Now, as the mode in which we derive a nature from the first man is by birth, so the mode in which we derive a nature from the Second man is by _new_ birth. Being born, we partake of the nature of the former; being "born _again_," we partake of the nature of the latter. A newly-born infant, though entirely incapable of performing the act which reduced Adam to the condition of a fallen being, is, nevertheless, a partaker of his nature; and so, also, a newly-born child of God,--a newly-regenerated soul, though having nothing whatever to do with the working-out of the perfect obedience of "the man Christ Jesus," is, nevertheless, a partaker of his nature. True it is that, attached to the former nature, there is sin; and attached to the latter, there is righteousness,--man's sin, in the former case; God's righteousness in the latter: yet, all the while, there is the actual, _bona fide_ participation of a real nature, let the adjuncts be what they may. The child of Adam partakes of the human nature and its adjuncts; the child of God partakes of the divine nature and its adjuncts. The former nature is according to "the will of man," (John i.,) the latter is according to "the will of God;" as St. James, by the Holy Ghost, teaches us, "of his own will begat he us by the word of truth." (James i. 18.)
From all that has been said, it follows, that Abel was not distinguished from his brother Cain by any thing natural. The distinction between them was not grounded upon aught in their nature or circumstances, for, as to these, "there was no difference." What, therefore, made the vast difference? The answer is as simple as the gospel of the grace of God can make it. The difference was not in themselves, in their nature, or their circumstances; it lay, _entirely_, in their _sacrifices_. This makes the matter most simple, for any truly convicted sinner,--for any one who truly feels that he not only partakes of a fallen nature, but is himself, also, a sinner. The history of Abel opens, to such an one, the only true ground of his approach to, his standing before, and his relationship with, God. It teaches him, distinctly, that he cannot come to God on the ground of any thing in, of, or pertaining to, nature; and he must seek, _outside himself_, and in the person and work of another, the true and everlasting basis of his connection with the Holy, the Just, and only True God. The eleventh chapter of Hebrews sets the whole subject before us, in the most distinct and comprehensive way. "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice ([Greek: pleiona thysian]) than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God bearing witness ([Greek: martyrountos]) to his gifts; and by it he being dead yet speaketh." Here we are taught that it was, in nowise, a question as to the men, but only as to their "sacrifice,"--it was not a question as to the offerer, but as to his offering. Here lay the grand distinction between Cain and Abel. My reader cannot be too simple in his apprehension of this point, for therein lies involved the truth as to any sinner's standing before God.
And, now, let us inquire what the offerings were. "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto Jehovah. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel, and to his offering; but unto Cain and to his offering, he had not respect." (Gen. iv. 3-5.) This passage sets the difference clearly before us: Cain offered to Jehovah the fruit of a cursed earth, and that, moreover, without any blood to remove the curse. He presented "an unbloody sacrifice," simply because he had no faith. Had he possessed that divine principle, it would have taught him, even at this early moment, that "without shedding of blood there is no remission." (Heb. ix.) This is a great cardinal truth. The penalty of sin is death. Cain was a sinner, and, as such, death stood between him and Jehovah. But, in his offering, there was no recognition whatever of this fact. There was no presentation of a sacrificed life, to meet the claims of divine holiness, or to answer to his own true condition as a sinner. He treated Jehovah as though he were, altogether, such an one as himself, who could accept the sin-stained fruit of a cursed earth.