Did Abel Eat the Meat of the Sacrifice? (Expanded)
Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical Authority Ministries, April 25, 2025 (Donate)
Was Abel eating meat soon after the curse when he wasn’t
supposed to be (Genesis 1:29) since he kept the flocks and sacrificed an animal
in Genesis 4:2-4? This is a popular question by those attacking the biblical
account trying to assert contradictions in the places like Genesis. Let’s take a
closer look at the account:
Then she [Eve] bore again, this
time his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of
the ground. And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an
offering of the fruit of the ground to the LORD. Abel also brought of the
firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his
offering. (Genesis 4:2-4, NKJV)
Because Abel mimicked what God did in Genesis 3:21 by
sacrificing animals to cover sin, his sacrifice was acceptable. Cain’s offering
wasn’t the proper sacrifice—he needed a blood sacrifice. Of course, Cain then kills
Abel but his blood wasn’t the proper sacrifice either—that was murder.
Nevertheless, Abel sacrificed of flocks—an animal—some think
he was eating of the sacrifice. But was he? The scriptural text doesn’t say that he ate! That
would be an unrighteous thing for Abel to do in light of God’s command
to be vegetation initially. We read in Matthew:
"that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar." (Matthew 23:35, NKJV)
Matthew indicates that Abel was righteous and therefore was
not being disobedient to God’s command in Genesis 1:29 to be vegetarian[1]. Therefore, to answer “why was Abel tending
the flocks?” then we need to consider that flocks can yield many other useful things
such as wool, milk, leather, keeping the grass cut back, etc.
A
fattened lamb, for example, would likely be the one that would be producing the
most wool, had the most life ahead of it and so on; hence the most valuable. So, when Abel sacrificed the fattened ones,
he was offering his best and it was a
blood sacrifice. This sacrifice, was acceptable to the Lord as it followed what
God did with Adam and Eve as a blood sacrifice to cover their sins (recall
Hebrews 9:22 and Genesis 3:21).
The
passage doesn't indicate that Abel ate of
the sacrifice so there is no reason to assume he did—and that reveals the strawman
fallacy in the logic against those attacking the Bible’s truth. When God
sacrificed animals to cover Adam and Eve's sin, there is no indication that
they ate either, and since Abel mimicked what God did, then there is no reason to
believe that he would have eaten from the sacrifice.
The
first possibility of eating the sacrifice would have been with Noah and his
family after the Flood when they sacrificed and God told them they were no
longer restricted to vegetarian meals (Genesis 8:20-9:3). So there is no
contradiction when we take a closer look at this allegation.
This
article is an expanded version that was originally here: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/did-abel-eat-the-meat-of-the-sacrifice/; Republished by permission.
