05. § 3. Isaac
§ 3. Isaac
Some of the events occur in the lifetime of Abraham. For Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife, sixty at the birth of his two sons, seventy-five at Abraham’s death; Abraham therefore survived the birth of his grandchildren about fifteen years. The events in Isaac’s life are in many respects like those of Abraham’s. This is owing rather to the character of Isaac than to a similarity of relations. Abraham, as the father of the faithful, opened the great series; in his guidances and spiritual peculiarity all that follows is typified and foreshadowed, and hence his inner life is throughout peculiar and independent; but in Isaac, who only carried on the succession, the inner life is throughout intermediate, as with Joshua in relation to Moses, with Elisha in relation to Elijah, and in some measure with the apostles in relation to Christ. The most suitable motto for his history is contained in Genesis 26:18, “And Isaac digged again the wells of water which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father; for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham: and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them.” We learn that his life is only to be considered as a continuation of the life of Abraham, by the fact that the promise respecting him. Genesis 26:24, contains the additional clause, “for my servant Abraham’s sake.” His eye was so firmly fastened on his prototype, the powerful personality of Abraham made so deep an impression on the soft nature of his son, that he follows him even when imitation is reprehensible, viz. in representing his wife as his sister, although he was not able to do this with the same semblance of truth, or at least with less semblance of truth, for the relation was a more distant one. Yet notwithstanding all the dissimilarity in gifts, which was necessary that free scope might be given for the development of Jacob, the second primitive type of Israel; yet in the one main point Isaac resembles Abraham, in his living faith in the living God. Even in forty years he had not attained to such ripeness of character that Abraham deemed it necessary to consult him with respect to marriage; but none the less was there spiritual life in him. He had gone into the field to pray when his bride arrived. Afterwards he had not strength to conduct the education of his sons with a firm hand; but when his eyes were dim from old age, he had still power to bless, firmly believing in the promise. It is significant that a multiplicity of types should stand at the head of the nation. In Isaac a pledge is given to those quiet passive natures who with a true mind keep the traditionary possessions of the church, that they also, with all their apparent insignificance, have part and inheritance in the people of God; that even a life which is not highly gifted, not endowed with extraordinary powers, may yet be good and blessed; that faith and truth alone are indispensable. Isaac’s usual place of residence was on the southern borders of Palestine. This habitation corresponds to his character. The thronging and driving of the ever-increasing Canaanites was not congenial to a mind disinclined to strife and competition. He sought quietness and solitude. But even there he was obliged to suffer much injustice. What Abraham’s awe-inspiring personality and energy had kept at a distance from him, Isaac surmounts by patient submission, and yet by God’s blessing always overcomes in the end.
1. The birth of Jacob and Esau.—The twenty years’ childlessness of Rebekah was destined to serve the same purpose as that of Sarah, not so much to exercise the faith of the parents as to arrest the attention of the whole after-world, to demonstrate that God was active in the matter, and that something important was in preparation. The divine revelation which Rebekah received when she had been disturbed by certain phenomena had a similar tendency. She had a presentiment of the symbolic significance of these phenomena; for she knew the promise, and, made observant by the long delay, she believed that here everything must be significant, even that which was otherwise not unusual. Therefore she goes to inquire of the Lord; in what manner is uncertain, probably by prayer, for that is the most immediate. If the asking of God by a prophet had been intended, as in 1 Samuel 9:9, a nearer hint could not have been absent, since it is not at all obvious whom she should have asked. And no trace exists elsewhere of a prophetic gift outside the patriarchal circle. She was not deceived in her presentiment. The phenomenon signified strife between her sons, the ancestors of two nations; in which strife the younger was to overcome. The most important point in the narrative is that we here see how God’s promises are not connected with carnal birth, nor inherited like human possessions after the usual manner. The same thing is shown in the history of Ishmael with respect to Isaac, but more obviously in the present instance, since one mother was to bear both sons. But we must not therefore assume that the preference given to Jacob was merely arbitrary. God’s freedom of choice is only opposed to human claims and pretensions. The history shows that it was controlled by reference to individualities. Jacob is here related to Esau as Israel to the heathen. What Lange says of Israel as a nation, On the Historical Character of the Gospels, p. 9, is equally appropriate to their ancestor: “From their mother’s womb, from their deepest fundamental life, they had already a predisposition to revelation, a genial inclination for true religion.”
Esau’s appearance at his birth symbolized his individuality. On this account it is narrated by the author, and for this reason it determines his name.
Esau is the representative of a certain natural good-nature and honesty, combined with roughness, passionateness, and unsusceptibility for the higher. He is without resentment or longings, a man who finds full satisfaction in the visible. Such natures, even when grace has softened their hearts, are not fit to be placed at the head of a development. One destined for such a position must possess not only faith, but gifts; but every
Jacob’s nature is much more complex than that of Esau. In his heart are recesses and chambers difficult for himself and others to see into; while a man like Esau may be pretty well known in about an hour. He is soft and yielding, sensitive, susceptible of all contact with the higher world, full of capacity to see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending; but at the same time, like all characters where phantasy predominates,—Esau is the personified healthy intellect of man,—subject to great self-deception, open to strong temptation to impurity, inclined to cunning and craftiness, deficient in frankness. God put this man to school in order to free him from the great shadow which always accompanies great light, to that school in which alone some things are thoroughly learnt, the school of suffering; and when God’s education is finished, then we see the individuality of Jacob, which remains the same throughout, purified and cleansed from the dross of sin.
2. Transactions relative to the birthright, or Jacob’s cunning and Esau’s roughness.—The disposition of the two brothers is seen in their respective choice of a calling. Jacob chose the peaceful, quiet shepherd-life, conducive to meditation and contemplation. For Esau’s rude mind his father’s mode of life was not manly enough—he chose hunting. Even the ancients remarked the injurious influence which this pursuit exercises on the mind, as a daily employment. Jerome says, “We find in Scripture instances of holy fishermen, but not one of a holy hunter.”
Isaac is unable to comprehend his son Jacob. He prefers Esau because he understands him better; because he is more adapted for daily intercourse. And Esau is more drawn to the father than the mother; is careful to minister to his smallest likings. His corporeal strength is pleasant to Isaac, who sees in him a welcome supplement to that in which he himself is deficient, a prop for his old age; in Jacob’s spiritual power and spiritual wealth, on the contrary, there is something strange and uncongenial to Isaac. Here he stumbles on an element in which he is not at home. The subtle-minded Rebekah, on the other hand, is drawn towards her counterpart, Jacob; and she holds that she is the more justified in preferring him, since God Himself has already designated him the heir of the promise. In Jacob’s cunning her tendency to intrigue finds a welcome confederate. She developed this propensity in the face of that obstinacy which in Isaac, as is so frequently the case, was united with weakness. In the transaction concerning the birthright, the disposition of both brothers was clearly evinced. If the question had been of those rights of the first-born which were common to a later time, of the precedence in the family after the father’s death, and of a double inheritance,—comp. Michaelis, Mos. Recht. § 79, 84,—then Esau would only have incurred the reproach of great recklessness; Jacob, the worse reproach of ambition and avarice. But in this case the possession was a much higher one. If, as Isaac afterwards assumed, the divine election followed the human claim, if the carnal birthright were to be regarded as an actual expression of God concerning the spiritual prerogative, then the first-born was the heir of the promises, and was justified in assuming that at a future time the God of Abraham and Isaac would be his God also in a special sense; then he might hope his posterity would possess the land of Canaan, and that the blessing would proceed from them on all nations. Esau neglects all this, has no perception of the higher meaning; for the sake of a momentary gratification he gives up the highest possession, as the source so strikingly says: “And he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright.” So he becomes the representative and type of those who for the sake of present worldly pleasure renounce eternity, and give up the real good for the sake of that which is apparent. For this reason he is called in Scripture (Hebrews 12:16)
Jacob’s conduct appears in another light, if we look at the birthright from this point of view; and we may infer that he himself thus regarded it, from the fact that he never made an attempt to appropriate the lower privileges of the birthright, never made any claim to precedence before Esau, or to a larger share in the inheritance. So long as Jacob was in Haran, Esau was richer and more powerful than he, as appears from Genesis 32. On his return, Jacob went to meet Esau with a humility which was almost excessive, in order to avoid all suspicion that he had such an object in view. We must also assume that he perceived how little his brother was adapted to be the bearer of a divine revelation, and, what is still more important, that he knew from the Lord’s utterance which his mother had kept in her heart that the birthright was destined for him. But just because he knew this, he ought to have felt less temptation to act as he did. His act was the result of want of faith. For if he knew that God had destined the birthright for him, how could he conceive the thought of helping God, as if God Himself were not sufficiently powerful to execute His own design? A warning example for all those who would further the kingdom of God and their own position in it by every kind of jugglery! The juristic maxim, Volenti non sit injuria, which is applied by those who wish to excuse Jacob in the matter, has only a limited application even in the juristic department—Esau might have made the complaint of the ultra dimidium loesi—in the moral department it has no claim at all. The words of the apostle, “Thou shalt not overreach thy brother,” are far more applicable. Jacob himself, erroneously connecting the divine gift with the carnal prerogative, regarded it as a matter which might be bargained for. But even human sin must be subservient to God’s plan.. Esau now began to give up his supposed claim to the promise. He did this fully afterwards, when the father’s blessing, which stood in the closest relation to the promise, was given to Jacob. The narrator is solely occupied with God’s design in the matter. The actual judgment on Jacob’s conduct is contained in his subsequent fate. How remarkably this exemplified the divine jus talionis will be seen hereafter. But mark how, in the midst of all his error, the better element in Jacob shines out, so that he never ceases to be a subject for the chastising and purifying grace of God: he appears as a man of whom something may be made. He has faith in God’s word, and a disposition for God’s grace. Roos says with truth, “His faults are better than the virtues of Esau and of all worldlings.”
3. Isaac’s blessing.—The circumstance that we find Isaac already so weak that he must lie in bed, more than forty years before his death, is to be explained by his whole character. The less energy of spirit a man possesses, the more easily does he succumb to sickness, the more readily does he become a prey to disease, against which the will may do so much. His blindness also may in some measure be considered rather as an effect of this spiritual and physical weakness than the result of a definite malady. The mind exercises the greatest influence on the nervous activity. Of Moses, who was so full of mental power, it is said in Deuteronomy 34:7 : “And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.” Thus the representation of Isaac’s character is consistent even to the minutest details,—a phenomenon which we do not find in any mythical history. His love for venison and wine is another indication of his character. Abraham places milk before his guests. The consciousness of spiritual weakness leads a man to attribute too much importance to the body, and to seek strength by means of it. “Make me savoury meat” is truly a speech of cherished weakness, which alone can give rise to such desires; and if surprised in them, one cannot fail to be ashamed. In the transaction relative to the blessing, we must first of all draw attention to the fact that Isaac was not without considerable guilt. He perfectly understood the great significance of the blessing. He was penetrated by the consciousness of the special divine providence which presided over the fate of his race. He had a presentiment that in this important moment he should be a mere instrument. Such consciousness should have impelled him, with complete subjection of his own intention and inclination, to listen only to God’s voice within him; the more since the earlier utterance of God was in unison with this intention and inclination. And, moreover, Esau’s profane mind, and the religious indifferentism he showed by his marriage with Canaanitish women, served as a confirmation of this divine utterance. Isaac’s conduct after the discovery of the deception contains an actual confession of guilt. He does not think of reproaching Jacob and Rebekah. In what has happened he recognises a judgment of God. Faith makes its way through the carnal prejudices which had held him in subjection. He looks away from the human means by which he had been led to act in opposition to his intention and desire, and rises to the invisible hand which has led the event to this issue. The sole object of the narrator is to draw attention to the overruling providence of God. Apart from this, what would all human means have availed? It would have been so easy to discover the deception. That it was God’s design to give the blessing to Jacob, is shown by the circumstance that the deception was not discovered, and that the blessing was given to Jacob against the will of the blesser. The fact that God employs these human means for the accomplishment of His plan does not justify them; otherwise every sin would seem to be justified. If Jacob and Rebekah had been persuaded in their hearts that God had destined the blessing for him, they must have believed also that God would find means and ways to confer it upon him. It was unbelief which made them think it necessary to frustrate the carnal views of Isaac by human means—the same unbelief which in all ages has given rise to the maxim, “The end justifies the means.” The want of living faith leads man to put himself in God’s place. That Jacob and Rebekah estimate the end so highly, shows that there was a germ of good in them. That they chose bad means for its attainment, shows how much they were in need of purification. Moreover, we must consider that Jacob did not wish to appropriate the possession of another, but only to make sure of that which belonged to him, and which seemed in danger of falling into wrong hands. For this good end he made use of bad means. We must remember also that Jacob and Rebekah were not in the habit of putting their confidence in human means, so uncertain in themselves; but that they only wished in this way to prepare a substratum for the divine agency. It was this confidence in God which gave Jacob the boldness to answer Isaac’s doubtful question, “Art thou my very son Esau?’ with the words “I am.” Otherwise he would have felt as Luther, who says of himself, “I would have run away for fear, and have let the keys drop.” The purification which Jacob and Rebekah needed, they received in full measure by means of heavy trials. The author, whose eye is fixed solely on God’s part in the matter, esteemed it the less necessary to pass judgment on the conduct of Jacob and Rebekah, since the actual judgment of God appears in that which follows. Rebekah was punished by the lengthened absence of her beloved son, which was the immediate result of this event. Henceforward he was as dead to her. She never saw him again, for on Jacob’s return she was already dead; as we learn from the circumstance that we find Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, who would certainly not have left her before her death, in Jacob’s company on his return. How must her heart have been tortured with anguish in forming the resolution to take this difficult step! Jacob, who had grown up in affluence, must leave his home alone, in secret flight, and earn his bread in a strange land by the work of his hands. In his case the divine blessing is always associated with punishment. As he had deceived his brother Esau, his relative Laban deceives him by a striking retribution. As he had deceived his father, his sons deceive him in representing his beloved Joseph to be dead. That he did not err through ignorance of the divine law, is shown by the fear he expressed, that if the deception were discovered he might draw down his father’s curse instead of receiving his blessing; and still more by his anxiety, when after long years he again comes into the vicinity of Esau. The consciousness of having sinned against his brother first gives the true sting to his anguish. It is this which makes it so difficult for him to have perfect confidence in the divine help.
Isaac was 137 years old when he blessed his sons, just as old as his brother Ishmael when he died; whence Lightfoot concludes that it was this circumstance which led him to think of death. He died at Mamre, at the age of 180; comp. Genesis 35:27-29. We may now leave him and pass on to Jacob, who from this time forms the sole centre of the history. But we must not omit to point out how exactly God’s manner of dealing with him corresponds to the personal relation of Isaac to Abraham. Here we find nothing of the richness and fulness of divine revelations as they were imparted to Abraham. Just as Isaac’s life was only a continuation of the life of Abraham, so also was the providence of God which was closely connected with it. Only twice was a divine manifestation granted to Isaac,—the first time at Gerar, where, in imitation of his father, he was about to go down to Egypt during the famine which had arisen in Canaan, probably with the intention of permanently settling there, and thus to realize before the time the announcement made to Abraham; again at Beersheba. God assures him that his posterity should possess Canaan, and that in him all the nations of the earth should be blessed. No new development, only transfer and renewal.