06.09. Abel's Faith: the Witness God Bore

Abel’s Faith: the Witness God Bore "By which [faith] he obtained witness that he was righteous, God bearing witness to his offering" (Heb 11:4).

Here we have two statements in one, for it is the same verb in each clause. The A.V. renders the first "witness" and the second "testimony." The R.V. renders it: "Through which he had witness borne to him that he was righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts." On this, there is a marginal note: "over his gifts. The Greek Text in this clause is somewhat uncertain." The uncertainty referred to is about the word "God": as to whether it should be the Genitive case, or the Dative: i.e., whether it should be as it stands in both Versions, or whether it should be "bearing witness by his gifts to God" (Lachmann, & Tregelles). But the scope of both the clauses is the same. It is the witness that Abel obtained and that God gave. God gave it ἐπί (epi) upon or over. Not Abel obtained it "by." In other words, Abel obtained the witness, because God gave it. He received what God gave.

How this was done is not explained in the history of Gen 4:1-26. There, the whole act is condensed and summed up in the words "God had respect to" his offering: but we are not told how God manifested this respect.

It must have been shown in such a way that there could be no mistake about it; and that Cain could just as evidently see it, as Abel; and knew that the opposite was true in his case; and that to his offering, which he brought, God "had not respect."

It is the word ἐπί (epi), upon, (which the R.V. margin renders over), which gives us the key to the solution, by reminding us of the subsequent fact revealed in connection with all Sacrifices: viz., that those which God accepted were never consumed by fire emanating from this earth, or kindled by fire "made with hands"; but by God-made fire descending from heaven. In Gen 15:17, Abram, in his deep sleep, saw a smoking furnace; which, beside being typical of Israel’s affliction in the "iron furnace" of Egypt, was doubtless the material agency by which the sacrifices, which Abram had so carefully prepared and arranged, were consumed. In Gen 22:6-7, when Abram "took the fire in his hand" we have the Figure Metonymy, by which the "fire" is put for that which would set light to the wood which was consumed; as when we say we "light the fire" we do not light the fire but we set fire to the wood. If the fire is literal then the "hand" is literal, and Abraham "took the fire in his natural hand": which is absurd. In Lev 9:24, on the occasion of the first formal offering on the Altar of burnt-offering, we read: "There came a fire out from before the Lord,[18] and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering, and the fat, which when all the people saw, they fell on their faces."

[18] Compare Lev 10:1-20, where Nadab and Abihu used, not this fire from the brazen altar to kindle the incense in their censers, but took other fire: i.e., emanating from this earth, or kindled by man’s hand. This was called "strange fire," and the consequence was that, "there went out a fire from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord" (Lev 10:2). When we reflect that the incense of worship on the golden altar must be kindled with fire taken from the brazen altar of atonement, we can understand the sin of offering in worship today the "strange fire" of that which is produced by the flesh, and not by the Spirit of God." When Gideon prepared his offering in Ophra "the angel of the Lord put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up a fire out of the rock and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes" (Jdg 6:21). This was no fire kindled by Gideon, or "made with hands" of man. It was supernatural fire produced by the miracle wrought by Jehovah’s messenger, to show that He had accepted Gideon’s offering. When Manoah made his offering "and offered it upon a rock unto the Lord, the angel did wondrously; and Manoah and his wife looked on. For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that the angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on it, and fell on their faces to the ground" (Jdg 13:19-20).

Here again was miraculous fire from the Lord, consuming and accepting their offering. It was no fire kindled by human hands. When David offered his offering on the altar which he built on the site purchased from Ornan the Jebusite, "The Lord answered him by fire upon the altar of burnt offering" (1Ch 21:26). At the dedication of the Temple, when Solomon had ended his prayer, we read that "the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt-offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the house... and when all the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the glory of the Lord upon the house, that they bowed themselves with their faces to the ground, upon the pavement, and worshipped" (2Ch 7:1-3). When Elijah would offer a sacrifice away from the Temple where Jehovah had caused His name to be placed, and where the fire which had fallen from heaven was kept continually burning,[19] fire had to fall from heaven specially for the occasion. After the prophets of Baal had in vain tried to produce the phenomenon by appeals to their god, and after Elijah had soaked the wood and the offering with water we read: "Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces, and said: The LORD, He is the God; The LORD, He is the God" (1Ki 18:38-39).

[19] It is in imitation of this that the Church of Rome pretends to keep the perpetual light before their altars, in spite of the fact that it is kindled by man’s hands and consumes nothing but their own pretensions.

Add to all these examples the words of Psa 20:3, "The LORD remember all thy offerings and accept thy burnt sacrifice."

Here, in the margin of the A.V. we read, against the word "accept," that the Hebrew means TURN TO ASHES.

Why? Because this was always the way that Jehovah did accept offerings made to Him. By "fire from heaven" He turned them to ashes, and thus showed that He "had respect" unto them, and accepted them as the substitute of him who offered them.

How else did Abel "obtain witness that he was righteous"?

How else did God testify of his gifts?

How else did Cain know that God "had not respect unto his offering"?

Surely there can be no doubt whatever as to the force of the word ἐπί (epi), upon, for it was the fire that descended upon the sinner’s substitute instead of upon the sinner; upon Abel’s lamb instead of upon Abel.

Thus the doctrine of substitution was the very first doctrine taught to mankind; the first that is recorded in the Scriptures of truth; the first with regard to which man was required to believe what he had heard from God.

God had spoken. What he had said may be summed up in the words afterwards recited to Israel, "Without shedding of blood is no remission" (Heb 9:22). "It is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul" (Lev 17:11). "The wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23). This was the pronouncement for the sinner in Gen 3:17. And it is in Gen 4:1-26 that we have the further revelation that God provided a substitute whose death He would accept in the sinner’s stead. That is why the acceptance must be God’s own act.

All that the sinner could do was in faith to bring his offering and lay his hand upon it and confess it as his substitute (Lev 1:4). It was for God to give His testimony that He had accepted it.

It is even so today.

It is ignorance of this great first lesson that is the source of much of the quite modern evangelistic phraseology of the present day.

Man’s conventional talk of this twentieth century (of the present era) is about the sinner’s acceptance of Christ. God’s Word, for nearly sixty centuries has been about the sinner believing what He had said.

God has spoken. He has told us that He cannot and will not accept the fallen sons of men in their sins. In ourselves we are not only ruined sinners because of what we have done, or not done; but we are ruined creatures because of what we ARE. The question is, Do we believe God as to this solemn fact?

What God accepted was Abel’s "gifts" (Heb 11:4); Abel was accepted only in his gifts (Gen 4:4).

So, God has told us that He can accept us, as such, only in the merits and Person of that perfect Substitute—His Christ—whom He has provided. Do we believe Him as to this?

If we do we shall by faith lay our hand on Him, confess our belief in God as to our own lost and ruined nature, and as to Christ as God’s provided Salvation; knowing that, by this faith, God pronounces us righteous, accepts us in the person of our Substitute; and declares us as "accepted in the Beloved," because God accepted His one offering when He raised Him from the dead.

Christ’s resurrection is the proof and evidence that God has accepted Christ. Christ risen is the sinner’s receipt which God has given to show that He has accepted Christ’s payment of the sinner’s debt.

There is no other receipt.

Christ’s blood is not the receipt. That is the payment. The sinner’s faith is not the receipt. It is no use for a man to go to his creditor and say he believes he has paid what he owes. He must produce the receipt.

What is the receipt which we can produce to God which will prove that our debt is paid?

Nothing but the blessed fact that God’s Word assures us that He has accepted payment on our behalf in the person of our Substitute, when He raised Christ from the dead.

We are to believe what He says when He assures us of this, and He is pleased to accept us in Him.

It is always the Creditor who accepts the payment which the debtor makes. And, when payment has been once accepted, no further demand can be made upon the debtor. This is how Abel was accepted; and this is how the sinner is saved to this day. By the same faith in what God has said, we lay our hand on that Lamb of God as our substitute; and we obtain God’s witness that we are righteous. God bears His testimony to this in that He raised Christ from the dead, and has accepted the believing sinner IN HIM.

It is not a question of whether the sinner accepts Christ, but whether he believes God when he says that He has accepted Christ.

It may be said that, the same thing is meant, in modern phraseology; then, Why not say so? Why not keep to Scripture language? Why alter it? Why make it all to stand on what man can DO, instead of believing what God has SAID. Why make it all turn on man’s accepting, instead of man’s believing?

God has shut up the sinner as to the uselessness of his bringing any thing of his own by way of merit.

It is useless for him to bring or plead any substitute other than that one whom God hath appointed. It would be the same as saying it is not necessary.

It is useless to bring anything in addition thereto, for it would be the same as saying that it is not sufficient. In either case it would be a proof that God’s command had been unheeded; that His word had not been believed; and that His provision had been slighted and rejected.

All are today either in Abel’s way, or Cain’s: in God’s way, or man’s.

All are trusting either to that Substitute whom God has provided, or they are labouring to provide one for themselves. This is why such stress is laid on this matter of faith, in Rom 10:1-21 "The righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise... But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth and in thine heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach [is nigh thee]: that, if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus [as thy Substitute] and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath Raised Him from the Dead thou shalt be saved."

Thus it is that "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing [cometh] by the Word of God" (Rom 10:6-11; Rom 10:17). But instead of believing the report of what God has said, sinners are taught today to believe in what they can do. As though they were the Creditor, and would fain make God their Debtor! And all this, because they do not see or understand that "all is of God"; and all is of God’s Free Grace.

There is no merit in faith, of itself. It is not considered as merit among men, when one man believes what another man has said. How then can there be any merit in believing what God has said? It is our first bounden duty, without which all is "sin."

But, instead of this, the sinner tries to make God believe in him; and that it is possible for him to DO SOMETHING. In his blind ignorance he practically tells God that he, the sinner, is pleased to accept the payment which Christ has made to God! But all this is only salvation "by works" in its most subtle form. So subtle that thousands are misled on the very threshold of their way back to God.

Hence it is that while the multitude are still taught to do something, many would shrink from doing certain things as "works"; and would be ready to confess, and say: "not the labour of my hands." Yet they do not see that this acceptance of Christ is a work, after all: when it is thus put in the place of believing God.

True, it is "not the labour of my hands." Nothing "made with hands" can obtain a footing in God’s new creation, where "all things are of God": for new creation ground is the ground of resurrection.

Though they would shrink from making a god with their hands, they make their god out of their own heads, and out of the imagination of their own hearts. But "the God of our Salvation" is the God who hath spoken unto us by His Son, and left to us the simple duty of pointing the sinner to what He hath said. This is why we are to "Preach the Word." This is the first great lesson of Holy Writ.

It is the oldest lesson in the world.

And, it is to show us that to believe God in this matter of substitution is the only way of salvation, the only way for man to be just with God; for "The just by faith, shall live."