INTRODUCTION

It should be noted that the book of Genesis is a book of foundations and it is necessary to understand what Genesis is saying here, in order to grasp the theological statements God makes in the rest of the Bible. Genesis deals at length with Abraham and Sarah and the three generations which followed them and we can see from these lessons how God taught them and how their characters were formed. 

In these chapters we see romance, violence by brother against brother, power grabs, jealousies, slavery, war, imprisonment and all kinds of human failure.  We also see how God worked among these people, forgave them and helped them along. 

In a previous lesson we looked at the rivalry between the son God promised Abraham and Sarah and the son brought into life by the ‘works of the flesh’.  Just before this chapter and our text we read of Ishmael the son of Abraham, a rough, rugged character who lived in the desert, fathered twelve princes and settled vast territories.   

There is no hint that during his lifetime Abraham tolerated the exercise of rivalry between the brothers and even after Abraham's death there was no obvious hostility between them, even though we know that there was tremendous hostility between the descendents of Ishmael and the later descendents of Isaac. 

When we look at Ishmael’s brother Isaac, the father of the central characters in our text, we see a younger brother with a softer character.  He was not as aggressive, bright, capable and energetic as his older brother but yet he was the one chosen by God.  God had chosen the ‘vessel’ He wanted and it does not look as if human ability was the critical factor; for Isaac's accomplishments in life were not significant, certainly not as significant as those of his father Abraham. 

It seems obvious that the character of Isaac was a major determining factor in what happened in our story. God never said of Isaac that he knew that he would bring up his children in the proper way. In contrast, when speaking about Abraham, God had said in Genesis 18:17-19;

“And the Lord said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do; Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.” 

Isaac had begun well, marrying the woman God had brought to him and when she could not conceive, he prayed that God would open her womb. Though he slipped afterwards, we do not get the impression that he was an evil man. 

He was very different from his father. Even when Abraham sinned and deceived Abimelech, telling him that Sarah was his sister, thus implying that she was not his wife, Abimelech humbled himself before Abraham, begging him to pray for him and his people.  When Isaac committed the same trespass, the Abimelech reacted totally differently; he lectured Isaac about his deception and upbraided him for his foolishness.  Here was an unbeliever roughing up the promised son. 

Abraham fought evil kings and rescued the innocent.  He interceded for Sodom.  He saved Lot twice.  Abraham, even though he did wrong, prayed for Abimelech and made Abimelech establish a covenant with him.  He traveled all over the land of Canaan, witnessing to others and reaching out to them. 

Isaac only lived in a very small area for the one hundred and eighty years of life. When he ran into trouble with other people and they quarrelled with him (Genesis 26) he simply moved on.  There is no evidence he interacted positively with the people in Canaan. 

So what kind of leadership would a man like Isaac give to those in his house?  Would he be like Abraham and obtain the approval of God given to his father in Genesis 18?  Absolutely not! 

What we do see is that he intended to disobey God’s expressed statement and secretly give the covenant blessing to the son of his choice rather than God’s choice. 

We have just read how carefully and cautiously Abraham had set about to choose a wife for Isaac.  Isaac did no such thing for his two sons and one ended up marrying two Canaanite women with no written expression of dismay by his father. Only the mother Rebekah seemed to suffer over Esau marrying pagan women.  In Jacob’s case, getting a wife for him from Abraham's family in Mesopotamia was only vaguely considered in the context of finding a refuge for him from his brother’s anger.

So we are looking at a father who did not look at his responsibilities seriously with respect to his children.  He simply failed to seek the mind of the Lord and was apparently unconcerned about the next generation and God's purpose for his family line. He showed little leadership in his home and so his wife usurped the authority as he watched passively. 

The unfolding of our story really reflects a tragedy.  It is not that the people themselves were altogether evil, but the fact was that they did not properly obey God and so we see a situation where the grace of God had to abound. 

God obviously knew what would happen and we see Him preparing both mother and father for the coming drama.  But unfortunately they did not seem to have learned the lesson well. 

Christian husbands and wives should ask whether or not they are a godly influence in their home, whether or not they constantly witness for God in their homes, whether or not they hungry and thirsty after righteousness. If we do not have our children develop a passion for God and the things of God from their early days, there will be many sorrows in our life, as well as in the lives of our children. 

So we note that enmity between Esau and Jacob, the sons of Isaac and Rebekah, appears to have begun as early as during the pregnancy of their mother Rebekah; prompting her to enquire of the Lord, as to the turmoil happening inside her womb. God’s answer: “Two nations are in thy womb… and the elder shall serve the younger” seemed to have set the stage for the ensuing rivalry or hostility which has in fact survived for a very long time. Rebekah’s unusual pregnancy is seen to be even more so when she gave birth to two very different twins and with the heel of the first firmly in the grasp of the second. This clutching of the heel portended a life long struggle between the two brothers. 

The differences between Esau and Jacob were sharp and evident in every sphere of their lives and marked them as being very different and as some believe the exact opposite of each other. Compounding their differences and fuelling the rivalry was the ill-advised favouritism of the parents who favoured one child over the other. In addition the elements of lifestyle, disposition, vocation, spirituality and birthright provided even more grounds for the rivalry to be played out. 

The two brothers approached life very differently and there is no indication that in the early stages of life they could be considered as rivals vying for the same prize; for they both had different desires and ambitions. Their natural bent took them to opposing sides.  They had different tastes and personalities, which is quite normal. One preferred the outdoors and became a skilful or cunning hunter. This would imply that he was not at all stupid, but was well aware of what was happening around him. The other is described as a “plain” or a “mild” man who preferred living in a tent.  The word “plain” or “mild” in Hebrew has the idea of “wholeness”, and is used of Job in Job 1:8. It  does not mean that he was weak or effeminate.  He was “complete”, well put together, shrewd, a clever thinker, a man of intellectual strength and so well able to take advantage of this brother. 

Jacob is generally regarded as ‘slippery’ and devious but this is not all there was to him, for Jacob had time to think and meditate on the things of the covenant and apparently he appreciated and strove for the things of God.  

Esau on the other hand was more inclined to hunting and enjoying the active kind of life in the field and so he was more dominated by his natural appetites and despised the things of God. It is not that he did not appreciate some of the things of God but he certainly did not think that they were critically important.  He later came to appreciate that they were important, but his tears could not reverse what had happened. 

But beyond the human element of sibling rivalry, Esau and Jacob became the definitive illustration of God’s sovereignty and ‘electing grace’ and they themselves are metaphors for the profane and the spiritual. Some blame however has to be attached to Isaac and Rebekah, for they certainly did not straighten out the two boys when they were young. 

No wonder then and as with most Christians, God had to pour out his grace in great measure to ensure that the son of promise was kept under tight control and bent by the events in his life in the proper directions.  But note that at every stage God had to fight against the inclination of Jacob's flesh. 

Our text clearly shows that God’s choice of people is solely His own and independent of all other considerations. Paul cites this text in Romans 9 in his exposition on divine election. None of the principals in our story manage to distinguish themselves, yet God made a clear choice even before the children were born.  So neither the way people are nor the way they will be influences God’s choice in any human type way.  

He works after the counsel of His own will.  

The painful lesson Abraham learned concerning God’s will, His way and His time seems to have been lost on his grandson Jacob, as he attempted to grasp the blessing by his own unsavoury means.

His actions were of course totally unnecessary.  This is a case where a man brought sorrow and much tribulation on himself without a cause. As a result his life followed a torturous and painful route.  

This story evokes a lot of sympathy for Esau whom many see as a hapless victim of the scheming Jacob. The Scriptures however are a lot less generous as we read in Hebrews 12:16 -…

1est there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 

The ‘promise’ of God (Gen. 3:12-15) had passed from Abraham to Isaac and one of Isaac’s two sons stood to be the heir to the ‘promise’ that would normally have gone to the elder as part of the ‘birthright’ package. On this occasion however, as in the case of Ishmael and Isaac, Sarah and Hagar, God overruled convention and chose the younger Jacob as heir to the ‘promise’ made to Abraham.

TEXT

Verses 1-18.   The early verses of Genesis 25 wrap up the life of Abraham and the torch is passed to Isaac as Moses records: And it came to pass, after the death of Abraham, that God blessed his son Isaac…(Gen.25:11).

Abraham descendants from his ‘wife’ Keturah are listed. His age and other factors in his life are seen as showing God honouring his promises to Abraham in Genesis 17:4 and 15:15. Abraham did in fact become the father of many nations and he died peaceably at a ripe old age.

“As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, And you shall be the father of a multitude of nations.”

“And as for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried at a good old age” 

Interestingly, many consider Keturah a concubine as she is called in 1 Chronicles 1:32 and also that her children were born while Sarah was still alive. 

Immediately after listing the children of Keturah, Moses pointedly state that …

Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac.  But unto the sons of the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son.

This was another demonstration of the faith of Abraham; the ‘special’ son would receive special treatment. All this is seen as voluntary on the part of a now more spiritually matured Abraham.  Earlier he was reluctant to send Ishmael away from his home. 

He had of course as a great father made provision for all his children, but he separated them from the ‘son of promise’ sending them all in opposite directions.  Having made careful preparations for everyone, having discharged his obligations properly, he died and was buried beside a faithful wife Sarah. 

God is faithful to all and every promise. He promised Abraham to bless Ishmael with twelve princes and here we have a list of the generations of Ishmael. We note that twelve sons are named to Ishmael. And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.

Ishmael enjoys some prominence in the Genesis account but we note that he was not buried in the  cave of Machpelah, for this was a monument of hope for the people of the ‘promise’. The land of Canaan was to be the possession of the children of the promise and so Ishmael’s descendants settled from Havilah to Shur which is east of Egypt as one goes toward Assyria. Two of his sons, Midian and Kedar are mentioned in Scripture as playing an important role in the life of Israel. Here again another promise is fulfilled as God had told Hagar:

And he will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone’s hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers (Genesis 16:12). 

God’s  record as a keeper of His promises is established from His earliest dealings with men and is fortified throughout the rest of Scripture. 

Most of the book of Genesis, beginning with the study text and the entire bible itself, records the story of the inheritor and inheritors of the promises made to Abraham and shows us a remarkable variety of experiences in the life of the patriarchs.  All of these experiences have many lessons for us who are of the same faith as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.     

Verse 19.   Moses takes one step back in recording the generations (account of men and their descendants; genealogical list of one's descendants) of Isaac by telling us, Isaac is Abraham’s son.  

The history of Isaac is short when compared to that of the other patriarchs Abraham and Jacob.

One writer notes of Isaac:

We can imagine Isaac was anxious to have children after waiting forty years to be married and being the one who should father the child through whom God’s promise would continue. It appears history was repeating itself, for just as in the case of Sarah before her, the mother-to–be of the male offspring promised by God was barren a full nineteen years after being married. News of Ishmael’s potency and the fertility of his wives must have reached the household of Isaac and Rebekah and this could not have made things any easier.  

To Isaac’s credit he did not approach a concubine as Abraham had done but entreated the Lord for his wife. Isaac pleaded with God to allow Rebekah to become pregnant. His behaviour is instructive and exemplary, for he prayed according to the will of God and thereby guaranteed his request. 

God had promised to multiply Isaac’s family and His promises are sure but even so the promises of God should not make our prayers unnecessary but rather encourage our prayers. We can well assume that they had been praying for some time and even though his request had not been granted, Isaac persisted in his prayers for the promised offspring.  The word for “prayed” actually means “to plead” and the term is used to describe how in Exodus 7-10 Moses entreated God to remove the plagues. Men ought always to pray, and not to faint (Luke 18:1). 

Jewish tradition holds that Isaac eventually took Rebekah to mount Moriah, where God had promised to multiply Abraham's descendants (Genesis 22:17) and there they invoked the promise made in that very place. God granted their request and Rebekah conceived. 

The slowness of God's response to prayers has often tried the faith of believers.  Sometimes we like to think that when we wait for a long time for God to send us a requested petition we would appreciate it more.  But be that as it may, it is obvious that Isaac had the virtue of patience, something that many believers sorely lack. 

But the delay of God could very well be caused by His mercy, for He knew that the children they would have would not be easy to deal with.  God must be giving them time to enjoy each other before the trouble started. 

It is interesting to speculate though why God closed up Sarah’s womb for so long, then closed up  Rebekah’s womb for a long time, and then closed up Rachel's womb for a long time. 

One reasonable answer seems to be that this chosen family had to be brought to recognize that the children of promise were “children of His grace” rather than “children from the fruit of nature”.  These children were special and the parents all had to realize that God intended to accomplish His purpose, His way and in His time. 

Maybe it is time we realize that when God gives us children He does not intend them to be regarded as “ordinary” children.  Parents who profess to be people of God must realize that their children are the result of the accomplishment of God's will and He has a purpose for bringing them onto the earth.  They must regard their responsibility as parents as an extraordinary, so that the fruits of His grace will come to proper fruition.

Verse 22.   …the children struggled…The ruckus happening in Rebekah’s womb was not the ordinary fetal movement. It was something of a violent struggle, so much so that she became apprehensive both for her own safety and that of her womb’s occupants. This was nothing less than a commotion inside of Rebekah, for the children were literally smashing themselves one against the other.

…why am I thus…lends itself to several translations. Some think she thought, “if I must suffer such things, why did I ever wish to have a child”?; a speech not uncommon to mothers in their first pregnancy. Others think she viewed the unusual commotion as a bad omen and either wished she had not become pregnant or that she would die rather than birth ‘trouble’. 

…she went to enquire of the Lord. Rebekah appeared distraught at the internal struggle and so she prayed to God for an answer. Some however believe that this phrase meant that she might have gone to see Melchisedek or a similar Oracle.  But it is reasonable to believe that Isaac and Rebekah were certainly people of prayer and it is clear they had faith in God based on their knowledge of who God is. Faced with infertility, Isaac’s response is to pray and a difficult and unusual pregnancy moves Rebekah to prayer.  We can assume that prayer for this couple was not just for difficult times but was the habit of their lives.  

Her communication with God appears to have been direct and have led to the conclusion that

there was now a fixed mode and perhaps a place to inquire of the Lord.

Verse 23-24.   God’s answer confirms that the pregnancy is anything but ordinary and provides a clear example of God’s sovereign election of his people. Two distinct and hostile nations are in her womb, one shall prevail over the other and the elder shall serve the younger. 

 One writer makes the following observation:

“Of these two sons, the older would not, as was the custom, become pre-eminent. Normally, the first-born son would have been the heir through whom the covenant blessings would have passed. While the father could designate a younger son to be the owner of the birthright (Genesis 48:13-20), this was the exception, not the rule. Also, the oldest son could sell his birthright, as Esau did.

This prophecy is a very significant revelation not only for Rebekah but also for Christians in our age because it indicates the principle of divine election. Before the birth of the children God determined that it would be the younger child who would possess the birthright and thus be the heir of Isaac so far as the covenant promises were concerned.

In Romans 9 the Apostle Paul referred to this incident as an illustration of the principle of election. And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac, for though the twins were not yet born, and had not done anything good or bad, in order that God’s purpose according to His choice might stand, not because of works, but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, ‘The older will serve the younger’ (Romans 9:10-12).

While we must acknowledge that God in His omniscience knew all of the deeds of both these sons from eternity past, Paul says that the choice of Jacob over Esau had nothing to do with their works. Jacob was chosen in the womb and without regard to the works he would do in the future. In other words, God’s election was not based upon “foreknowledge” as it is sometimes taught. God’s choice was determined by His will, not by man’s works”.  

Even at this early time in biblical history we have examples of a reversal of what would have been the norm.  We read for example that the offering of Cain, the older brother, was rejected, whereas the offering of the younger brother, Abel, was accepted.  While the sacrifice on this occasion did not directly concern something like inheriting a birthright, it shows that God was quite willing to accept the sacrifice of a younger son over an older one, regarding the state of the “heart” as being more important than the matter of “age or seniority”.  

Also we read that the line of Seth, the younger brother, was the chosen line (4:26-5:8); Isaac was chosen over his older brother, Ishmael (17:18-19). Later on Rachel was preferred by Jacob over her older sister, Leah (29:18) but then in this case God seem to have preferred Leah and blessed her with famous sons like Judah and Levi; Joseph, the younger brother, was chosen over all the rest (37:3); and Judah was chosen over his older brothers (49:8).  

All these demonstrate the recurring theme of God’s sovereign election as he dispenses His grace.  God’s blessing was not a natural right, rather He extends His blessing to those who have no other claim to it. They all received what they did not deserve. 

As stated by the all-knowing God, Rebekah gave birth to twins. Still the prophecy concerning the children went beyond Esau and Jacob and would be more fully fulfilled in their posterity.

Esau, who later did not seem to have any direct enmity against Jacob, became the father of the Edomite nation and the Israelites are the direct descendants of Jacob.  

The Edomites and Israelites lived apart and grew apart and became so different from each other in their manners, customs and religion, as to be at perpetual odds among themselves. The children’s struggle together in the womb was an omen of things to come.

Subsequent history shows that initially Edom was stronger than Israel but later a succession of Jewish kings subdued Edom and dominated them throughout Bible times. Eventually they were forced to either leave their country or embrace Judaism at which time many submitted to circumcision.

Verse 25.   Esau was born first and he emerged red and very hairy. His name Esau simply means “hairy one”. To give us some idea of his hirsute, this is the man that Jacob would later pretend to be by wearing goatskins on his hands and neck.

Verse 26.   Jacob followed fast on Esau’s heel (no pun intended) actually clutching his brother’s heel. The name Jacob is derived from the Hebrew word for heel but carries a negative connotation of tripping-up someone by the heel. In those days this name had the uncomplimentary connotation of a trickster.  Jacob had to live with a little bit of pain for what he did on the date of birth. 

It is noted here that Rebekah gave birth to the boys when Isaac was sixty years old.

Verse 27.   Here we have the first indication of the divergence and differences between the twins. Esau was the outdoors, sportsman type, rugged, physical and a cunning hunter. He was prepared to trust his meals and livelihood on his ability to bag game, even though his father was quite wealthy and he did not have to do this hunting for a living.  

Esau might have been the kind of son some fathers like to talk about, the athletic hero type, especially when the father is not very energetic himself.  Isaac who was not the athletic hero type, certainly turned away from the son who was probably most like him.  

Ishmael was the type of strong, desert conquering man, and it seems that Esau took after his uncle.  It is possible that Isaac longed to participate in that kind of life, but never did and so he applauded Esau in his own way for his outdoor passion. 

Interestingly ‘hunters’ are not portrayed favourably in the Scriptures. The first hunter we read of was Nimrod, a rebel against God and Esau comes along the same lines.  

Jacob appears to be the opposite of his brother. He was the ‘staying at home’ type, likely quiet, pensive and a believer that a ‘bird in the hand, is worth two in the bush’. Adventure for its own sake was not for him, he preferred the ‘sure thing’ and devised schemes for its achievement. He was a man that was very capable around the house and planning probably came naturally to him.  But we know that the Scriptures considered him to be well rounded. 

We know that Jacob was not only well rounded, but was strong physically.  The Scriptures left no doubt in that regard for it tells us that when he saw his beloved Rachel for the first time, Jacob lifted up the cover from the well so she could get water, a feat that normally required the combined strength of several men. 

Verse 28.    It is very easy to see trouble brewing here, as parental favouritism always produces negative consequences.

Undoubtedly the parents loved both children but Isaac favoured Esau while Jacob was Rebekah’s boy. Isaac enjoyed the taste of Esau’s game and maybe saw in his son what he would like to have been. Rebekah on the other hand seemed more aware and appreciative of the promised blessing coming to Jacob.  In any case mothers tend to lean to the son that is always around them.  

We can safely assume that the parents’ favouritism only served to heighten the differences between the boys.

Verse 29-30.   The incident described certainly appears on the surface to be very ordinary and not earthshaking, but yet it was very significant.  In addition, it was very revealing of the personalities and disposition of the brothers.

It is uncertain where the incident occurred but an apparently very hungry and exhausted Esau stumbles in just as Jacob had finished cooking up some delectable lentil stew. The tone of the exchange is likely characteristic as the two were probably not very close or congenial and would have acted independently of the other, with each one providing for himself.  

Esau would certainly on occasion have been crude and hasty and Jacob would likely have viewed his arrival on this occasion as an unwelcome intrusion. Some interpret the text as Esau literally demanding Jacob’s food in a forceful manner. They feel that the sense of the text is that he not only demanded the food but demanded to devour it.  Lentil stew was a common dish but Esau disrespectfully called it “this red stuff”.  

Others however have not interpreted the passage historically in that way. Some expositors believe that this was not the first occasion that Jacob and Esau had discussed the sale of the birthright, something that was permitted, but now Jacob saw his ideal opportunity. 

Remember also that some scholars regard the records that Moses used as originally written by the patriarchs and passed down through their generations and so this was probably part of Jacob's account of his life and of this event.  We should note that chapter twenty-five and onwards really deals with the life of Jacob and his children, and he would be the ideal one to write about it.  The way this particular episode is written would suggest that this was simply the culmination of incomplete negotiations between Jacob and Esau. 

The stew was red.  Esau fell for Jacob's underhanded tactics because he did not care about the birthright and its spiritual privileges, the excellent dignity and power that the birthright brought with it.  Edom means “red”, and Jacob records that because of his foolishness Esau would bear this nickname the rest of his life. 

This was the costliest meal ever served.  The one who served the meal and the one who ate it suffered tremendously.  We can hardly overestimate the cost of this meal.

Verse 31-32.    …sell me your birthright… Jacob did not even give the hospitality due a stranger but responded with a demand of his own: Jacob’s statement showed this was something he had long coveted and ruthlessly exploited his brother’s weakness. Here was the greedy, grasping Jacob in mercenary fashion, striking a cruel bargain to gain the advantage. 

It is important to note that this was not even a valid transaction for Jacob was buying what was already his and Esau was selling something that certainly did not belong to him.  They both would have known that God had already determined what should happen to the birthright. 

Deuteronomy 21:17 and 1 Chronicles 5:1-2 tell us the birthright involved both a material and a spiritual blessing. The son of the birthright received a double portion of the inheritance, but he also became the head of the family and the spiritual leader upon the passing of the father (Gen 43:33). And, in the case of this family, the birthright determined who would inherit the covenant God made with Abraham, the covenant of a land, a nation, and the Messiah.

Jacob was really a “heel catcher”, behaving in the worst possible way as a rascal.  He was operating under the control of the flesh, scheming to get something that God had already said was his.

It frequently happens today in church, in the nation and in communities.  If people could only wait on God and not fight for position, they would eventually be leaders in the church, in the community, and in the nation.  But the ‘flesh’ is a terrible thing and when one operates under its control, there is always disaster.

So in the Scriptures David encourages the godly in Psalm 62 and warns against foolish behaviour:

“My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him”.  

Here Esau fares even worse than Jacob in the eyes of Scripture, for Esau was a hunter and would have often traveled without food and water.  He was certainly not dying and would have had ample opportunity to ask his mother or the servants of the household for a snack. 

Esau had a highly exaggerated estimation of his physical condition. He disdained his birthright and all it entailed as he exchanged it for a single meal. The right to be the priest of the family was thoughtlessly discarded for a meal. When he agreed to trade the birthright to his cunning brother for a meal of “red stuff”, Esau was simply revealing his nature and his appraisal of the birthright. 

He saw no value in the spiritual. Esau gave up spiritual realities – the land, being in the line of the Promised Redeemer and all the other spiritual blessings of the ‘promise’. He sold out for the visible, the material and the very temporary.

Verse 33-34.   Jacob insisted the exchange of meal for birthright be formalised with a solemn oath and Esau obliged. Esau was clearly an individual who gave little thought to spiritual matters but Jacob was not going to be casual and so he demanded the oath. 

The oath having been taken, Esau was served the meal and the transaction was completed. Moses describes Esau’s actions in very earthy terms: he ate, drank, rose up and went, all characteristic of a man with no spiritual dimension.   

It was so simple.  He ate, received momentary pleasure, got up, walked out, turning his back on every thing God had promised.  This was a tragedy.  He really did not care.  His mind was made up.  He lived for the here and now. 

Moses concluded his report of this event with a damning verdict on Esau: “…thus Esau despised his birthright”.  

Later the writer Hebrews issues a stern warning in his commentary on this incident.

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 godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal (Hebrews 12:15-16).

CONCLUSION

Esau did not find repentance later though he sought it.  It was not that God would not accept his repentance, but God knew that his mind was made up to choose what he could see, rather than the things of God. 

Esau's character was that of a fornicator and profane person, says the book of Hebrews.  He did not really believe the word of God.  He wanted his own things; he did not really want God.  This was his attitude and history shows that he and his descendents continued along the same line. 

So we see that God's choice is always perfect, even when we include the fact that Esau's character was not the basis for God's choosing. 

So what can we conclude? 

We look back on our lives and we see that we have behaved like Esau, setting out for some moment of pleasure, power, or passion.  We might have lied, cheated, stole, practiced chicanery, employed devious methods to achieve our goals, but if our heart really hungers for spiritual things, God will deliver us. 

If you do hunger for God he might have to take us through the very difficult kind of life that Jacob lived.  It took Jacob’s entire life.  Hebrews 11:21suggests this for it tells us that when Jacob was dying, he blessed the sons of Joseph and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff.  He had learned to trust the leading of God.  He would bless the one that God told him to bless in the way that God told him to bless. 

So, do we have to wait until we see the wreckage of our lives to realize what God is telling us?  Do we have to let Satan succeed in seducing us to give up the eternal riches God has given us in our spiritual inheritance in Christ? 

Let us be careful of our strong, sudden, desires for material things;  the “red stuff” that is continually being offered to us to gratify the feelings of the moment! 

So we can learn the lessons taught us from Genesis.  Starting with Creation and throughout the entire book we see the exercise of the sovereignty of God and the wisdom of His “delays.” Sarah and Abraham had to wait twenty-five years before Isaac was born and Isaac and Rebekah waited twenty years for their offspring. After these lengthy waits the chosen family recognized that the children came according to God’s promise and were not simply the fruit of nature. God was teaching His people that the promised blessing, through the chosen seed of Abraham, could not be accomplished by mere human effort. God accomplishes His will, His way and in his time. This is a universal teaching for all God’s people. 

Jacob gets no credit for the unsavoury manner he obtained the birthright but he obviously craved the things of God.  Neither he nor Esau were in danger of poverty, so it must have been the spiritual aspect of the birthright that was his interest. Sadly he saw no contradiction in that desire and the means he employed to for its realization. Later on in Genesis he conspires with his mother to supplant his brother for the blessing but the result set him on a perilous path.  

God had promised him the blessing but he sought to obtain it by his own means. God’s promises are to be realized in His time and by His means. Evil has no place with God and cannot be excused to justify his ends. 

In the end all the characters in our text showed a failure to believe and appreciate the promises of God.  As a result there were bitter, enduring consequences. Believers must trust the word of God and demonstrate this with a patient faith bolstered by unceasing prayer to our gracious God.

As one writer encourages us: “We too are children of Abraham.  Let us question the things we hunger for in life.  And let us rise up in hope in the sovereign God in whom we put our trust.”