The problem of priorities: Esau's choice

In Genesis chapter 25 verses 27 - 34, we read of an interesting exchange between twin brothers. One wonders if Jacob and Esau were teenagers at the time this happened. Who else but a teenage boy would claim he was “dying of starvation,” just because he came home from a tiring day in the outdoors. It’s an illustration of how unbalanced a teenager’s priorities can be: they want things now and don’t want to wait for them. Delayed gratification is a vital life skill that parents need to help them learn at this age. They’d rather watch TV than do homework for an exam. They’d rather get that new bike now, than save up to buy it. And they see everything as more dramatic than it really is: is everyone really looking at that tiny pimple on their chin? Will they truly be a social outcast if they’re not wearing the latest designer label? Would Esau really have starved to death if he hadn’t got that lentil stew right there and then?

Learning to order priorities is part of growing up for pre-teens and teenagers. Tragically, some people never learn it, and they go on into adulthood without this important life skill. They get into credit card debt because they don’t want to wait for that new phone or car, or new clothes that they want.  They throw away their virginity because waiting for the right time and the right person requires too much self discipline. They give up their studies because they want to be out “having fun,” like all their friends are (or, at least, as they believe all their friends are doing.)

Most tragically of all, some - like Esau - throw away their birthright and never mature to be the person that they could have been. They squander their destiny because their lack of character causes them to settle for second best in life.

I guess this is why God, in the mystery of His omniscience, knew that the younger brother would be the one to inherit the birthright and blessing that were usually reserved for the firstborn.

But more about Jacob in a later post (see below.) What we read here about Esau is that he “despised” or “showed contempt” for his birthright. The Spanish word for despise is menospreciar - to consider something as being of lesser value. And in this Bible passage, the Hebrew verb bazah also means to undervalue or to see something as worthless. Esau simply didn’t care about what or who he could be in the future. All he cared about was getting what he wanted, and getting it right now.

So what about my life or yours? Where am I in danger of throwing away who I could be, because of settling for something lesser that I want out of life today?

It can happen with the big things in life, and it can happen in the smaller choices from day to day. Anyone who has ever been on a diet has experienced this temptation in a smaller way; many a dieter has traded their dream of a healthier body for the more immediate pleasure of a slice of delicious chocolate cake today. Sometimes we discover too late (as would happen with Esau) that today’s decisions shape tomorrow’s destiny, and having the wrong priorities today can lead to devastating consequences tomorrow.

Selfish ambition: Jacob's pitfall

I’m not sure what to make of the fact that Jacob appears to have been hassling with his twin brother right from birth. Some people seem to be born with the sort of “go for it” personality that makes them leaders and high achievers in the future. Sadly, unless their motivation and ambition is balanced by humility and godly character, these are often also the kind of people who end up destroying their own lives and leaving a trail of hurting people in their wake.

Interestingly, though, Jacob seems to be have been the quieter of the twins when the boys were growing up. He liked staying home and doing stuff around the house, while his brother Esau liked to be outdoors, doing things like hunting. And so it happened one day that Jacob was busy cooking a big pot of lentil stew, right at the moment when Esau arrived home exhausted from a day in the outdoors.

Now Esau had been the firstborn of the boys, so tradition dictated that he would inherit a double portion of the inheritance their father passed down to them. That’s what’s meant by the “birthright” of the firstborn son. I wonder if this seemed like an injustice to Jacob. After all, the “older twin” is a bit of a misnomer if you consider that twins are conceived and are growing in the womb at exactly the same time. I wonder if it seemed like a cruel quirk of fate that their position at the time of birth meant that Esau was born first and therefore technically the “older” of the two boys.

So when his hungry twin asks for a bowl of stew, Jacob grasps his opportunity and offers to give him the meal in exchange for his birthright. In his short sightedness, Esau swears an oath, giving Jacob the rights due to the firstborn.
There’s a difference between a birthright and a blessing. A birthright was an honour bestowed on the oldest son inn a family, and Esau carelessly gave his up in a moment of greed and impulsiveness. (Genesis 25: 34) A blessing could be given regardless of birthright, but a greater blessing was usually given to the son who had the birthright.

Jump forward two chapters, and a new drama is unfolding in the twins’ household. Their elderly father senses that his time on earth is drawing to an end, and begins making plans to bestow a blessing on his sons, beginning with Esau, the firstborn. If you’ve read Genesis chapter 27, you’ll know that Jacob and his mother mount an ambitious scheme to deceive Isaac and cheat Esau out of the blessing that would have been his.

Jacob may have got the blessing in that situation, but he paid a high price for it. He ended up so alienating his brother, that Esau wanted to kill him. Jacob had to flee from all that was familiar and precious to him: he was separated from his brother and his homeland for more than twenty years. He also discovered for himself the principle that what we sow, we reap, because he later found himself deceived and cheated multiple times by his uncle and father-in-law.

Ironically, it was never necessary for Jacob and Rebecca to engage in all that subterfuge. God had already given a prophetic word about great things in Jacob’s future. Was he aware of this, and made the mistake of trying to do God’s will in Jacob’s way? Or was he simply tripped up by his own selfish ambition - ambition that made him betray his own family and sent him on a 20 year detour before he could finally enter into his destiny?

It’s good to have godly ambition, but self-seeking ambition can be a trap for us. Let’s not take as long as Jacob did in learning to seek God’s will in God’’s way. He is more than able to lead us into all that He has purposed for our lives.

Secret grievances...

Deception damages trust and Abraham didn’t have a very good track record as far as Abimelech was concerned. Abraham had lied to Abimelech (Genesis 20) and this had caused some strain in their relationship. So it’s not surprising that, some time later, when the two men are seeking to patch things up and make a covenant together (Genesis chapter 21: 22 - 32) Abimlech says to Abraham, “Please promise me that you won’t deceive me again,” and Abraham swears that he won’t.

But there’s more to deception than the act of saying things are aren’t true. You can also deceive someone by not telling them things that are true. As the treaty process continues, Abraham happens to mention a grievance that is a potential threat to their covenant: one of his wells has been stolen by Ablimelech’s servants. 

Poor Abimelech is shocked. “This is the first I’ve heard about it, and I’ve no idea how it happened," he says. “Why didn’t you tell me about it before?” We can sense the pain in his heart when he discovers that Abraham has been nursing a grudge that Abimelech was completely unaware of. Perhaps he felt misjudged at the suggestion that he would knowingly allow anything to jeopardise their relationship and their treaty.

As we can see by Abimelech’s response to the news, and by what happened next, there was no reason at all for this situation to have been a problem that drove a wedge between them. It was only a threat to their relationship as long as it was kept silent and not spoken out. As soon as Abraham spoke directly to Abimelech, the potential threat no longer had any power to damage their treaty with one another.

It can be so easy for us to take offence at something another person has said or done, or something that they didn’t do or say. How tragic to guard that secret grievance in our hearts and allow it to affect our relationship, when the other person may be completely unaware of it, and not at all intending to let that thing come between us.

You might feel you have good reasons for your silence; you might be fearful of a confrontation and choose to “keep the peace” instead. Or you might be so convinced the other person was in the wrong, that you feel it’s up to them to approach you and apologise for what happened. 

It doesn’t matter what your reasons are; when you harbour a secret grievance and don’t take initiative to speak to the other person about what happened (or what you think happened), you are the one responsible for the break in your relationship. The other person might be as completely unaware of the issue as Abimelech was.... and just as eager to offer an explanation or to put things right. 

This is such a crucial issue that half a chapter of the New Testament (Matthew 18) is given to Jesus’ teaching about what to do in such situations. Don’t dabble in deception by allowing secret grievances to come between you and another person. And don’t assume that the person already knows what you’re feeling or thinking. It might be hard to do, but it’s always better to bring things truthfully into the open and work together to find a solution and reconciliation. 

It's not where you start that counts...

In a recent post (see 27th January) I reflected on Sarah’s laugh, the expression of her unbelief. In Hebrews 11: 11, a New Testament author, writing from the perspective of history, shows us the other side of the coin: Sarah’s faith.
Sarah is pretty unique in scripture; she’s the only woman in the Bible to have her name changed. That was usually reserved for the patriarchs and the apostles, men who played a significant role in the unfolding of the Bible’s story. And she’s also the only woman in the Bible whose age at the time of her death is mentioned; that too was usually reserved for kings and other firstborn males. So, what was the reason for Sarah’s being honoured in this way? It’s found in verse 11 of that well known chapter about people of faith: Sarah believed that God would keep His promise.

She may have started out by laughing. (So did Abraham.) She may have got weary of waiting, and messed things up with the Hagar fiasco. (Abraham did too.) But, somewhere along the line, Sarah moved from unbelief to unusual faith... and that is what she’s remembered for, and commended for, in this account. It’s not how you start out that counts, be it good or bad. It’s how you finish!

God didn’t define this couple’s story by any of their questioning or stumbling; He defined it by how they ended up, and by the faith that got them there. Starting out well and finishing in mediocrity is a tragedy. Starting out doubting and finishing by trusting is a triumph of faith. And it’s the same for us. God doesn’t focus on the times we failed or doubted; He’s looking to see whether we keep moving forward and whether we finish well in the end.

Citrus season...

If you live in a part of the world with citrus groves, you'll know that winter is the time of year when you're blessed with an abundant supply of vitamin C: all that freshly squeezed orange and grapefruit juice. Delicious!

My neighbour gave me some monster-sized lemons this week. Some were the sweet kind and some were the super-sour kind, so I decided to use the sour ones to make some lemon curd. Neither of my neighbours had heard of it, so I gave them a new taste experience today by serving up waffles with lemon curd when we were having our afternoon coffee. It got their seal of approval, and one of them confessed that she had never eaten a waffle before, either.

What is your God like?

There are many different ways of describing who God is. Lots of names and descriptions are found in the Bible; other descriptions have been spoken or penned by people throughout history who have experienced God's reality in their own life. I was struck this week by a description of God that was said by Abraham when he was a very old man.

In Genesis 24 verse 40, when speaking to a servant whom he was sending on a special mission, Abraham described God as the Lord in whose presence I have lived. This gives us an insight into who God is (personal, present, very close to us…) but it also gives us an insight into who Abraham is: someone who had chosen, despite all his mistakes and weaknesses, to live his life in God's presence. There were many other people on earth in Abraham's day, but not all would have described God in the same way… because not all had made a personal choice to live in God's presence. It was this choice of Abraham's that caused people to describe him as a friend of God. (James 2: 23)

I remember, during the years that I lived in Glasgow and Paisley, that a King's Kids leader I worked with used to make this statement to the teenagers: You can be as close to God as you want to be. Whether or not you live your life in God's presence, as Abraham did, doesn't depend on God, because He's already made the decision to draw very close to you. Now it depends on your, and my, response: will we make the choice to live our lives every day in His presence?

The true test of faith...

Still enjoying my daily reading in the first book in the Bible, I was reflecting last week on that well known account in Genesis 22, where Abraham is on the point of sacrificing his young son, Isaac. It’s a disturbing story for many, as the cultural backdrop to those events is completely unfamiliar to us today. We’re horrified that a father could even contemplate giving up his own child... because we don’t remember that such an action was a common occurence among the heathen tribes of Canaan, and not shocking at all to people who didn't know the God of Israel. But we do know that God, and perhaps we’re aghast that a God of love would even ask such a thing of Abraham. Of course, it’s true that it was never God’s intention for any harm to come to the boy, and that the whole episode, according to Genesis 22 vs 1 was simply a way of testing and strengthening Abraham’s faith.... Perhaps, though, our minds can’t fathom what this horrendous experience had to do with faith.

Sometimes we interpret these events to mean that God was testing whether Abraham was willing to give up what was most precious to him; checking whether the Lord was more important to him than his son was. This might have been true and included in the test, but I don’t believe that this in itself is necessarily about faith; this would have been more about testing Abraham’s commitment, or allegiance, or even simple obedience. If Abraham had been willing to lose his son for God’s sake, it would have proved his loyalty to God, but not necessarily his faith. You can be loyal without having or exercising real faith.  There are people who go to church every Sunday, yet they have serious doubts about whether God is good and kind and loving. Loyalty is about following someone, no matter what the cost. Faith, on the other hand, is about believing in who God is, in His good and loving character, and holding on to what He has said or promised to do for us. As the writer to the Hebrews so clearly discerned it (Hebrews 11: 17 - 19), the point of faith here is that Abraham knew God had promised to give him many descendants through Isaac.

As I read the story again, I’m tempted to think that it was never really about losing Isaac, and I suspect that Abraham knew that too. I wonder if the true evidence of Abraham’s faith, in this story, was not the part where he raised the knife above the altar, but was actually even before that: in verse 5, when he tells his servants that he and the boy will both come back after they have worshipped; and in verse 8, when he tells his son that God will provide an animal for the sacrifice. The proof of Abraham’s faith was that he was convinced nothing would stop God from doing what He had said He would do.... and God had promised that Isaac would be an integral part of that. Does it make Abraham’s faith less, if he believed that he wouldn’t really lose his son? No! Perhaps it makes it even more obvious that he was really trusting in what God had promised. 

When it came to the crunch, when he raised his knife in the air, he was not only proving his allegiance (“Okay, maybe there’s going to be no last minute lamb, after all.”), he’s also proving his faith, because suddenly he’s brought to a place of having to trust God for something that had never before happened in the history of mankind; something that no one had ever even dared to imagine: that a person could be raised to life again after death, and that our God is a God of resurrection. Not only was that prophetic, it was also true faith in action.

So it's interesting, in verse 12, that when God intervenes and stops Abraham's hand, He doesn't say, "Now I know you have faith, Abraham." He says, "Now I know that you have respect for the Lord." It seems to point to the fact that the real test of faith wasn't so much about giving up his son as about believing he'd get him back again. And maybe our own tests of faith are not so much about how much we're willing to give for the Lord, but more about how much we're able to receive from Him.