[And He Walks With Me] Genesis 25
6 Modern sensibilities cringe at the thought of Abraham sending away the sons of his concubines, but in the cultural context of the day, this was actually quite generous. Typically, concubines brought no dowry into the relationship, and their children were considered as slaves in the household. When the patriarch died, then, they did not receive an inheritance. Rather, they were passed on as part of the inheritance. By sending these sons away, Abraham was protecting Isaac from any claims they would make on the estate. He was also granting them freedom. This, in and of itself, was not normal, but then Abraham also gave gifts to the sons of his concubines. The exact nature of these gifts is not provided, but they were clearly not real estate. By giving them flocks, herds, gold, etc., Abraham was providing for their needs wherever they went. This was extraordinarily generous.[54]
8 For the origin and meaning of gathered to his people as a euphemism for death, see note on 23:4.
13 Contrary to popular belief, Ishmael’s descendants were not the original Arabs. In fact, Ishmael’s progeny virtually disappears from Scripture after this, appearing only as associates of the Midianites (e.g., Genesis 37:25), allies of Israel’s enemies (e.g., Psalm 83:6), the wives of Esau (Genesis 28:9; 36:3), and members of David’s administration (1 Chronicles 2:17; 27:30).[55]
22 So she went to inquire of the Lord presents an interesting paradox. On the one hand, the phrase suggests that Rebekah was dependent upon the Lord. On the other hand, however, no details are given concerning where she went, who she consulted, or how she inquired of the Lord. A similar lack of details is noted when Rebekah’s brother, Laban, has two encounters with the Lord in 30:27 and 31:24. This may suggest that Rebekah was trying to fuse her family’s pagan rituals with her husband’s God. Notice, however, that God nevertheless responded to these rituals, demonstrating tolerance for her slow progress in matters of faith. God is patient with those who are earnestly working to draw near to him, even when their progress is slow or halting.[56] Indeed, it is not unusual for our faith to take two steps forward and one step back. The key is to get up and keep pressing forward in faith!
25 Esau’s descendants would be called Edom, which sounds like the Hebrew word rendered red-looking.
27-29 Esau grew up as the epitome of stereotypical masculinity: an expert hunter, an outdoorsman. Jacob, on the other hand was a quiet man who stayed at home. This was further supported by the fact that Isaac loved Esau, Rebekah loved Jacob, and Jacob was cooking a stew when Esau came in from the field. This is not to say that Isaac and Rebekah hated or rejected one son. It means only that they had favorites. Moreover, the fact that God chose Jacob would defy those who assert that there is a “biblical masculinity” to which all males must conform.
31-34 The birthright was a big deal in ancient cultures. As the eldest, Esau was entitled to a double portion of the inheritance and the role of patriarch upon the death of his father. As tired and hungry as he may have been, these were not trivial things. Yet, he ate, drank, got up, and went away, suggesting Esau did not give this a further thought. In trading his birthright for a bowl of stew without a second thought, Esau treated these things as inconsequential. His actions here demonstrate a shocking lack of appreciation and/or foresight.
The fault for this situation does not rest entirely upon Esau. The name Jacob means “he grasps the heel” (see CSB text note), which was a euphemism for conniving or tricky, and he certainly lived into his name here. Jacob took advantage of Esau’s impetuous nature and manipulated him into a terrible decision.
[54] Keener and Zondervan 2016, Genesis 25:6
[55] Keener and Zondervan 2016, Genesis 25:13
[56] Keener and Zondervan 2016, Genesis 25:22