Reading Life Through The Principle - Day 7

Hello everyone, it's nice to see you all again. I want to share an experience I had about 15 to 18 years ago. I had been a missionary in Russia for seven years and then returned to England in 1999 to train as a teacher. I thought I would spend the rest of my life as a school teacher until one night I woke up and felt God speaking to me. God said, 'I miss you,' and I thought that was nice. But then I asked God why He missed me, and He replied, 'You're not teaching the Principle.' I was surprised because I thought many others were teaching it, and I hadn't taught workshops for about 12 years since my time in Russia. God insisted that I teach the Principle the way it was supposed to be taught, which left me unsure of what to do next.

I decided I had to start somewhere, so I began sitting in the back of the Sunday school for teenagers with Tim Hughes, who encouraged me to give it a try. I started teaching Sunday school for teenagers and ended up doing that for ten years. Gradually, I was invited to teach workshops, and I had to prepare slides and notes, which led me to rediscover my love for the Principle and its profound stories. I was happy to see that people enjoyed my lectures, and that’s how I ended up here today.

Now, let's continue from where we left off on Wednesday, which was a bit of a cliffhanger. We were looking at the story of Abraham and Isaac and discussing the challenges of understanding its meaning. I explained the earlier sacrifice Abraham made, where he didn't cut up the doves, which is connected to the land. This sacrifice allowed his descendants to live for 400 years. However, we need to understand the significance of the sacrifice that God asked Abraham to make. Abraham was chosen to be a role model, and one interpretation is that we must do what God tells us, even if it seems unethical, because we love God. This reasoning can lead to dangerous fanaticism, as seen in the actions of suicide bombers who commit horrific acts in the name of their faith.

The story of Abraham and Isaac is foundational in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Jews pray about this story daily, and Muslims celebrate it during Hajj by sacrificing a lamb, which connects back to the sheep Abraham sacrificed. If we misunderstand this story, we risk becoming religious fanatics. So, what does this story mean? In Christianity, it is often seen as a metaphor for God sacrificing Jesus to save the world, with Abraham representing God and Isaac representing Jesus. This raises questions about why God needed to sacrifice Jesus and how that relates to our understanding of family and sacrifice.

In our spiritual community, we often hear about sacrificing our 'Isaac.' But what does that mean? If you sacrifice your child, you lose them; they are gone forever. So, we need to find another way to interpret this story. The core of these stories is about restoration and the change of lineage. Restoration involves overcoming fallen nature and restoring relationships that were lost due to the Fall. The relationships between parents and children are particularly significant in this context.

The story of Abraham and Isaac connects to restoring the four great realms of heart and changing lineage. The Fall resulted in a fallen family structure, characterized by ancestor worship and child sacrifice. People believed that sacrificing their children was the most precious offering to God, demonstrating total devotion. This practice was rooted in a misunderstanding of what would please God. Additionally, in ancient families, the father had absolute authority over his wife and children, which often led to tragic outcomes. This authority was inherited through Roman law and has echoes in modern society, where women and children were often seen as property.

In 19th century England, for example, a woman who inherited property would lose ownership upon marriage, as her property transferred to her husband. Up until the 1950s, women needed permission from their husbands or fathers to open a bank account. This reflects the ancient understanding of family authority, where men had control over their wives and children. The patriarchal system allowed men to treat their families as property, leading to practices like selling children into slavery during financial hardship. This historical context is crucial for understanding the significance of the story of Abraham and Isaac and its implications for our relationships today.

In ancient times, a father could sell or exchange his wife, as well as his children, viewing them as his property. This authority was inherited by the firstborn son, who, upon the father's death, gained independence. However, this independence came with the disturbing right to even put his mother to death, as evidenced by certain Roman emperors. The biblical tradition rejects these practices, viewing them as pagan and a consequence of the Fall. The story of Isaac, from his birth to the binding or sacrifice, stands in stark opposition to the idea that a child is merely the property of the father. Sarah's struggle to conceive and the eventual birth of Isaac was seen as a divine gift, highlighting the belief that children are blessings from God rather than possessions.

The Bible categorically rejects child sacrifice, as stated in the Mosaic Law in the book of Leviticus. God commands that anyone who gives their offspring to Molech, a pagan god worshipped through child sacrifice, shall be put to death. This act is seen as the most repulsive thing one can do, as it defiles God's sanctuary and profanes His holy name. From God's perspective, sacrificing children is abhorrent, even if the individual believes they are worshipping God through such actions. This serious condemnation underscores the biblical worldview, which is fundamentally different from that of the ancient pagan societies.

In the biblical narrative, worship is directed towards the one God of all humanity, rather than ancestors or tribal deities. The Jewish people are noted for their lack of ancestor worship, as there is no record of such practices in the Bible. Instead, the focus is on the belief that all human beings are children of God, starting from Adam and Eve. This understanding fosters a respect for all individuals, regardless of their ancestry, race, or nationality. The biblical story asserts that every human being is created in the image of God, which establishes their inherent value and dignity.

This notion of individual value is foundational to the concept of human rights, which often lacks a philosophical basis in secular discourse. However, the biblical tradition provides a clear rationale for the unique, divine, and eternal value of every human being, as each person is a child of God. This perspective contradicts ancient views where individuals were often seen as property. Furthermore, it implies that parents do not own their children; rather, they are guardians of God's children. Parents are entrusted with the responsibility to raise their children, acknowledging that these children belong to God.

When God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, it was a test of Abraham's understanding of ownership. Abraham could have refused, arguing that Isaac was his property, but instead, he was called to recognise that Isaac belonged to God. This act was not merely about sacrifice; it was about acknowledging God's ultimate authority over life and death. Isaac, too, demonstrated his understanding of belonging to God when he willingly accepted his fate, showing faith in God's goodness and purpose.

The binding of Isaac is a profound moment that establishes the dignity of human beings as children of God. This event marked a significant shift in human history, laying the groundwork for the eventual abolition of slavery. If every human being is God's property, then the ownership of one person by another becomes morally indefensible. This theological and philosophical foundation for human dignity took centuries to unfold, influencing the development of laws and ethical standards in Judaism and Christianity.

Ultimately, the biblical narrative asserts that no one can own another person, including wives and children. The equality of men and women is emphasised from the very beginning of the Bible, as seen in the commandment to honour one's parents. This understanding challenges patriarchal norms and reinforces the idea that every parent has a duty to care for their children as gifts from God. The responsibility to nurture and educate children is a privilege, highlighting the sacred nature of this relationship and the importance of treating all individuals with respect and love.

The wife is a daughter of God and the feminine expression of God. She should be treated with love, respect, and cherished in worship. This is the basic principle for restoring the relationship between husband and wife, men and women. A husband is a son of God, the masculine expression of God, and he too should be treated with love, respect, cherished, and worshipped. This is the kind of relationship we aim to restore. During the three-day ceremony, when a husband and wife bow to each other, they recognise that God is giving them His daughter to marry. How incredible it is to marry God's daughter, to marry God's princess. It is an incredible honour to treat this person, who is so precious, not as property, but as someone of infinite value and preciousness. This is God's son, and I am privileged to marry the son of God, honouring and respecting him in that way. This consciousness is what the story aims to teach: the value and dignity of a human being.

I didn't make all this up; I just looked deeper into the stories. I once hated teaching the story of Abraham and Isaac more than any other because I found it morally repulsive. The idea that Abraham would sacrifice Isaac, that Isaac would be willing to be sacrificed, and that God would test Abraham in this way seemed morally unethical. However, by digging deeper and looking at it through the prism of the restoration of the four great realms of heart, particularly the relationship between parent and child, we can see a change of lineage. People should not identify themselves through their ancestry but rather as the sons and daughters of God. I define my identity and value by my lineage, which is a change of lineage that transcends ancestry. This is what God told Abraham: to leave his country and his father's house, not to be defined by those things, but to define himself by his relationship with God. This is the core of identity.

People often talk about individualism, but the core of Western individualism lies in the biblical understanding of the value of the individual, which is affirmed in Genesis and restored through the story of Abraham and Isaac. Within the Jewish-Christian tradition, the individual has incredible value. However, this can become corrupted into selfish individualism when people think they own themselves. The challenge for Isaac was not to claim ownership of himself but to recognise that he belonged to God. This is the origin of Western liberalism, rooted in this story. God said to Abraham, 'Do not lay your hand on the lad or do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.' The test was not whether Abraham would sacrifice his son; child sacrifice was not unusual in the ancient world. The test was to see if Abraham would acknowledge that Isaac belonged to God and that God had the right to ask him to do this.

Father spoke about changing lineage in God's sight, stating that one becomes God's property. This is similar to what we discussed regarding who you belong to. Satan will have no claim over you; you can be placed in the storehouse of God. Even if Satan were to kidnap you and imprison you, you can have complete confidence that no one can truly touch you. Satan has no power over me because true parents have changed my lineage. I no longer belong to my parents, the state, a leader, a dictator, or an organisation; I belong to God. The change of lineage signifies a change of ownership. Father uses similar language to interpret the story of Abraham and Isaac, bringing a new and deeper understanding of truths that people have understood before.

Abraham and Isaac establish the principle that every human being belongs to God. Jews and Muslims recognise this; for Jews, it is evident on the eighth day when boys are circumcised. This act signifies that every boy is dedicated to God and made a member of the covenant, meaning they have their own personal relationship with God and their own responsibilities before Him. The circumcision is a sign of this dedication, acknowledging that these are God's children. In our own tradition, we have the eight-day dedication ceremony, where blessed parents dedicate their children to God and promise to care for them on God's behalf. The meaning is the same; the only difference is that we live in a different age. Abraham and Isaac had to go through this experience to establish that principle. For Jews, it was a serious matter, as sometimes baby boys died during circumcision, making it a life-and-death situation. However, the meaning remains connected to what Abraham and Isaac were doing.

When Eve first gives birth, she says, 'With the help of the Lord, I have acquired a man.' The Hebrew word for 'acquired' is 'keniti,' which is why she named him Cain. Eve regarded Cain as her possession, saying, 'I own this son; God has helped me to have my son.' She was a very possessive mother. What do you do with a possessive mother? You either get crushed or rebel, and Cain rebelled. Khalil Gibran, a beautiful Lebanese poet, expressed this theme well in his poetry. He said, 'Your children are not your children; they are the sons and daughters of life's longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, and though they are with you, they belong not to you. You may give them your love but not your thoughts; do not try to brainwash them or indoctrinate them, for they have their own thoughts. You may house their bodies but not their souls, for their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit even in your dreams. You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.' This highlights the importance of allowing children to grow into their own beings.

Was Abraham actually successful? God promised that his descendants would number the stars of heaven and inherit the land of Canaan. However, when you look at it, Abraham died with only one son, and the other son, Ishmael, had already been sent away with Hagar. He had only one small plot of land that he bought to bury his wife. You might wonder if he was successful. Jonathan Sacks commented on Abraham, saying, 'To place your life in God's hands, to have faith, which is trust that whatever happens to you happens for a reason, to know that you are part of a larger narrative or story, and to believe that others will continue what you began, is to achieve a satisfaction in life that cannot be destroyed by circumstance.' Abraham and Sarah had that faith, allowing them to die with a sense of fulfilment, even if that was all they had to show for it. To be happy does not mean having everything you want or everything you were promised; it means simply having done what you were called to do and passing on the baton to the next generation. The righteous, even in death, are regarded as though they are still alive because they leave a living trace in those who come after them. Abraham and Sarah made a start, and this was carried on by Isaac, Jacob, and so on. Today, more than half the population in the world trace their origins, spiritual or literal, to Abraham: the ancestors of Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Abraham left a huge trace in the world in which he lived four thousand years later.

The next relationship we will explore is one you may be familiar with, but I hope to present it differently. We will discuss restoring the relationship between Adam and the archangel. Adam had to win the respect of the archangel, Lucifer, and the other archangels to become the lord of creation. The archangels existed from the very beginning and had been working with God throughout the cosmos's development. Adam needed to win their respect to become the lord of creation, but he failed to do so. Abel, in the position of Adam, must restore the birthright by winning the respect of Cain, in the position of the archangel, and become the elder brother, the head of the family. In English, we have two words: older and elder. You can never become older than your older sibling, but you can become elder, which is more respected. Abel could never become older than Cain, but he could become the elder brother, looked up to and respected. This distinction is useful.

What must Abel do? First, he must become one with God, separating from Satan and developing a deep relationship with God. Second, he must love the archangel. By being one with God, he can give God's love to the archangel. Abel must win the archangel's recognition, acknowledging that he is truly the son of God and the heir apparent. At this moment, the archangel's personal position is Cain, and Abel is in the position of Adam. It is essential to understand this clearly. As Father said, first, become one with God, separating from Satan and developing a relationship with God to become a channel of God's love. Then, love the archangel, becoming a channel of God's love to Abel, just as Adam should have become a channel of God's love to the archangel. The archangel would then have been completely satisfied, acknowledging Abel as the true son of God and heir apparent.

The way it works is that we need to analyse this story to understand what needs to be done to restore the Fall. To be perfectly honest, both Cain and Abel need to make a foundation of faith. They both need to develop their relationship with God, separate from Satan, and overcome their fallen nature. This foundation of faith involves living a life of conscience and loving God, while the foundation of substance is about overcoming the fallen nature, which means living a righteous life and loving your neighbour. When Jesus said to love your neighbour and love God, he was essentially instructing us to establish both a foundation of faith and a foundation of substance.

Cain, in his position, had the same feelings as the Archangel. Restoration occurs when you find yourself in a similar situation to someone from the past, dealing with the same emotions, feelings, and thoughts. Instead of repeating their mistakes, you must follow your conscience and do the right thing. Lucifer had to deal with the same emotions and feelings that Cain faced. A common question arises when reading the Bible: Adam and Eve had sons, but who did they marry? The Bible does not mention daughters, leading to speculation. In Jewish and Christian tradition, it is said that every time Eve gave birth, she had twins—a boy and a girl. Cain had a twin sister named Acclima, and Abel had a twin sister named Jamilia.

The next question is, who would marry whom? According to ancient commentary on the Quran, Adam instructed Cain to marry his twin sister to Abel and Abel to marry his twin sister to Cain. Abel agreed, but Cain refused, believing he was better than Abel's sister and wanting to marry his own sister instead. This disagreement continued, and to resolve it, Adam suggested that Cain and Abel offer sacrifices. The one whose sacrifice was accepted by God would have the right to choose which girl to marry. This was a way of leaving the decision to God, similar to tossing a coin.

At this early stage of restoration, Adam's family was dealing with the same emotions and feelings that Lucifer had. Cain wanted Acclima for himself, wanting to possess and control her, while Abel did not share that feeling. Adam and Eve suggested that Abel marry Acclima and Cain marry Jamilia. This illustrates the conflict at the very beginning, as they attempted to restore what had gone wrong. In 1957, Father made an interesting comment that from the time they prepared their offerings, Cain already harboured hatred towards Abel. It was not a momentary feeling; Cain hated Abel even before the offerings were made, but Father never explained why. This raises the question: why did Cain hate Abel? Understanding the marriage dynamics clarifies the situation, as it involved the classic triangle of one girl and two boys, leading to jealousy and hatred.

The Bible states that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground, while Abel brought the firstlings of his flock. God regarded Abel's offering but had no regard for Cain's. This raises questions about the significance of their sacrifices. According to the Talmud, Adam instructed Cain and Abel to make their sacrifices to determine who would marry whom. Abel prepared diligently, waking early, dressing well, and selecting the best lamb for his offering. His sacrifice was accepted, and he was filled with joy. In contrast, Cain overslept, made a hasty offering with little thought, and felt a sense of anti-climax when God did not accept it. This led to a confrontation between the brothers, with Abel rejoicing in his acceptance and Cain feeling resentment.

Jesus made an interesting comment regarding offerings, stating that if you remember your brother has something against you, you should reconcile before making your offering. When Abel arrived at the altar, he should have noticed Cain was absent and realised that Cain had something against him. Abel should have gone to Cain, woken him gently, and encouraged him to make the offering together. If Cain had felt supported and helped by Abel, he might not have harboured hatred towards him. This illustrates the importance of reconciliation and brotherly love, which Abel needed to cultivate with Cain.

Ultimately, Cain's offering was not accepted, while Abel's was. Cain complained to Abel, expressing his frustration that God accepted Abel's offering but not his. Abel replied that Allah accepts only from the pious, implying that he was devout while Cain was not. This was not a wise way to speak to an older brother, and Cain's anger escalated to the point where he threatened Abel's life. The underlying emotions tied to their sacrifices were significant, as they determined who would marry whom, and this context helps explain Cain's extreme reaction. The commentary from Jewish sources indicates that Cain was jealous of Abel due to the female dynamics involved, highlighting the need to restore what happened in the Garden of Eden. God did not reject Cain's sacrifice out of hatred; rather, Cain was in a position to relate to Satan and had to confront the same emotions and thoughts that Lucifer did. Therefore, God could not accept Cain's sacrifice without first establishing a condition for its acceptance. Cain needed to overcome his fallen nature, but the emphasis is often placed solely on him, while both Cain and Abel shared fallen nature.

Your crops, it's your fault because you're so lazy. This completely was like the straw that broke the camel's back; all these emotions and anger suddenly exploded. It came to pass within the field, and Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. He just lost his temper; the red mist came down. We often say in English that he lost his temper, clenched his fist, and hit out at Abel, killing his brother. It's interesting that in the Quran, Abel says, 'If you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand to kill you, but I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds.' So, that's interesting; Abel didn't try to defend himself. I think that was a mistake. Abel should have run away or practiced a bit of judo and escaped, but he just wouldn't defend himself. He allowed himself to be killed, which I think was a serious error.

When you look at this, you think, okay, within this bigger story, there are three small stories. Normally, I would ask people to tell me what they are, but here we are on Zoom, so I'll tell you what they are. The first story is about mind-body unity. Who had mind-body unity? Abel did. When the alarm clock went off, Abel jumped out of his sleeping bag, got everything ready, and made his offering. When the alarm clock went off for Cain, he pressed the snooze button and didn't have mind-body unity. In that sense, we could say Abel fulfilled the first blessing; he had mind-body unity. When it came to dealing with sisters and who gets married to whom, Cain was full of jealousy and emotions. He couldn't control his emotions, so in that sense, he wasn't able to manage the second blessing. He couldn't manage his emotional life and the relationship about who he would marry.

Looking at the third story, it's about the relationship with creation. Who had dominion over creation? Cain didn't mend his fences, so he didn't have dominion over creation. Because Cain wasn't able to fulfill the first, second, or third blessings, this is why we say Satan was able to invade. If Cain had managed the mind-body unity, he might have felt jealous because he wanted to marry his sister instead of Abel's. He might have gotten angry because Abel's sheep destroyed his field, but he wouldn't have lost his temper. He wouldn't have lost control of himself; he would have been able to manage his anger. He would have had mind-body unity, but he didn't, and that's why we say Satan was able to invade. That's why he lost his temper and ended up killing Abel. It makes sense.

It's all about these three things, the three blessings. If Cain had managed them, if he had dominion over creation and mended his fences, then this whole situation would never have arisen. He might have been able to manage his emotions about the sister business and eventually see that Abel's sister is quite pretty, wise, and loves him very much. He could have overcome that and been happily married. But because of these three things, he wasn't able to do that. I found that really interesting. I read these stories in the Talmud and immediately recognised the three blessings. It's a powerful framework for analysing many of these stories. I'm sure Father had the blessing and privilege of discussing the Bible with a rabbi instead of a Christian priest. He would have known these stories and appreciated that kind of analysis as well.

Anyway, that's not what happened. Cain murdered Abel, and then the Lord said to Cain, 'Where's your brother Abel?' Just like when God went into the Garden of Eden, He didn't judge or accuse Adam and Eve, although He knew what had happened; He just asked the question, 'Where are you?' He said to Cain, 'Where's your brother Abel?' He realised what had happened and hoped that Cain would say, 'I'm so sorry, God. I lost it. I got so angry and upset with my brother because of the marriage issue, the offering, and because his sheep destroyed all my crops. I realised I couldn't even blame Abel for that because it's actually my fault for not mending my fences. I'm sorry I got so angry, I lost my temper, and I punched him. He fell back, hit his head on a rock, and I killed my brother. I'm so sorry, please forgive me.' If Cain had responded like that, God would have understood and forgiven him, and they could have started the whole process of trying to restore things.

But instead, Cain said, 'I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper? Am I responsible for what's happened to my brother? Why do you ask me?' He's in denial of what he's done, failing to take responsibility. This is the question that echoes down the ages: 'Am I my brother's keeper?' This was asked of Christians in the 1940s living in Europe when the Jews were rounded up into ghettos and taken on trains to be exterminated. God says, 'Where is your brother?' and the Christian church has said, 'Am I my brother's keeper?' Abel made a foundation of faith, but there's no foundational substance. You might think I'm just making all this up, and it's true; I am making it up. They didn't have dry cleaners in those days. Recently, I came across this book called 'The Way,' which contains some interesting commentary from Father.

Father said that since God accepted only Abel's offering, Abel thought this was because he was better and that God only liked him. Thus, he must have bragged to his older brother, saying, 'See, my offering was accepted.' This must be what he did; otherwise, why would Cain grow red in the face? Father said Cain must never be arrogant; he must be humble. It's really important. Father also said Abel should not have bragged about being happy because he received the blessing from God. In other words, he shouldn't have gone around singing and dancing in front of Cain. Instead, when he received the blessing, he should have realised his shortcomings and said to his older brother, 'I'm sorry.' If he had done that, Cain probably would not have killed him. This is a mistake of Abel; he should have been nicer and more considerate towards his older brother.

What do you think God would have done if at that moment Abel wept and protested, 'Father, why did you only receive my offering?' and then went to his older brother and said, 'I don't like that God accepted only my offering'? God would have had to love Cain for sure. It's so profound. Abel must have expressed great joy to the extent that it aroused intense feelings of jealousy in Cain. It would have been good if he had just kept his happiness to himself and not expressed it. But he boasted to his older brother. Similarly, Abel must have boasted to Cain, and in the process, he must have gone overboard, saying, 'God did not receive your offering and only accepted mine; therefore, I am better than you.' Thus, Cain's face must have grown red, and he must have felt intense anger. It's reasonable to have this kind of thought.

You can see here that Father is using his imagination to try to understand why Cain did it and what it was about Abel that made Cain lose his temper. Father knew about this aspect, this dimension of who gets married to whom, which explains the incredibly powerful jealousies and emotions involved. It's not just about the offering; it's about the meaning of the offering and the consequences that flow from it, which is who gets married to whom. This is really important, and I wish people would read this. I wish the True Family would read this story. It's not enough to be anointed, appointed, and crowned; you have to win your older brother's blessing. When you get anointed and crowned by Father to be his heir, you have to go to your older brother and say, 'I'm really sorry. I have no idea why Father appointed me to be his heir. I'm so completely unqualified. You're so much better than me, so much wiser than me, and have done so many more things than me. Unless you support and help me, I'm going to tell Mum and Dad that I don't want the position. I don't want to be their heir without your support.' This is so profound.

I just wish some people had read these words, understood them, and thought, 'Okay, this is who I am. I'm Abel; I'm the heir. I've been anointed and crowned. What should I do next? Should I boast or should I apologise to my older brother?' These are really important things to understand within our own spiritual community. So many times, Abel has made similar mistakes, and we make them many times in our lives. So what happened next? You might wonder. Because Cain didn't repent, God said to Cain, 'What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground, and now you are cursed.'

The Lord said, 'You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.' God is telling Cain that because of what he did, this is his future. The ground will be cursed, and he will be a fugitive and a wanderer. Then Cain said to the Lord, 'Is my sin too great to be forgiven? Whoever finds me will slay me. They'll think, 'Oh, Cain the murderer, he deserves to be punished,' and they will punish me by killing me.' The Lord said to him, 'Not so. If anyone slays Cain, vengeance shall be taken upon him sevenfold.' The Lord put a mark on Cain lest anyone who came upon him should kill him. Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod. Cain knew his wife, she conceived, and bore Enoch, and he built a city.

So what happened to Cain? He got married, had a family, and built a city. Why didn't he become a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth? Why wasn't the ground cursed? What changed? From 'Is my sin too great to be forgiven?' Cain repented to God and asked, 'Is it possible for you to forgive me? I murdered my brother. Can you forgive someone like me?' So, Cain repented. When it says here that the Lord put a mark on Cain, it means God forgave Cain. The mark of Cain signifies that Cain has been forgiven and blessed; therefore, nobody has the right to punish Cain on God's behalf. That's why God said, 'Not so. If anyone kills Cain, they shall be punished sevenfold.' This is a really important principle.

Again, I talked about enjoying the dots: 'Vengeance is mine,' says the Lord. Never take revenge. Paul said it; Jesus said it. So who has the right to kill Cain? Nobody. That's what God is saying here: He's blessing Cain, forgiving Cain, and that's why the outcome was different. That's the power of repentance. There's nothing that any human being can do that God cannot forgive if that person sincerely repents. Repentance changes and transforms lives—of individuals, families, societies, and nations. Repentance can change a future. This is the first Cain, the first penitent, and we'll look at how this develops in later stories as well. I'm going to stop here, and tomorrow I'll start off by rethinking Cain and Abel.