made coats of skin, and clothed Adam and Eve, he clothed them with skins of those beasts, which he appointed to be offered in sacrifice. The duty of offering sacrifices and oblations was, therefore, clearly pointed out to Adam, who taught his sons this positive duty. Accordingly it is said, that "in process of time," or as the margin reads it, "at the end of days," Abel brought his offering. This intimates, that he exactly conformed to all the directions, which God had given, respecting sacrifices. He brought his of ferings at the very time which God had prescribed: at the end of days. Either at the Sabbath, or at the new moon, or at some particular festival. He brought also just such a sacrifice as Ged had appointed, which was the firstling of his flock and the fat thereof. And he likewise brought his offering at the very place, where God had appointed, and where probably his father had often presented his sacrifices before. And if God had appointed, as we know he did under the law, any particular mode of preparing his offering, he undoubtedly conformed to the divine appointment. In a word, he brought his offering perfectly according to God's revealed will. And on this account, he cordially approved of it, and publicly expressed his approbation.

2. God accepted Abel's offering because he was a good man. He was sincere and upright in heart. Hence our Saviour calls him righteous Abel. He had given himself up to God, and delighted to do his will. His pious education had proved the means of remembering his Creator in the days of his youth. Before he left his father's house he had become truly pious, and sincerly devoted himself to the service of God. He meant to do every thing out of love and respect to God. And this was a good reason why God should have respect to him and his offering. These are mentioned distinctly. "And the Lord had respect to Abel, and to his offering." In the first place, he had respect to Abel personally as a good man; and next, to his offering, which was the oblation of a pious heart. The prayer of the upright is God's delight, and so is the sacrifice of a broken spirit and a contrite heart. This was the habitual spirit of righteous Abel, who had seen the plague of his own heart, renounced his native enmity to God, and become cordially reconciled to his character, to his law, and to his government. God saw and approved of his heart in the offering he presented to him. But,

3. There was another and more particular reason why God had respect to Abel and his offering; and that was, because he offered his sacrifice in a lively faith of the promised Saviour, whose atonement was typified by the very sacrifice he presented. This is divinely recorded for the instruction and admonition of all who profess to offer any kind of sacrifice or religious homage to God. We read, "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and by it he being dead yet speaketh." At the very time Abel appeared before God and offered the firstlings of his flock and the fat thereof, he fixed his eye and his heart upon the promised Messiah, who was to come and make his soul

an offering for sin, and open the way for pardoning mercy to reach and save all penitent, believing, returning sinners. In the lively exercise of such precious faith, Abel offered up himself a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God; who openly declared his approbation of him and of his sacrifice.

Let me now inquire,

II. Why God disapproved and rejected Cain's offering. The text says, But to Cain and to his offering God had not respect." The question now is, why God disapproved and condemned Cain and his offering. Some suppose that one reason was, because he did not bring his sacrifice according to divine appointment. It is true he brought of the fruit of the ground, and not the firstling of the flock, as Abel did. But we ought to consider that Cain was a tiller of the ground, and not a keeper of sheep. This might have been a good reason why he brought of the fruit of the ground. We know that under the law God required his people to bring to him an offering of the first fruits of the earth; and it is very natural to suppose that God required such an offering of Cain, who was a tiller of the ground. He must have been guilty of great folly and presumption to bring an offering which he knew God had not appointed, and which he knew God would reject. Besides, it does not appear that God did reprove and condemn him for bringing such an offering, but for very different reasons.

And,

1. Because he was a wicked man, and totally destitute of every holy and gracious affection. Though he had been brought up in a pious family, and received the same pious education that Abel had, and though he had lived in a decent and regular manner, and perhaps professed to be really religious; yet he never had become a true penitent and sincere believer; but was under the reigning power of a carnal mind, which was enmity against God, and totally opposed to all true holiness. Though he had externally performed all religious duties, and joined with his parents and brother in the duties of devotion; yet he had never been internally devout, had always carried about with him an evil heart of unbelief. This God perfectly knew, notwithstanding all his outward appearance of piety, and therefore he abhored and rejected his offering. The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, who cannot be deceived, and who will not be mocked. But,

2. The more particular reason, why God rejected his offering was, because he did not bring it in faith of the promised Saviour. This we may justly infer from God's accepting Abel's sacrifice, because he offered it in faith. If the faith of Abel was the particular reason, why God accepted him and his offerings, then we must conclude, that he rejected Cain and his offerings because of his unbelief. Solomon says, "the sacrifice of the wicked is abomination: how much more, when he bringeth it with a wicked mind?" Cain was not only a wicked man, when he brought his offering to the Lord, but he brought it with a wicked, unbelieving, and malevolent heart. He felt no need of an atonement and consequently no need of offering sacrifice. Like Saul, he forced himself, and brought his offering with sensible reluctance. He hated God for

his holiness, and his brother for his piety, and nothing but a fear of losing his good appearance constrained him to come before God, and present his offering. He brought it with a wicked and unbelieving heart, for which God disapproved and condemned him. "He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. And without faith, it is impossible to please God." The want of faith, in the performance of any religious duty, never fails to render it unacceptable in the sight of God, who desires truth in the inward parts. Cain regarded iniquity in his heart, both towards God and his brother, when he appeared in the divine presence and presented his offering. On this account it was a vain oblation, not being offered in faith; for "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." God saw his insincerity and mockery, and therefore had no respect to him or to his offering, but abhored and rejected both.

It now remains to inquire,

3. Whether Cain had any just cause to be displeased with God for making such a great distinction between him and his brother. "He had respect to Abel and to his offering; but to Cain and to his offering he had not respect." He graciously accepted and approved Abel, but as expressly condemned and rejected Cain and his offering. Cain heard both his approbation of Abel and his condemnation of himself. He sensibly felt and visibly expressed his keen resentment of the divine conduct. He felt as all other unrighteous men feel, when they hear the essential distinction made between the godly and ungodly, the righteous and the wicked. They are always displeased when they are told that all their religious services are sinful and displeasing to God. Sinners in Zion bitterly complained of God because he took no more notice of their religious services. "Wherefore have we fasted, say they, and thou seest not? wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge?" They also said, " It is vain to serve God; and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the Lord of hosts." Sinners were 'highly displeased with Christ because he testified that their works were evil, even their offerings and sacrifices, their prayers and fastings, and their most shining deeds of charity. Sinners Cannot bear that God should accept the religious sacrifices of the godly, and reject and condemn them. But they have no just cause to complain of this distinction. They themselves lay the foundation of it. So God told Cain: "And the Lord said unto him, why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" Here then I would observe,

1. That Cain had no reason to be displeased with God for having respect to Abel and to his offering. This, it appears from his conduct afterwards, was one cause of his being so highly displeasIed with God. His selfish heart could not bear to hear his brother's character and conduct publicly approved and applauded. But he had no reason to entertain one hard thought of God for approving and applauding his brother's character and conduct. It was not owing to any partiality towards Abel, but to the perfect holi

ness and benevolence of the Deity. "The righteous Lord loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright with peculiar pleasure and approbation. As Abel was truly a righteous man, and brought his offering in the lively exercise of faith and love; it was morally impossible for God not to love his character and approve his holy sacrifice. To have disapproved and rejected Abel would have been a blemish in his conduct, and given just occasion even to Cain to be displeased with him. And since God was morally obliged to have respect to Abel and to his offering, it was altogether proper and just that he should declare his approbation, and bear witness to the righteousness of his character and the purity of his motives in doing sacrifice. It was, therefore, truly amiable and glorious in God, to treat Abel as he did, and publicly declare his approbation of him before Cain, who ought to have cordially joined and rejoiced in that public declaration. Abel would have rejoiced in hearing God declare his approbation of the character and conduct of any righteous person, and even of Cain's character and conduct, had he deserved divine approbation. Cain's displeasure at the divine conduct towards Abel, was altogether groundless and inexcusable.

This leads me to observe,

2. That he had no more reason to be displeased with God's conduct towards himself. For had he been as righteous as Abel, and exercised the same faith and sincerity in his offering, God would have as highly approved of him and his conduct, as he did of Abel's. And this he declares to Cain he would have done. "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted." God would have been equally disposed and morally obliged to approve of Cain and of his conduct, had the deserved approbation, as he was to approve of Abel's character and conduct. But it was morally impossible for him to look on sin or on sinners, with complacency and approbation. Cain was a sinner, and his offering was iniquity and mockery; and therefore God could not approve of them. And he certainly had no reason to be displeased with God for not doing what it is morally impossible for him to do. Besides, God was under moral obligation to disapprove and condemn Cain and his offering. His holy nature could not but hate and abhor the sacrifice of the wicked, when brought with a wicked and unbelieving heart. Cain knew, that he was an unrighteous, ungodly man, and had acted a vile and hypocritical part, in presuming to come before God, and presenting an offering as an expression of true faith and sincere obedience. Instead, therefore, of being displeased with God for disapproving of him and his sacrifice, he ought to have disapproved and condemned himself. It was proper for God to disrespect him, when he had disrespected God. It became him to repent and plead for mercy, instead of rising up, and complaining of God. He hated God without a cause; but God did not hate him without a cause. And as he had a cause to disapprove of his character and conduct; so he had a cause to declare publicly his disapprobation before his pious brother. It was altogether proper and important, that God should make an open distinction between

the righteous and the wicked, and bear public testimony in favor of Abel, and against Cain. This appears from the extraordinary effects which God's conduct produced. It laid the foundation for the clear display of Cain's malignant heart, which he afterwards acted out, in slaying his brother, because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous. Cain's conduct towards Abel is one of the most visible and striking evidences, that ever was given of the essential difference, between the righteous and the wicked. If we only admit that God perfectly knew the heart of Abel and the heart of Cain, we must allow, that he treated those two brothers according to perfect rectitude. He was morally obliged to make the distinction between them, which he did make; and neither Abel, nor Cain had any cause to complain of his conduct. Abel did not complain, and Cain ought not to have complained, but to have cordially approved of the divine testimony. And there was no other cause of his being displeased and of his complaining, but the selfishness of his own evil heart of unbelief. He is, therefore, justly set up as an everlasting monument of the total depravi ty of sinners, and of the essential difference between the righteous and the wicked.

HEADS OF IMPROVEMENT.

1. It appears from what God said to Abel and Cain, that he preached the doctrine of total depravity, or the essential difference between saints and sinners. He had respect to Abel, but not respect to Cain. But he would have been morally obliged to have had respect to Cain, if there had been the least degree of grace in his heart, or the least true obedience in his conduct. God was able to discern the least spark of grace in Cain's heart, if there had been the least spark. But his omniscient eye could see none -therefore we may be sure there was none-God accordingly told Cain, that he had not done well—but ill.

2. It appears from the character and conduct of Cain, that sinners never please God in the least degree, or do any part of their duty, Cain offered sacrifice, at the time, place, and in the manner required. But he did not please God. He had no respect to him or his offering. This was the best thing Cain ever did, in appearance, but there was no goodness in it.

So it is with respect to all sinners, they do nothing to please God, whether they till the ground, or come before God with his people. They do no part of their duty; their evil hearts turn all they do into sin.

3. It appears from the feelings and conduct of Cain, that sinners always hate the friends of God, for the very reason that they ought to love them. Cain hated Abel because his works were righteous, and deserved his cordial approbation. So it is with all sinners. They hate saints for the very reason why they should love them. I know they are not willing to allow this; but it is true. They hate them, let them be ever so nearly related to them, or connected with them; whether they are father or mother, brother or sister, or real friends.

4. It appears from the character and conduct of Cain, that sin