Genesis For The Mildly Curious

[WebersHome]

.
Hello;

Back around 2000 or 2001; I got the daring idea to begin composing a daily, bite-size commentary on the book of Genesis. It was a clumsy effort at first but I stuck with it and as time went by, it got pretty good. On some forums where I've survived opposition long enough to complete the whole fifty chapters, Genesis has attracted several thousand views.

As of today's date, I'm 76 years old; and an on-going student of the Bible since 1968 via sermons, seminars, lectures, Sunday school classes, radio Bible programs, and various authors of a number of Bible-related books. Fifty-two years of Bible under my belt hasn't made me an authority; but they've at least made me competent enough to tackle Genesis.

Barring emergencies, accidents, vacations, unforeseen circumstances, and/or insurmountable distractions, database errors, pandemic shut-downs, computer crashes, black outs, brown outs, deaths in the family, Wall Street Armageddon, thread hijackers, excessive quarrelling and debating, the dog ate my homework, visiting relatives, ISIS, car repairs, Black Friday, Cyber Monday, student walk-outs, Carrington events, gasoline prices, medical issues, and/or hard luck and the forces of nature; I'm making an effort to post something every day including Sundays and holidays.

Some really good stuff is in Genesis: the origin of the cosmos, Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, the Flood, tower of Babel, and the origin of the Jews.

Big-name celebrities like Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac and Ishmael, Rebecca, Jacob and Esau, and Joseph are here.

Not here are Moses vs. Pharaoh and the parting of the Red Sea. That story is in Exodus; Samson and Delilah are in Judges, David and Goliath are in 1Samuel; and Ruth and Esther are in books of the Bible named after them.

The author of Genesis is currently unknown; but commonly attributed to Moses. Seeing as he penned Exodus (Mark 12:26) it's conceivable that Moses also penned Genesis; but in reality, nobody really knows for sure.

Scholars have estimated the date of its writing at around 1450-1410 BC; a mere 3,400± years ago, which is pretty recent in the grand scheme of Earth's geological history.

Genesis may in fact be the result of several contributors beginning as far back as Adam himself; who would certainly know more about the creation than anybody, and who entertained no doubts whatsoever about the existence of an intelligent designer since he knew the creator Himself like a next door neighbor.

As time went by, others like Seth and Noah would add their own experiences to the record, and then Abraham his, Isaac his, Jacob his, and finally Judah or one of his descendants completing the record with Joseph's burial.

Genesis is quoted more than sixty times in the New Testament; and Christ authenticated its Divine inspiration by referring to it in his own teachings. (e.g. Matt 19:4-6, Matt 24:37-39, Mk 10:4-9, Luke 11:49-51, Luke 17:26 29 & 32, John 7:21-23, John 8:44 and John 8:56)

Buen Camino
(Pleasant Journey)
_

[WebersHome]

• Gen 25:23b . . One people shall be mightier than the other, and the older shall serve the younger.

Esau will come out first; therefore, chronologically, he's the eldest son. However, the right of primogeniture was taken from him and given to Jacob. That was God's sovereign prerogative as the paterfamilias of Moses' people.

Biblically, the firstborn son's birthright isn't inalienable; rather, quite transferable to a younger sibling e.g. Rueben and Joseph (1Chrn 5:1), Mannasah and Ephraim (Gen 48:13-19), and David and Jesus (Ps 101:1 cf. Matt 22:42-45)

• Gen 25:24 . .When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb.

Multiple births in human beings arise either from the simultaneous impregnation of more than one ovum or from the impregnation of a single ovum that divides into two or more parts, each of which develops into a distinct embryo. Plural offspring developing from a single egg are known as "identical"-- they are always of the same gender, resemble one another very closely, and have similar fingerprints and blood types.

Offspring produced from separate ova are "fraternal"-- not necessarily of the same gender; they have the usual family resemblance of brothers and sisters.

Precisely of which type Jacob and Esau were, is difficult to tell. However, they are definitely not identical; either in physical appearance nor in personality, nor in speech.

• Gen 25:25a . .The first one emerged red, like a hairy mantle all over;

The Hebrew word for "red" is 'admoniy (ad-mo-nee') which can refer to either red hair or to a reddish, rosy complexion. In Esau's case, it's difficult to know for certain which applied. That he was a hairy kid right from birth is uncontested. However, to avoid the association with red hair; some feel that the conjunction "and" should be inserted just after the comma, so that the verse would read: The first one emerged red, and hairy all over like a mantle.

Jacob looked like most babies do at birth: a little cherub; bald and smooth skinned.

Esau, in contrast, was not only hairy, but because of his fur, he was rough to the touch; sort of like a woolen G.I. blanket. Esau wasn't your typical cuddly little tykester. When Rebecca held him, it wasn't like holding a little boy, it was more like holding a grizzly bear cub, so to speak. Maybe that was a contributing factor in Rebecca's favoritism of Jacob? How many mothers can really warm up to a baby who looks like he'll morph into a werewolf any second?

• Gen 25:25b . . they named him Esau.

The Hebrew word for Esau is from 'Esav (ay-sawv'); the meaning of which isn't known for certain. Some say it means rough-- like rough to the touch. Others think it might mean to cover, or envelop like a blanket --a distinct possibility given Esau's appearance as one covered with hair all over his body. (maybe even on his little tush too.)

• Gen 25:26a . .Then his brother emerged, holding on to the heel of Esau;

Sibling rivalry between the two baby brothers was very intense. Jacob undoubtedly held on to Esau's heel to slow him down so he wouldn't get too far ahead-- and also an aggressive attempt to stop him from going first even though Esau was legitimately first in line to be born.

• Gen 25:26b . . so they named him Jacob.

The Hebrew word for Jacob is from Ya' aqob (yah-ak-obe') which means: heel-catcher.

Esau defined a heel-catcher like this:

"Esau said: Was he, then, named Jacob that he might supplant me these two times? First he took away my birthright and now he has taken away my blessing!" (Gen 27:36)

Supplanters take things by coup, usurping, artifice and/or treachery; e.g. Ray Kroc and the McDonalds® fast food chain.

Right from the womb, Jacob desired supremacy over his brother Esau and struggled to get out ahead of him. How male infants can be so competitive at such an early age is a total mystery; but not impossible. Boys are competitive by nature, and don't like to come in second place; especially against a brother. For some strange reason, it is much easier for a boy to suffer defeat by a non-kin male opponent than by his own sibling.

Jacob is one very Tricky Ricky who knows how to trip people up, and how to keep them from getting ahead, and how to cleverly separate them from what is rightfully theirs.

That boy was born way too soon. He should have been on Wall Street; manipulating stocks, marketing derivatives, and raiding corporations. Jacob isn't usually portrayed in Scripture as a man of muscle and brute strength, but as a man of cunning and determination, a man who gets what he wants by patience, stealth, intelligence, and/or trickery rather than by brute force. Maybe he should have been a corporate lawyer?
_

[WebersHome]

• Gen 25:26c . . Isaac was sixty years old when they were born.

Isaac married Rebecca at forty (Gen 25:20). If Becky was 18 at her wedding, she would have been 38 here. Imagine waiting twenty years to have your first child? Quite a few modern marriages end long before then.

• Gen 25:27a . .When the boys grew up, Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the outdoors;

Esau was the macho kind of boy dads are usually very proud of. He was a rugged, athletic man who preferred to sleep on the ground, under the stars, rather than between sheets. A real he-man; who, in our own day, would very likely own several guns; some of which would be brutal calibers like a .44 magnum revolver or a 10 ga. shotgun.

But Esau was totally physical. The poor lad had no brain at all. He was brave, adventurous, and a natural at hunting, but that is about all you could say for him-- kind of like professional sports stars who only got into college because of their athletic ability, not especially for any academic accomplishments.

Esau pegged the mark in virility; but at the same time rated a big fat zero in sense and sensibility-- a Neanderthal knuckle-dragger kind of guy. There was really no need for Esau to kill wildlife for fresh meat: as if the family were desperate for food; after all, Isaac was very wealthy in livestock.

No. Esau hunted for sport, and his goal was not to help support the family, but to exhibit his prowess, and to impress himself and those around him.

Esau excelled in outdoor survival skills: he was very definitely one-up on Jacob in that sphere; plus it gained him a level of admiration from his dad that exceeded the esteem Isaac held for Jacob.

But for all his natural athletic ability, Esau placed no importance whatsoever upon things of eternal value. He was the classic man under the sun; viz: earthly, secular to the bone, and his so-called "needs" took the highest priority over everything. (cf. 1Cor 2:14)

"See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be defiled; that there be no immoral or impious person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal." (Heb 12:15-16)
_

[WebersHome]

• Gen 25:27b . . but Jacob was a mild man

What's Genesis saying? That Jacob was a wimp; some kind of a mommy's boy? No. Far from it. The word for "mild" is from tam (tawm) which means: gentle; viz: temperate.

The Bible's God holds gentleness in very high regard.

"For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace." (Ps 37:10-11)

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt 5:5)

The Greek word translated "meek" in the third beatitude is praus (prah-ooce') which means essentially the very same thing as tam; viz: temperate, mild.

Moses was meek (Num 12:3) and Christ was meek. (Matt 11:29, Matt 21:5)

Webster's defines mild as: gentle in nature or behavior; viz: temperate; in other words: agreeable, approachable, reasonable, calm, mellow, and self-controlled.

Non-temperate people could be characterized as moody, grudging, irritable, emotional, thin-skinned, unreasonable, irrational, reactive, defensive, confrontational, assertive; and around whom one has to walk on egg shells all the time.

A temperate person, though mellow in demeanor, should never be assumed lacking in strength, courage, conviction, or self confidence. Anybody who's studied the lives of Moses and Jesus can easily testify that neither of those men were either timid, wimpy, or vacillating; no, they walked softly and carried a big stick.

Jacob and his dad Isaac were temperate men; but could be assertive when the situation called for it. Temperate people like Jacob and Isaac pick their battles carefully, and avoid getting all riled up over trifles.

That's all saying Jacob was mature and sensible; in contrast to his brother Esau who was carnal, immature, sensuous, and acted more like an adolescent than a grown man. Mature men take their responsibilities seriously, and their priorities are far different than a guy like Esau who just wants to have fun and adventure all the time.

So anyway, in the economy of God, a person with tam is to be admired way over and above a rugged athletic he-man. It's okay to be a rugged athletic he-man. There's nothing eo ipso wrong in that. After all, David was a rugged he-man himself. But it's not okay to be one without tam. Well, that was Esau-- the picture of health and male virility, but he lacked tam. Esau was a rude, lewd, crude bag of pre-chewed food dude.

Jacob was very different. It's true he was crafty, and maybe a bit dishonest at times; but he was no wimp I can assure you; and, on the whole, a very good man.

Jacob was mellow: he didn't need to show off and win the applause of the crowd to feel good about himself. He was the strong silent type who enjoyed home life and ranching. He was productive, and that's where he found the most contentment in life.

Jacob had the qualities that many good women look for in a husband. He was stable, enjoyed being at home with his family, worked an honest day's work, loved his mom, had no issues with women, and appreciated the value of religion.

Jacob wasn't a grand-stander, nor a narcissistic show-off; nor the kind of guy to run off on adventures all the time or constantly move to where the grass was greener. He didn't leave home till he was 75, and even then it was only because he was on the lamb. Jacob was the kind of man who buys a home and stays in the same neighborhood until his kids are out of school.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 25:27c . . who stayed in camp.

Does that mean Jacob never ventured outdoors? No. After all, his family was pastoral; they lived in tents and spent their whole lives working outdoors. Staying in camp only means Jacob would rather come on home when the day was over, take a hot shower, eat dinner with his family, brush his teeth, and sleep between clean sheets rather than needing a bath out under the stars on the ground with creepy-crawlies.

Esau wasn't dependable; and probably off away from home on one safari after another. But Jacob was always nearby, ready to lend a hand with the chores, shear the sheep, mend the fences, and help his mom get in a load of wood and water. He was like the ranchers in the movie Shane-- hard working and dependable --very unlike his wild and wooly brother who very likely scorned animal husbandry and thought of it as a life for losers.

Jacob was a lot like his mom Rebecca. Although she too came from a family with servants, it wasn't below her to bring in the evening water when it was time. Jacob could have kicked back and lived the life of a spoiled rich kid and never lifted a finger to help out around the ranch, leaving it all up to the servants. But he didn't do that. No. Jacob was a working rancher: he pitched in wherever he could because it was his nature to make himself useful and productive.

• Gen 25:28a . . Isaac favored Esau because he had a taste for game;

The Hebrew word for "favored" is from 'ahab (aw-hab') or possibly 'aheb (aw-habe') which mean: to have affection for.

Family counselors will tell you that favoritism is harmful: and who from a large family doesn't already know that. But nevertheless it's just about near impossible to prevent favoritism. People are only human after all.

Up to this point, Esau seems an okay kind of guy. No really serious faults are readily apparent. And he seems affable enough. On the pages of Old Testament Scripture, he isn't said to be a friendless loner, or an angry sociopath; nor into bad habits like drinking, gambling, murder, robbery, lies, laziness, fighting, disrespect for his parents, blasphemy, selfishness, foul language, or anything else like that.

The only apparent difference between Esau and Jacob-- up to this point --is Esau's preference for roaming the great outdoors instead of putting in a day's work around the ranch. Jewish folklore lays some pretty heavy sins upon Esau. but none of them are listed here in chapter 25.

For now, neither Isaac nor Rebecca have voiced any gripes against either one of their boys. Isaac does favor Esau more, but only because of the venison that he prepared for his dad on occasion-- which of course would appeal to Isaac because it was wild game rather than the meat of domestic animals. Guys sometimes feel more manly when they eat meat taken in hunting rather than from a local super market. Isaac is one of those men for whom this proverb rings true: The way to a man's heart is through this stomach.

• Gen 25:28b . . but Rebecca favored Jacob.

Well, that's understandable. Jacob was religious, temperate, conscientious, and helpful: attributes Rebecca would certainly value; whereas Esau was secular, out hunting, and saw no value in his dad's religion whatsoever (Heb 12:15-17). And Jacob was very likely home a whole lot more than Esau; and made good company too. Guys like Esau tend to be center-of-attention addicts; and eclipse everyone else in the room to the point where you get the feeling they believe themselves the only ones in the whole wide world that count and the only justification for your existence is to be their audience.

Rebecca was a no-nonsense kind of girl. I think she was very impressed by Abraham's chief steward because he was serious about his business and got right to it with no fooling around; plus he was a man of prayer too. I think all of that had a great deal of influence on Rebecca's decision to leave home with him.

I suspect Rebecca saw that very same kind of character in Jacob; and it had more appeal to her than the swash buckling, great white hunter attitude that compelled Esau to go off on safari so often. Not that an adventurer's nature is bad or anything like that. But Rebecca preferred the company of disciplined, level headed, temperate men who take care of their families and put them first. The kind who take their responsibilities seriously and don't shirk.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 25:29 . . Once when Jacob was cooking a stew, Esau came in from the open, famished.

I guess Esau never heard of the Boy Scouts' motto: Be prepared. Well . . next time, maybe he'll be a little more careful to fill his ALICE pack with some LRRP rations before going out in the boonies.

The word for "stew" is from naziyd (naw-zeed') which means: something boiled, e.g. soup. According to Gen 25:34, one of the ingredients in Jacob's soup was lentils: a type of flat, round seed related to the pea and is eaten as a vegetable.

• Gen 25:30a . . And Esau said to Jacob: Give me some of that red stuff to gulp down, for I am famished

The word for "red" (stuff) is from 'adom (aw-dome') which means: rosy.

• Gen 25:30b . . which is why he was named Edom.

Edom is from 'Edom (ed-ome') or possibly 'Edowm (ed-ome') which mean: red. 'Edom and 'Edowm are derived from 'adom; the word for rosy.

I actually knew a man when I was a kid whose nick-name was Rose; and what die-hard football fan hasn't heard of Rosey Grier?

• Gen 25:31 . . Jacob said: First sell me your birthright.

The birthright consists of two distinct components. One is material, and the other is spiritual. If Israel's covenanted law can be used as a guideline in this instance, then the holder of the birthright (which is transferable) is entitled to twice the amount of material inheritance given to his siblings. (Deut 21:15-17)

But Jacob isn't asking for Esau's material birthright; it's the spiritual one that he's after. Jacob wanted very much to be the family's next patriarch; and no doubt Rebecca wanted him too.

The position of patriarch carries heavy responsibilities. If Esau was to rule over the family, then he would be responsible to provide for them both materially and spiritually. Abraham was a very successful patriarch in both respects, but most especially in the spiritual.

It was the patriarch's duty to build, and officiate at, the family's altar; just as Abraham had done all those years (cf. Job 1:5). It was also the patriarch's duty to dispense the knowledge God and make sure it was carried forward in the family so as to prevent its loss to future generations (cf. Gen 18:19). I think what Jacob was really after was the inspiration that came with being the spiritual patriarch. (cf. Gen 20:7)

As far as Esau was concerned, the material aspect of his birthright was all that mattered. He was totally secular and cared nothing at all for his spiritual birthright. On the other hand, Jacob dearly longed for the spiritual aspect— the material part being only incidental. No doubt the two brothers had discussed these very things over the years so that Jacob already knew exactly how Esau felt about it. So that, half in jest, and probably half in disgust, he proposed that Esau barter his spiritual birthright for food.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 25:32-33 . . And Esau said: I am at the point of death, so of what use is my birthright to me? But Jacob said: Swear to me first. So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.

It just amazes me how much faith the people of long ago put in oaths. Nowadays nobody trusts an oath. You've got to sign your name on the dotted line, preferably with a witness and/or a notary, because it would be totally foolish to take anybody's word on anything; even if they swore to it.

Even if Isaac now gave the birthright to Esau, which he fully intended to do, at least Jacob had the assurance that his brother wouldn't retain the spiritual aspect. Isaac would never interfere with a contract between the two brothers sealed by an oath. He would have to honor it. The spiritual birthright would now go to Jacob, which, according to Gen 25:23, is exactly what the supreme paterfamilias of Abraham's clan mandated in the first place.

• Gen 25:34 . . Jacob then gave Esau bread and lentil stew; he ate and drank, and he rose and went away. Thus did Esau spurn the birthright.

Had Esau politely waived the birthright, that probably would've been okay with God, and no hard feelings about it: after all; not everyone is cut out to be a spiritual guru. But to merchandise something sacred to God was an insult that must have cut Him deeply.

Ironically, the birthright wasn't Esau's to sell in the first place since God pre destined it to Jacob before the boys were born (Gen 25:23 & Rom 9:11-12). I can't help but wonder what happened to the information that God passed on to Rebecca back when. Did she keep it under her hat all those years? If so; why?

Jacob and Rebecca no doubt both appreciated their association with Isaac, and were grateful Yhvh was their god. But did Esau did appreciate it? No, he didn't; nor did he see any advantage to it. He was truly a secular man: an earthly dude through and through. He wasn't a heavenly man in any sense of the word; no, far from it.

"A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." (1 Cor 2:14)
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 26:1a . .There was a famine in the land-- aside from the previous famine that had occurred in the days of Abraham

That previous famine occurred in chapter 12 before Isaac was born; even before Ishmael was born. So many good, prosperous years have gone by since the last famine. This may in fact have been the very first famine that Isaac ever witnessed, and probably his last too.

The Hebrew word for "famine" is from ra' ab (raw-awb') which means: hunger (more or less extensive)

People go hungry either because they can't buy the foods they need, or can't grow it for lack of soil or water. In Isaac's case it was probably a lack of water that made the difference. He had lots of money. But cattle can't live on legal tender. Down in the lowlands there would very likely be plenty of water in wells and springs that could be used for irrigation. So it's off to the lowlands they go; herds and all.

• Gen 26:1b . . and Isaac went to Abimelech, king of the Philistines, in Gerar.

This was very likely another Abimelech-- not the same man in chapter 20 whom Abraham knew. That Abimelech was very likely dead by now. The name "Abimelech" is more like a title than a moniker; sort of like Czar, Pharaoh, or Caesar.

Gerar hasn't been fully identified, but the site might be in one of the branches of Wady Sheri'a, at a place called Um Jerrar, near the coast southwest of Gaza and 9 miles from it. The site answers fairly well to the statements of Eusebius and Jerome, that it was 25 (Roman) miles south of Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrin). It's actually 30 English miles, but distances weren't very accurately determined in early times. Gerar was known in the first 5th century CE, when it was the seat of a bishopric; and its bishop, Marcian, attended the Council of Chalcedon 451 CE.

According to ERETZ Magazine, issue 64, Abimelech's land is an ample valley with fertile land and numerous springs; a perfect place for a man with cattle to weather out the drought.

Isaac's decision to investigate the possibility of living amongst Abimelech's people was quite possibly influenced by Abraham's pact with them back in chapter 20. Hopefully they would be inclined to honor his dad's relationship with the previous Abimelech and let Isaac's community live down there at least until it started raining again up in the highlands.

• Gen 26:2a . .The Lord had appeared to him

This is the very first recorded incident where God appeared especially for Isaac. When he was offered as a burnt offering back in chapter 22, God appeared to his dad while Isaac was with him. But God was not said to appear to Isaac. This is the first time.

You know, probably nobody alive today will ever be honored by a divine close encounter of a third kind. We will live out our pathetically boring little lives always never quite sure if maybe we were hoodwinked-- hoping against hope that the Bible is true. And wouldn't the joke be on us if it isn't? What a bunch of gullible morons Christians would be if there is no Bible's God after all.

• Gen 26:2b . . and said: Do not go down to Egypt;

Isaac may have been considering Egypt as plan B if Gerar didn't work out.

• Gen 26:2c . . stay in the land which I point out to you.

That had to be encouraging. Even if things looked bad in Gerar when Isaac arrived, he could rest upon the fact that he was going in the right direction.

• Gen 26:3a . . Reside in this land, and I will be with you and bless you;

Suppose it turned out Isaac didn't like the land God selected for him and moved to another one? Well he could just forget about the promise: "I will be with you and bless you" That promise was conditional. He had to live where God directed him to live.

• Gen 26:3b-4 . . I will assign all these lands to you and to your heirs, fulfilling the oath that I swore to your father Abraham. I will make your heirs as numerous as the stars of heaven, and assign to your heirs all these lands, so that all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves by your heirs--

Although some translations render the word "heirs" plural, zera' is one of those Hebrew words that can just as accurately be translated in the singular as well the plural: like the words sheep, fish, and deer. In this case, it's probably best to understand zera' in the singular because it most certainly refers to Jacob rather than to both he and his brother Esau.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 26:5 . . inasmuch as Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge: My commandments, My laws, and My teachings.

Some construe God's statement to indicate that Abraham was included in the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. But the statement below excludes him.

"The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. Not with our forefathers did the Lord make this covenant, but with us, we, all of whom are here alive today." (Deut 5:2-3)

Were Abraham included in the Jews' covenant; God would have placed Himself in a serious dilemma.

The problem is: Abraham was married to a half sister (Gen 20:12)

The covenant prohibits marrying, and/or sleeping with, one's half sister. (Lev 18:9, Lev 20:17)

Under the terms and conditions of the Jews' covenant; men who sleep with their sisters are cursed the moment they do so because "cursed be he" is grammatically present tense; no delay and no waiting period; viz: the curse is immediate.

"Cursed be he who lies with his sister, his father's daughter or his mother's daughter." (Deut 27:22)

Cursed be he who does not uphold the words of this Torah, to fulfill them. (Deut 27:26)

Well; were God to slam Abraham with a curse for sleeping with his sister, then God would be obligated to slam Himself with a curse in return.

"The one who curses you I will curse" (Gen 12:3)

Abraham enjoyed quite an advantage. He had a certain kind of immunity. In other words, seeing as how Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy were instituted long after Abraham passed away; then none of the curses listed at Ex 34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and/or Deut 28:1-69 applied to him.

Abraham complied with God's requirements; His commands, His decrees and His laws voluntarily rather than by compulsion because he wasn't in a covenant with God that demanded him to do so like his posterity would be in the days of Moses. (Deut 5:2-3)

The promises God made to Abraham as per Gen 12:2-3 and Gen 17:8 were not sustained by Abraham's piety. In other words: once God made those promises, neither Abraham nor his posterity can ever lose them because they are unconditional

"The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise." (Gal 3:17-18)

The "promise" in question reads like this:

"And I will give you and your seed after you the land of your sojournings, the entire land of Canaan for an everlasting possession, and I will be to them for a god." (Gen 17:8)

That should be really good news to Abraham's posterity because although the law has a marked effect upon their occupation of the land, it has no effect upon their entitlement to it.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 26:6 . . So Isaac stayed in Gerar. When the men of the place asked him about his wife, he said "She is my sister" for he was afraid to say "my wife" thinking: The men of the place might kill me on account of Rebecca, for she is beautiful.

NOTE: The thing about human beauty is that it's subjective, i.e. only humans can appreciate it. A big ape like King Kong would not be attracted to a cute blonde girl because his chemistry isn't mixed right. For example; meerkat boys no doubt think that meerkat girls are alluring little hotties. But I seriously doubt that meerkat boys feel the same way about human girls.

The Hebrew word for "sister" is 'achowth (aw-khoth') and has very wide application. It can mean an actual biological sister of the same parents as the brother, or it can just mean female kin, either near or far. I'm guessing that Isaac and Rebecca were far enough apart in age that she could easily pass for his niece.

'achowth is very much like the New Testament Greek word suggenes (soong-ghen ace'). For example Luke 1:36, "Even Elizabeth your cousin is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month." The word "cousin" is an arbitrary choice of words. Suggenes could just as easily been translated "aunt", or just simply "kin" and/or "relative" and/or "sister".

NOTE: Translating suggenes as "cousin" in Mary and Elizabeth's case is appropriate seeing as how both women were biologically related to Leah via Judah and Levi.

Suggenes and 'achowth are ambiguous words, and unless there is some additional clarification in the surrounding text, it is just about impossible to know precisely in what manner the female kin is related; for example in Gen 24:59-60, Rebeca's family called her a sister.

Isaac's response was semantic double-speak. In other words: he didn't tell an outright bald face lie; what he said was true; from a certain point of view-- he and Rebecca were related. But nevertheless, his response was a half truth meant to deceive.

I just have to wonder sometimes about the IQ of some of the patriarchs. God had just reaffirmed Abraham's covenant with Isaac; guaranteeing He would bless him on account of his father Abraham's righteousness (not Isaac's righteousness). Yet now he's worried about being murdered in Gerar? I'd hate to think that Isaac didn't believe God. I'd much rather reckon he wasn't paying attention.

• Gen 26:8 . . When some time had passed, Abimelech king of the Philistines, looking out of the window, saw Isaac sporting with his wife Rebecca.

Sporting with one's wife is far and away different than sporting with one's sister. The way those two were horsing around was unmistakably the behavior of lovers.

• Gen 26:9-10 . . Abimelech sent for Isaac and said: So she is your wife! Why then did you say "She is my sister". Isaac said to him: Because I thought I might lose my life on account of her. Abimelech said: What have you done to us! One of the people might have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.

I'm not surprised that Abimelech was frightened. It hadn't been all that long ago when his predecessor had a run-in with Isaac's god, That incident involving Abraham undoubtedly went down in the castle records.

And to top it off, out there grazing on Gerar pastures was a special breed of sheep that bore a witness for Abraham too (Gen 21:27-32) and their story was very likely woven into Gerar folklore. Oh yes. They knew about Yhvh alright; and they all knew what could happen to them if any of the local men messed around with Rebecca, the wife of Abraham's son.

• Gen 26:11 . . Abimelech then charged all the people, saying: Anyone who molests this man or his wife shall be put to death.

It is most encouraging to note that God is disposed to protect his own from the perils they bring upon themselves by the stupid blunders of their own self reliance. That's a tremendous advantage to have in life.

The Hebrew word for "molest" is from naga' (naw-gah') which means: to touch, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphemistically, to lie with a woman); by implication, to reach (figuratively, to arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy, etc.)

NOTE: A popular euphemism in our day relative to men and women is so and so are "sleeping together" which means of course that they do naughtier stuff than merely slumber.

So Abimelech was not just talking about sexual molesting; but mandated that his people not even so much as lay a finger upon Isaac and Rebecca in any way at all. Isaac, of course, is getting by on his dad's influence. But what the hey, it doesn't hurt to be connected.
_

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 26:12-14a . . Isaac sowed in that land and reaped a hundredfold the same year. The Lord blessed him, and the man grew richer and richer until he was very wealthy: he acquired flocks and herds, and a large household,

Quite a bit of the land down around Gerar was public, sort of like our own American frontier in the days of Lewis and Clark; and was up for grabs by whoever had the wherewithal and the moxie to take it. In fact, the Philistines really weren't even a country of their own at this time, but more like a colony clinging to the sea coast of Palestine, with the majority of them still living on the isle of Crete. They would migrate and settle en masse centuries later.

Farming may seem like a switch from animal husbandry, but the combination was common among pastoral peoples those days for two good reasons. For one; Isaac's herds needed pasture. And two; man can't live on meat alone; he needs fruits and vegetables too.

And Isaac needed bushels and bushels of those items to feed his immense community. He inherited at least a thousand people from his dad. By now, those have multiplied well beyond that. I think if you'd have encountered Isaac's outfit in those days it would have resembled an Iowa town rather than a simple camp of Bedouins.

Rates of increase varied from thirty to a hundred (cf. Matt 13:8, Matt 19:29). Sixtyfold is very good, and wasn't unusual in Palestine back in those days. A hundredfold was rare, and occurred only in spots of extraordinary fertility.

The region of Babylonia, however, yielded two-hundred and even three-hundredfold, according to Herodotus (I.193) and all without genetically modified seeds. Just exactly what those fold numbers indicate is uncertain. Perhaps they were similar to a modern term relative to bushels per acre.

• Gen 26:14b . . so that the Philistines envied him.

Some feel that the Philistines' envy was rooted in anti-Semitism. Well . . . there are always those seeking to enhance their own image as a victim; and this chapter would certainly seem a good source of propaganda for that purpose.

Envy is a normal human emotion that is typically blind to racial and ethnic identities. Envy isn't restricted to anti-Semitism, nor does it serve to identify it. Envy is a powerful passion; destroying friendships, fueling fierce rivalries, generating strong desires for revenge, and fracturing solidarity.

NOTE: Madison Avenue typically combines envy with gloating; which Webster's defines as to show in an improper or selfish way that you are happy with your own success or another person's failure. Whenever someone's goods and/or services in an ad are superior to others, there's usually no sympathy shown by the one with the superior stuff; only gloating over those less fortunate with no concern at all for their feelings. Thus advertisers encourage consumer rivalry and smug satisfaction. It's very common in TV ads.

Just watch the ads on TV, and the ones in magazines and you'll see. They constantly provoke us to keep up with and/or surpass our peers in clothing, cars, physical appearance, business success, and popularity. Envy is a powerful, negative feeling that overwhelms us whenever others are doing better than ourselves.
_