Sibling Rivalry—Lectionary Reflection for Pentecost 7A/Proper 10A (Genesis 25)

 

Rembrandt Harmensz. van Rijn 1606 – 1669 - "Esau Selling His Birthright to Jacob

Genesis 25:19-34 New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

¹⁹ These are the descendants of Isaac, Abraham’s son: Abraham was the father of Isaac, ²⁰ and Isaac was forty years old when he married Rebekah, daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, sister of Laban the Aramean. ²¹ Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife because she was barren, and the Lord granted his prayer, and his wife Rebekah conceived. ²² The children struggled together within her, and she said, “If it is to be this way, why do I live?” So she went to inquire of the Lord. ²³ And the Lord said to her,

“Two nations are in your womb,

    and two peoples born of you shall be divided;

the one shall be stronger than the other;

    the elder shall serve the younger.”

²⁴ When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. ²⁵ The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle, so they named him Esau. ²⁶ Afterward his brother came out, with his hand gripping Esau’s heel, so he was named Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them.

²⁷ When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a quiet man, living in tents. ²⁸ Isaac loved Esau because he was fond of game, but Rebekah loved Jacob.

²⁹ Once when Jacob was cooking a stew, Esau came in from the field, and he was famished. ³⁰ Esau said to Jacob, “Let me eat some of that red stuff, for I am famished!” (Therefore he was called Edom.) ³¹ Jacob said, “First sell me your birthright.” ³² Esau said, “I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?” ³³ Jacob said, “Swear to me first.” So he swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob. ³⁴ Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate and drank and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.

************

                We hear a lot about biblical family values. What I’ve discovered reading scripture is that for the most part, biblical families are as dysfunctional as any modern family. It starts at the beginning of the biblical story with the sibling rivalry displayed by Cain and Abel, a rivalry that leads to murder. Then there are spousal rivalries such as Sarah and Hagar. This week turn the page to the next generation and find that things continue to be problematic. This time it is sibling rivalry, though parental favoritism is involved.

                The current story fits into a larger narrative present in the lectionary readings from Genesis this Pentecost season that speaks to God’s faithfulness to the covenant promise. This covenant promise, given to Abraham and Sarah decreed that their descendants would be a blessing to the nations. As we read through this covenant story found in Genesis, we quickly discover that the way forward isn’t straightforward. The problems begin with Sarah’s inability to conceive, even though she is supposed to be how God’s covenant promise would be fulfilled, which leads to a plan b with a surrogate (Hagar) who produces an heir, but not the one who fits the covenant promise. Once Sarah does provide Abraham with a son, Abraham hears a word from God asking that he sacrifice the promised child (Isaac). Now, in the end, God steps in and prevents Abraham from completing the sacrifice. Now that we’ve turned the page, things don’t get all that less convoluted with Isaac and his family. So, perhaps the message of Genesis is that when it comes to family values don’t turn to Scripture (let’s not get into the family of David in a later story).

                Isaac’s story begins shortly before our passage. After Sarah dies (Gen. 23), Abraham arranges for Isaac to marry his cousin Rebekah, who was the granddaughter of his brother Nahor, so that Isaac didn’t end up marrying a Canaanite woman (Gen. 24). Genesis 25, the chapter in which our story appears, begins with Abraham marrying Keturah, with whom he had seven more sons (Gen. 25:1-6). As to the identity of Keturah, no one knows. When he dies his sons Isaac and Ishmael reunite to bury their father (an intriguing passage for interfaith dialog within the Abrahamic tradition) (Gen. 25:7-11). That’s followed by a word about Ishmael’s descendants (Gen. 25:12-18}. Each of these stories is worth pondering, but they are not the focus of this week’s reading. That would be the story of Esau and Jacob and the rivalry that we’re told began in the womb!

                The story begins with a reminder that Isaac was married to Rebekah, daughter of Bethuel and sister of Laban (Laban appears in the next phase of the story). As was true of her mother-in-law, Sarah, who had passed away before Isaac’s marriage to Rebekah at age forty, Rebekah was unable to conceive. Since Isaac was concerned about his own legacy, he began to pray that Rebekah might conceive, and the prayer was answered. So far, so good. There’s no need for a plan b as with Abraham and Hagar. Notice that it was Isaac who did the praying, not Rebekah.

                Rebekah’s pregnancy was a difficult one. It seems that the twins were, to put it mildly, a bit rambunctious as they experienced life in the womb. As for Rebekah, she wondered whether this pregnancy was worth it. She declared: “If it is to be this way, why do I live?” If we think in terms of the historical context, Rebekah may have feared for her life, since death in childbirth was rather common. In any case, Rebekah puts the question of her suffering to God. God responded to her query, telling her that two nations were struggling with each other in her womb. God told her that the two would experience division. And, as is often true in the biblical story, the “elder shall serve the younger.” Ashley Wilcox notes that “At this point, Rebekah embodies the tensions between two peoples: her sons will each father a nation, and those two nations will be in conflict with each other.” As for why God tells her this, Wilcox speculates that perhaps God wanted her to help the younger son achieve prominence [TheWomen’s Lectionary, pp. 176-177].

                When the time came for Rebekah to give birth to these two warring brothers/nations, the first child to emerge is said to be red with his body covered with a hairy mantle. So, Isaac and Rebekah named him Esau. His “younger” brother, was close behind him. In fact, the younger brother came out gripping Esau’s heel. They name him Jacob. It would seem that the struggle continued right to the point of birth with Jacob trying to pass his brother. The rivalry is in full view right from the beginning.

                The two brothers are very different. Esau exemplifies masculinity. He’s hairy and he’s a hunter. Perhaps not surprisingly, he’s his father’s favorite. Jacob, on the other hand, is described as being quiet, living in tents rather than the fields. In other words, he’s a homebody. He lacks the masculine characteristics present in his older brother. And, while his father favored Esau (who provided him with game), Rebekah “loved Jacob.” You can see trouble brewing here. Not only are the brothers rivals, but the parents appear to have chosen sides. Of course, God had revealed to Rebekah that the younger of the two sons would gain supremacy over the older one. The question at this point is, how this quiet man who loved the tents more than the fields would overcome his brother’s more apparent masculine supremacy? How would Rebekah help?

                The moment of truth comes after the two brothers have reached adulthood. Apparently, Jacob is a good cook. On this particular day, while Esau was out hunting, Jacob was busy making a stew. When Esau returned home he was famished, he asked Jacob to give him some of the “red stuff.” The Hebrew word used here for the stew “the red stuff” is ʼādom, the same word used to describe Esau at birth. It is also the same letters as the nation of Edom, of which Esau is the founder (Gen. 36:16-43). As the story continues, Jacob, who is not only a good cook, but something of a trickster, tells his famished brother that he’ll give him some stew in exchange for his birthright. That is, if you will trade the blessing that comes with being the oldest (if even by seconds), he’ll give him some food. In line with Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs,” Esau’s hunger got the better of him. At that moment, Esau thought he was going to die of hunger, so what use was his birthright if he was going to die without food? So, he agreed to the trade—the steal of the century, a bit of stew for the inheritance. Thus, as Eugene Peterson puts it in The Message after Jacob gave Esau the bread and lentil stew: “He ate and drank, got up and left. That’s how Esau shrugged off his rights as the firstborn” (Gen. 25:33-34)

                As for the meaning of this exchange, Walter Brueggemann suggests that the contrast here is between “deferred and immediate material blessing.” While Esau is obviously hungry and can’t wait to eat, we’re not told if Jacob is hungry (though he’s preparing a meal), he can wait. Thus, “he can wait (cf. 29:30). In its posture of faithfulness, Israel is prepared to wait because it does not doubt that God can be trusted (cf. Heb. 2:2-4; Isa. 40:28-31). Waiting can be done if one does not doubt the outcome (cf. Rom. 5:3-5). Jacob is here the figure of trusting Israel, about to wait” [Brueggemann, Genesis, pp. 218-219]. That willingness to trust the process (covenant promise) leads to blessing. How the blessing is received, a process that requires quite a bit of deceit aided by his mother is revealed in chapter 27. That part of the story, however, must wait till later.

                What word might we hear in this passage? We probably should start by acknowledging that in God’s response to Rebekah’s plea, the process is from the beginning in line with God’s plans. However, this works out, God intends for the younger brother to serve the older. How this gets accomplished is ultimately irrelevant. That message could serve as the starting point for a conversation about God’s sovereignty.

                We could ask whether this story offers us an example of what a good biblical family dynamic looks like. We could ponder whether that is true, but it’s clear that this family has problems. Of course, the story could give modern parents a bit of solace to know that biblical parents and their children weren’t perfect. Of course, the story could serve as a warning to parents about the danger of favoring one child over the other, especially if the parents side with different children. Perhaps this is an example of how we might gain power. I doubt that it is wise to use deceit to gain power so that probably isn’t the lesson to be learned here.

                Perhaps this passage, though probably not intended to be used in this fashion, can serve as a warning as to what happens when we trade our spiritual birthright for immediate gratification. This has occurred time and again in history as the church has aligned itself with the powers that be so that it can achieve certain ends, usually political power. As with Esau’s trade of his birthright, which is a rather valuable commodity in the ancient world, it doesn’t work out well. Though, Jacob’s actions aren’t much more commendable, especially once he tries to obtain the birthright. In any case, it is always worth asking whether we might be willing to trade our spiritual birthright for a bowl of stew.