Jacob boiled stew. Esau came in from the field, and he was famished. Esau said to Jacob, “Please feed me with some of that red stew, for I am famished.” Therefore his name was called Edom.
Jacob said, “First, sell me your birthright.”
Esau said, “Behold, I am about to die. What good is the birthright to me?”
Jacob said, “Swear to me first.” He swore to him. He sold his birthright to Jacob.
Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew. He ate and drank, rose up, and went his way. So Esau despised his birthright.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv29, 30, 33, 34 29. And Jacob sod pottage. This narration differs little…
29. And Jacob sod pottage. This narration differs little from the sport of children. Jacob is cooking pottage; his brother returns from hunting weary and famishing, and barters his birthright for food. What kind of bargain, I pray, was this? Jacob ought of his own accord to have satisfied the hunger of his brother. When being asked, he refuses to do so: who would not condemn him for his inhumanity? In compelling Esau to surrender his right of primogeniture, he seems to make an illicit and frivolous compact. God, however, put the disposition of Esau to the proof in a matter of small moment; and still farther, designed to present an instance of Jacob’s piety, or, (to speak more properly,) he brought to light what lay hid in both. Many indeed are mistaken in suspending the cause of Jacob’s election on the fact, that God foresaw some worthiness in him; and in thinking that Esau was reprobated, because his future impiety had rendered him unworthy of the divine adoption before he was born. Paul, however, having declared election to be gratuitous, denies that the distinction is to be looked for in the persons of men; and, indeed, first assumes it as an axiom, that since mankind is ruined from its origin, and devoted to destruction, whosoever are saved are in no other way freed from destruction than by the mere grace of God. And, therefore, that some are preferred to others, is not on account of their own merits; but seeing that all are alike unworthy of grace, they are saved whom God, of his own good pleasure, has chosen. He then ascends still higher, and reasons thus: Since God is the Creator of the world, he is, by his own right, in such a sense, the arbiter of life and death, that he cannot be called to account; but his own will is (so to speak) the cause of causes. And yet Paul does not, by thus reasoning, impute tyranny to God, as the sophists triflingly allege in speaking of his absolute power. But whereas He dwells in inaccessible light, and his judgments are deeper than the lowest abyss, Paul prudently enjoins acquiescence in God’s sole purpose; lest, if men seek to be too inquisitive, this immense chaos should absorb all their senses. It is therefore foolishly inferred by some, from this place, that whereas God chose one of the two brothers, and passed by the other, the merits of both had been foreseen. For it was necessary that God should have decreed that Jacob should differ from Esau, otherwise he would not have been unlike his brother. And we must always remember the doctrine of Paul, that no one excels another by means of his own industry or virtue, but by the grace of God alone. Although, however, both the brothers were by nature equal, yet Moses represents to us, in the person of Esau, as in a mirror, what kind of men all the reprobate are, who, being left to their own disposition, are not governed by the spirit of God. While, in the person of Jacob, he shows that the grace of adoption is not idle in the elect, because the Lord effectually attests it by his vocation. Whence then does it arise that Esau sets his birthright to sale, but from this cause, that he, being deprived of the Spirit of God, relishes only the things of the earth? And whence does it happen that his brother Jacob, denying himself his own food, patiently endures hunger, except that under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, he raises himself above the world and aspires to a heavenly life? Hence, let us learn, that they to whom God does not vouchsafe the grace of his Spirit, are carnal and brutal; and are so addicted to this fading life, that they think not of the spiritual kingdom of God; but them whom God has undertaken to govern, are not so far entangled in the snares of the flesh as to prevent them from being intent upon their high vocation. Whence it follows, that all the reprobate remain immersed in the corruptions of the flesh; but that the elect are renewed by the Holy Spirit, that they may be the workmanship of God, created unto good works. If any one should raise the objection, that part of the blame may be ascribed to God, because he does not correct the stupor and the depraved desires inherent in the reprobate, the solution is ready, that God is exonerated by the testimony of their own conscience, which compels them to condemn themselves. Wherefore, nothing remains but that all flesh should keep silence before God, and that the whole world, confessing itself to be obnoxious to his judgment, should rather be humbled than proudly contend.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv30, 32, 33 Or, feed me quickly.
Or, feed me quickly.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv29–34 Gen 25:29 And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came…
Gen 25:29 And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he [was] faint:
Ver. 29. And Jacob sod pottage.] Pottage of lentiles, which was a kind of pulse much like to vetches or small peas: so frugal and sparing was the diet of those precious patriarchs, to the shame of our luxury. Quicquid avium volitat, quicquid piscium natat, quicquid ferarum discurrit, nostris sepelitur ventribus. {a} We devour the wealth of earth, air, and sea. {b}
Read full note →
Esau came from the feld, and he was faint.] Labor est etiam ipsa voluptas. Of carnal pleasures, a man may break his neck sooner than his fast. Nor is it want of variety in them, but inward weakness, or the curse of unsatisfyingness, that lies upon them. The creature is now as the husk without the grain, the shell without the kernel, full of nothing but emptiness; and so may faint us, but not fill us.
{a} Seneca.
{b} Kακιστον θνριον η γαστηρ.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv30–34 Red pottage; red by the infusion of lentiles, or…
Red pottage; red by the infusion of lentiles, or saffron, or some other things of that colour. The word is doubled in the Hebrew text, to show how vehemently he desired it.
Edom, which signifies red; as he was at first so called from the colour of his hair, so now that name was confirmed and given to him afresh upon this occasion: q.d. He was rightly called Edom, or red, not only historically for his colour, but prophetically for this accident.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v29 We have here a bargain made between Jacob and…
We have here a bargain made between Jacob and Esau about the birthright, which was Esau's by providence but Jacob's by promise. It was a spiritual privilege, including the excellency of dignity and the excellency of power, as well as the double portion, Gen 49:3. It seemed to be such a birthright as had then the blessing annexed to it, and the entail of the promise. Now see,
I. Jacob's pious desire of the birthright, which yet he sought to obtain by indirect courses, not agreeable to his character as a plain man. It was not out of pride or ambition that he coveted the birthright, but with an eye to spiritual blessings, which he had got well acquainted with in his tents, while Esau had lost the scent of them in the field. For this he is to be commended, that he coveted earnestly the best gifts; yet in this he cannot be justified, that he took advantage of his brother's necessity to make him a very hard bargain (Gen 25:31): Sell me this day thy birthright. Probably there had formerly been some communication between them about this matter, and then it was not so great a surprise upon Esau as here it seems to be; and, it may be, Esau had sometimes spoken slightly of the birthright and its appurtenances, which encouraged Jacob to make this proposal to him. And, if so, Jacob is, in some measure, excusable in what he did to gain his point. Note, Plain men that have their conversation in simplicity and godly sincerity, and without worldly wisdom, are often found wisest of all for their souls and eternity. Those are wise indeed that are wise for another world. Jacob's wisdom appeared in two things: - 1. He chose the fittest time, took the opportunity when it offered itself, and did not let it slip. 2. Having made the bargain, he made it sure, and got it confirmed by Esau's oath: Swear to me this day, Gen 25:33. He took Esau when he was in the mind, and would not leave him a power of revocation. In a case of this nature, it is good to be sure.
Read full note →
II. Esau's profane contempt of the birthright, and the foolish sale he made of it. He is called profane Esau for it (Heb 12:16), because for one morsel of meat he sold his birthright, as dear a morsel as ever was eaten since the forbidden fruit; and he lived to regret it when it was too late. Never was there such a foolish bargain as this which Esau now made; and yet he valued himself upon his policy, and had the reputation of a cunning man, and perhaps had often bantered his brother Jacob as a weak and simple man. Note, There are those that are penny-wise and pound-foolish, cunning hunters that can out-wit others and draw them into their snares, and yet are themselves imposed upon by Satan's wiles and led captive by him at his will. Again, God often chooses the foolish things of the world, by them to confound the wise. Plain Jacob makes a fool of cunning Esau. Observe the instances of Esau's folly.
1. His appetite was very strong, Gen 25:29, Gen 25:30. Poor Jacob had got some bread and pottage (Gen 25:29) for his dinner, and was sitting down to it contentedly enough, without venison, when Esau came from hunting, hungry and weary, and perhaps had caught nothing. And now Jacob's pottage pleased his eye better than ever his game had done. Give me (says he) some of that red, that red, as it is in the original; it suited his own colour (Gen 25:25), and, in reproach to him for this, he was ever afterwards called Edom, red. Nay, it should seem, he was so faint that he could not feed himself, nor had he a servant at hand to help him, but entreats his brother to feed him. Note, (1.) Those that addict themselves to sport weary themselves for very vanity, Hab 2:13. They might do the most needful business, and gain the greatest advantages, with half the pains they take, and half the perils they run into, in pursuit of their foolish pleasures. (2.) Those that work with quietness are more constantly and comfortably provided for than those that hunt with noise: bread is not always to the wise, but those that trust in the Lord and do good verily they shall be fed, fed with daily bread; not as Esau, sometimes feasting and sometimes fainting. (3.) The gratifying of the sensual appetite is that which ruins thousands of precious souls: surely, if Esau was hungry and faint, he might have got a meal's meat cheaper than at the expense of his birthright; but he was unaccountably fond of the colour of this pottage, and could not deny himself the satisfaction of a mess of it, whatever it cost him. Never better can come of it, when men's hearts walk after their eyes (Job 31:7), and when they serve their own bellies: therefore look not thou upon the wine, or, as Esau, upon the pottage, when it is red, when it gives that colour in the cup, in the dish, which is most inviting, Pro 23:31. If we use ourselves to deny ourselves, we break the forces of most temptations.
2. His reasoning was very weak (Gen 25:32): Behold, I am at the point to die; and, if he were, would nothing serve to keep him alive but this pottage? If the famine were now in the land (Gen 26:1), as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, we cannot suppose Isaac so poor, or Rebekah so bad a house-keeper, but that he might have been supplied with food convenient, other ways, and might have saved his birthright: but his appetite has the mastery of him; he is in a longing condition, nothing will please him but this red this red pottage, and, to palliate his desire, he pretends he is at the point to die. If it had been so, was it not better for him to die in honour than to live in disgrace, to die under a blessing than to live under a curse? The birthright was typical of spiritual privileges, those of the church of the first-born. Esau was now tried how he would value them, and he shows himself sensible only of present grievances; may he but get relief against them, he cares not for his birthright. Better principled was Naboth, who would lose his life rather than sell his vineyard, because his part in the earthly Canaan signified is part in the heavenly, Kg1 21:3. (1.) If we look on Esau's birthright as only a temporal advantage, what he said had something of truth in it, namely, that our worldly enjoyments, even those we are most fond of, will stand us in no stead in a dying hour (Psa 49:6-8); they will not put by the stroke of death, nor ease the pangs nor remove the sting: yet Esau, who set up for a gentleman, should have had a greater and more noble spirit than to sell even such an honour so cheaply. (2.) But, being of a spiritual nature, his undervaluing it was the greatest profaneness imaginable. Note, It is egregious folly to part with our interest in God, and Christ, and heaven, for the riches, honours, and pleasures, of this world, as bad a bargain as his that sold a birthright for a dish of broth.
3. Repentance was hidden from his eyes (Gen 25:34): He did eat and drink, pleased his palate, satisfied his cravings, congratulated himself on the good meal's meat he had had, and then carelessly rose up and went his way, without any serious reflections upon the bad bargain he had made, or any show of regret. Thus Esau despised his birthright; he used no means at all to get the bargain revoked, made no appeal to his father about it, nor proposed to his brother to compound the matter; but the bargain which his necessity had made (supposing it were so) his profaneness confirmed ex post facto - after the deed; and by his subsequent neglect and contempt he did, as it were, acknowledge a fine, and by justifying himself in what he had done he put the bargain past recall. Note, People are ruined, not so much by doing what is amiss, as by doing it and not repenting of it, doing it and standing to it.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv29–34 And Jacob sod pottage,.... Or boiled broth; this he…
And Jacob sod pottage,.... Or boiled broth; this he did at a certain time, for this was not his usual employment; the Targum of Jonathan says, it was on the day in which Abraham died; and whereas this pottage was made of lentiles, as appears from Gen 25:34; this the Jewish writers (i) say was the food of mourners; and so this circumstance furnishes out a reason for Jacob's boiling pottage of lentiles at this time: and hence also they (k) gather, that Jacob and Esau were now fifteen years of age; for Abraham was an hundred years old when Isaac was born, and Isaac was sixty at the birth of his sons; and Abraham lived to be one hundred and seventy five, and therefore Esau and Jacob must be fifteen years old when he died:
and Esau came from the field, and be was faint: for want of food, and weary with hunting, and perhaps more so, having toiled and got nothing.
Read full note →
(i) Pirke Eliezer, c. 35. (k) Seder Olam Rabba, p. 3. Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 5. 1.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv29, 30, 31, 34 Sod - That is, boiled.
Sod - That is, boiled.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv29, 30, 31, 34 Verse 29. Sod pottage] יזד נזיד yazed nazid, he…
Verse 29. Sod pottage] יזד נזיד yazed nazid, he boiled a boiling; and this we are informed, Ge 25:34, was of עדשים adashim, what the Septuagint render φακον, and we, following them and the Vulgate lens, translate lentiles, a sort of pulse. Dr. Shaw casts some light on this passage, speaking of the inhabitants of Barbary. "Beans, lentiles, kidney beans, and garvancos," says he, "are the chiefest of their pulse kind; beans, when boiled and stewed with oil and garlic, are the principal food of persons of all distinctions; lentiles are dressed in the same manner with beans, dissolving easily into a mass, and making a pottage of a chocolate colour. This we find was the red pottage which Esau, from thence called Edom, exchanged for his birthright." Shaw's Travels, p. 140, 4to. edit.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv29, 34 Gen 25:29-32. Sod — That is, boiled. Edom, or…
Gen 25:29-32. Sod — That is, boiled. Edom, or red. Sell me this day thy birthright — He cannot be excused in taking advantage of Esau’s necessity; yet neither can Esau be excused, who was profane, Heb 12:16, because for one morsel of meat he sold his birthright. Various have been the opinions what this birthright was which Esau sold, but the most probable is, that, together with the right of sacrificing, and being the priest of the family, it included the peculiar blessing promised to the seed of Abraham, that of being the progenitor of the Messiah, and the heir of the special promises of God, respecting Christ’s kingdom. It was at least typical of spiritual privileges, those of the firstborn that are written in heaven. Esau was now tried how he would value those, and he shows himself sensible only of present grievances; may he but get relief against them, he cares not for his birthright. If we look on Esau’s birthright as only a temporal advantage, what he said had something of truth in it; our worldly enjoyments, even those we are most fond of, will stand us in no stead in a dying hour. They will not put by the stroke of death, nor ease the pangs, nor remove the sting of it. But being of a spiritual nature, his undervaluing it was the greatest profaneness imaginable. It is egregious folly to part with our interest in God, and Christ, and heaven, for the riches, honours, and pleasures of this world.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv29, 30, 31, 33 Pottage, of Egyptian lentiles, the most excellent in the…
Pottage, of Egyptian lentiles, the most excellent in the world. (Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv29, 31, 32 Jacob sod pottage--made of lentils or small beans, which…
Jacob sod pottage--made of lentils or small beans, which are common in Egypt and Syria. It is probable that it was made of Egyptian beans, which Jacob had procured as a dainty; for Esau was a stranger to it. It is very palatable; and to the weary hunter, faint with hunger, its odor must have been irresistibly tempting.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv29, 31, 34 29. Sod pottage — Jacob boiled a dish of…
29. Sod pottage — Jacob boiled a dish of lentiles, (Gen_25:34,) a podded vegetable like the pea or bean, which is cooked by parching over the fire or boiling into a soup, making a favourite and highly nutritious dish all through the East. There is a small red variety of lentile which makes a reddish brown, or chocolate coloured pottage, much prized by the Arabs, which, when being cooked, exhales a savoury odour very grateful to a hungry man. Robinson, Thomson. Jacob’s household tastes made him skilful in the preparation of this favourite dish. In Eastern homes food is prepared only as it is wanted; and when Esau returned home from the unsuccessful hunt, fatigued and faint, and saw and smelled the red savoury pottage steaming in Jacob’s tent, impetuous, impatient, and hungry, he cried out, 30. Feed me — “Literally, Let me devour now that red, that red, for I am faint; therefore they called his name Red (Edom.) It is the language of greedy, and perhaps imperious, impatience, which Jacob might have resented, whereas he craftily resolved to turn it to his own advantage. In this characteristic incident the sacred writer dramatically paints the two brothers before us. The man, the hungry hunter, led by the senses, is fascinated by the high colour and rich flavour of a mess of pottage, and the meditative schemer of the tents, the man of wits, cannot wait for Providence to bring him the predicted birthright, but must intermeddle with his selfish craft. Here is also an interesting illustration of the origin of names. Some characteristic incident gives rise to a name, and on the subsequent occurrence of a similar incident the appropriateness of the name, or its coincidence with events, is noted, and the name is renewed. Esau is first surnamed Red from his red hair, and then from the red pottage. Jacob is called heel-catcher, or tripper, first literally (Gen_25:26) and then figuratively, (Gen_27:36,) and the figurative name is first applied when he trips up Esau in the matter of the birthright, and then its appropriateness is noticed again when we arrive at the incident of Isaac’s blessing. We often thus meet in this history with various reasons for the application of the same name.” — Newhall.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv30–34 30. Feed me … with] i.e. “let me, I…
30. Feed me … with] i.e. “let me, I pray thee, swallow a little of.”
that same red pottage] Heb. the red pottage, this red pottage. Esau’s words repeat the adjective “red”: either this was the name by which the pottage was known, or else Esau in his faintness and weariness is represented as simply pointing and gasping out “that red, red mess1[22].”
Read full note →
[22] “The phrase ‘mess of pottage’ does not occur in the A.V. of 1611, but is used proverbially of the means whereby Esau sold his birthright (Genesis 25.). The actual phrase was used in the heading to this chapter of Genesis in the Bibles of 1537 and 1539, and in the Geneva Bible of 1560. Coverdale, in his Bible of 1535, used the phrase in other passages, viz. in 1Ch_16:3 and Pro_20:7, but not in Genesis 25. See A New English Dictionary (Oxford University Press),” Spectator, Nov. 29, 1913.
therefore was his name called] A separate tradition accounting for the origin of the name “Edom”: see note on Gen_25:25.
Edom] That is, Red.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv29, 34 (29, 30) Jacob sod pottage.—The diverse occupations of the…
(29, 30) Jacob sod pottage.—The diverse occupations of the two youths led, in course of time, to an act fatal to Esau’s character and well-being. Coming home one day weary, and fainting with hunger, he found Jacob preparing a pottage of lentils. No sooner did the savoury smell reach him than he cried out in haste, “Let me swallow, I pray, of the red, this red.” The verb expresses extreme eagerness, and he adds no noun whatever, but points to the steaming dish. And Jacob, seeing his brother’s greediness and ravenous hunger, refuses to give him food until he has parted with the high and sacred prerogative which made him the inheritor of the Divine promise.
Therefore was his name called Edom.—Esau may have been called Edom, that is, Rufus, the red one, before, but after this act it ceased to be a mere allusive by name, and became his ordinary appellation.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv29–34 And Jacob sod pottage: literally, cooked something cooked; eyhse…
And Jacob sod pottage: literally, cooked something cooked; eyhse de JIakwb eyhma (LXX); prepared boiled food, of lentils (vide on ver. 34)and Esau came from the field, and he was faint exhausted, the term being used of one who is both wearied and languishing (Job_22:7; Psa_63:2; Pro_25:25)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v29 Esau despised his birthright
Gen_25:29-34
Esau despised his birthright
Read full note →
The story of the birthright
The story of the birthright shows us what kind of a man Esau was: hasty, careless, fond of the good things of this life.
He had no reason to complain if he lost his birthright. He did not care for it, and so he had thrown it away. The day came when he wanted his birthright, and could not have it, and found no place for repentance that is, no chance of undoing what he had done--though he sought it carefully with tears. He had sown, and he must reap. He had made his bed, and he must lie on it. And so must Jacob in his turn.
I. IT IS NATURAL TO PITY ESAU, BUT WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DO MORE; WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO FANCY FOR A MOMENT THAT GOD WAS ARBITRARY OR HARD UPON HIM. Esau is not the sort of man to be the father of a great nation, or of anything else great. Greedy, passionate, reckless people like him, without due feeling of religion or the unseen world, are not the men to govern the world or help it forward.
II. GOD REWARDED JACOBS FAITH BY GIVING HIM MORE LIGHT; by not leaving him to himself and his own darkness and meanness, but opening his eyes to understand the wondrous things of His law, and showing him how that law is everlasting, righteous, not to be escaped by any man; how every action brings forth its appointed fruit; how those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind.
III. IT IS THE STEADY, PRUDENT, GOD-FEARING ONES, WHO WILL PROSPER ON THE EARTH, and not poor, wild, hot-headed Esau. But those who give way to meanness, covetousness, falsehood, as Jacob did, will repent it, the Lord will enter into judgment with them quickly. (C. Kingsley, M. A.)
The despised birthright
In forfeiting his birthright to his younger brother, Esau gave up--
1. The right of priesthood inherent in the eldest line of the patriarchs family;
2. The promise of the inheritance of the Holy Land;
3. The promise that in his race and of his blood Messiah should be born. Esau parted with all this because, as he said in the rough, unreflective common-place strain which marks persons of his character even now, and which they mistake for common sense--He did not see the good of it all. What good shall this birthright do me?
I. IN MATTERS OF KNOWLEDGE WE FIND MEN DESPISING. THEIR BIRTHRIGHT. Knowledge is power; but as the maxim is used now, it is utterly vulgarizing. Knowledge not loved for itself is not loved at all. It may bring power, but it brings neither peace nor elevation to the man who has won it. If we cultivate knowledge for the sake of worldly advantage, what are we doing but blaming farewell to all that is lasting or spiritual in knowledge and wisdom, and taking in exchange for it a daily meal?
II. AGAIN, AS CITIZENS, MEN DESPISE THEIR BIRTHRIGHT. If, when it is given them to choose their rulers, they deliberately set aside thinkers; if they laugh at and despise the corrupt motives which affect the choice of rulers, and yet take no serious step to render corrupt motive impotent--then there is a real denial and abnegation of citizens to act on the highest grounds of citizenship.
III. WE ARE IN DAILY DANGER OF SELLING OUR BIRTHRIGHT IN RELIGION. Esaus birthright was a poor shadow to ours. Esau had priesthood; we are called to be priests of a yet higher order. Esau had earthly promises; so have we. Esau had the promise of Messiah; we have the knowledge of Messiah Himself.
IV. THE LOST BIRTHRIGHT IS THE ONE THING THAT IS IRRETRIEVABLE Neither good nor bad men consent that a forfeited birthright should be restored. (Archbishop Benson.)
On despising ones birthright
Esau repeats here, as we all of us repeat, the history of the fall. Mans first sin was despising his birthright. The fruit of the tree was Eves mess of pottage; the friendship, the Fatherhood of God, was the birthright which she despised.
I. WHAT IS A BIRTHRIGHT? Briefly, it is that which combines high honour with sacred duty; it confers dignity and power, but it demands self-abnegation and unselfish work. Each of us is born with a birthright. Gods infinite realm is large enough to confer on each one of us ,a title, and to demand in return a correspondent duty and work. The prize we strive for and have a right to strive for is the wealth of the universe through eternity.
II. WHAT IS IT TO DESPISE A BIRTHRIGHT? ESAU despised his birthright by holding it cheaper than life. All shrinking from the pain and sacrifice which are ever found in the path of duty is a despising of the birthright, a counting ourselves unworthy of the place in the mansion which God has made us to occupy.
III. THE INEVITABLE FRUIT: the brand of reprobate. Esau was rejected as under proof. God sought a son: He found a slave; He marked him, like Cain, and sent him away. The birthright which we despise as a possession will haunt us as an avenger, and will anticipate upon earth the gloom of the second and utter death. (J. B. Brown, B. A.)
The sale of the birthright
Esau may be regarded as the founder of the Epicurean sort, of all whose motto and philosophy of life is, Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. Such is the chief lesson of this history. But this history, considered in itself, shows us that both the parties to this bargain are to blame. It was unrighteous business, and altogether discreditable to the two brothers engaged in it. This is evident if we--
I. CONSIDER THE PARTIES ENGAGED IN THIS TRANSACTION AS ORDINARY MEMBERS OF SOCIETY.
1. As to Jacobs conduct.
(1) It was marked by unkindness unworthy of a brother. His conduct was most unfeeling.
(2) It was marked by low cunning. To take an unfair advantage of his brothers need was a mean device.
2. As to Esaus conduct.
(1) He abandoned himself to the delights and temptations of appetite.
(2) He was lacking in a true sense of honour and nobility.
(3) He was unconcerned for the peace of the future.
II. CONSIDER THE PARTIES ENGAGED IN THIS TRANSACTION AS RELIGIOUS MEN.
1. As to Jacobs conduct.
(1) It was irreverent. This birthright was a sacred thing, dignified with a religious importance; yet Jacob, in a most profane manner, mixes it up with things secular. He makes it a commercial business of the meanest order.
(2) It showed a want of faith in God.
(3) It was contrary to the broad, free spirit of true piety.
2. As to Esaus conduct.
(1) It showed a powerlessness to resist temptation.
(2) It was profane.
(a) He preferred the present to the future.
(b) He preferred the sensual to the spiritual.
(c) He preferred the near and certain to the distant and probable. (T. H.Leale.)
Esaus contempt of his birthright
Let us consider--
I. WHETHER THERE BE NOT A BIRTHRIGHT WHICH WE MAY SELL; OR BLESSINGS TO THE ENJOYMENT OF WHICH WE ARE BORN, BUT WHICH WE MAY FORFEIT. Compare our state with that of--
(1) The inferior creatures;
(2) The fallen angels;
(3) The heathen.
II. FOR WHAT CONSIDERATION THEY WHO SELL THIS BIRTHRIGHT PART WITH IT. (J. Benson, D. D.)
The two brothers
1. They differed in appearance.
2. They differed in pursuits.
3. They differed most in character.
I. THE BIRTHRIGHT.
1. Not worldly prosperity.
2. Not immunity from sorrow.
3. The birthright was a spiritual heritage.
It gave the right--which ever belonged to its possessor--of being the priest of the family or clan. It carried the privilege of being the depositary and communicator of the Divine secrets. It constituted a link m the line of descent by which the Messiah was to be born into the world. The right of wielding power with God and men; the right of catching up and handing on--as in the old Greek race--the torch of Messianic hope; the right ofheirship to the promises of the covenant made to Abraham; the right of standing among the spiritual aristocracy of mankind; the right of being a pilgrim of eternity, owning no foot of earth, because all heaven was held in fee--this, and more than this, was summed up in the possession of the birthright.
II. THE BARTER. We cannot exonerate either of these men from blame. Jacob was not only a traitor to his brother, but he was faithless towards his God. Had it not been distinctly whispered in his mothers ear that the elder of the brothers should serve the younger? Had not the realization of his loftiest ambition been pledged by One whose faithfulness had been the theme of repeated talks with Abraham, who had survived during the first eighteen years of his young life? He might have been well assured that what the God of Abraham had promised He was able also to perform; and would perform, without the aid of his own miserable schemes. But how hard is it for us to quietly wait for God! We are too apt to outrun Him; to forestall the quiet unfolding of His purposes; and to snatch at promised blessings before they are ripe. And as for Esau, we can never forget the beacon words of Scripture, Look diligently, lest there be any profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright Heb_12:15). Yet let us, in condemning him across the ages, look close at home. How many are there amongst ourselves, born into the world with splendid talents; dowried with unusual powers; inheritors of noble names; heirs to vast estates; gifted with keys to unlock any of the many doors to name, and fame, and usefulness--who yet fling away all these possibilities of blessing and blessedness, for one brief plunge into the Stygian pool of sensual indulgence! And the appeals to sense come oftenest when we are least expecting them. These appeals, moreover, come in the most trivial things. One mess of pottage; one glass of drink; one moments unbridled passion; one afternoonss saunter; a question and an answer; a movement or a look. It is in such small things--small as the angle at which railway lines diverge from each other to east and west--that great alternatives are offered and great decisions made. (F. B.Meyer, B. A.)
Esau: a true idea of life and prosperity
I. A TRUE IDEA OF LIFE. Esau felt himself at the point of death, and all men are at this point.
1. The period of our mortal life.
2. The nature of our mortal life. The moment we begin to live, that moment we begin to die.
II. A TRUE IDEA OF WEALTH. Esau felt that his birthright was nothing to him when he died, and how patent this truth! Lessons:
1. To the aspirant for wealth. How foolish this eagerness. You are reaching after that which is no sooner clasped than let go for ever.
2. To the possessor of wealth.
(1) Do not set your heart upon your possessions, because you will soon leave them.
(2) Use them for purposes that will yield you happiness for ever. (Homilist.)
The birthright sold
I. THE CUNNING MAN.
1. He waited for the right opportunity.
2. He employed the likeliest means of gaining his object.
3. He took no account of natural ties.
4. He made the compact irrevocable.
II. THE SENSUAL MAN.
1. He lacked resolution.
2. He despised an honourable position.
3. He lost sight of the future. Conclusion: Both characters are unjustifiable. (Homilist.)
Contempt of spiritual privileges
Hundreds and thousands of people are showing exactly the same sort of contempt for spiritual privileges which God extends to them to-day as Esau showed for the birthright. The hundreds and thousands with whom the present overbears the future; who allow the body, with its appetites and passions, to drown the voice of conscience, or obscure the vision of promise; who place things temporal before things spiritual, the world before heaven, the present before the eternal; who say of spiritual privileges, What profit shall they be to me? or, What earthly use are they? Let us take one or two very common and ordinary examples.
1. How few recognize the privilege of public worship as a privilege, as well as a clear duty! How readily is the privilege exchanged for something else, at the very smallest opportunity!--a country walk, a chat with a friend who happens to drop in just as you are starting for church, a call, some pleasure which might very well wait. A man hears the church bell ringing, and he debates within himself whether he will go or not go. It is just the merest matter of self-pleasing. There is no thought of the duty he owes to
God; and as for the privilege, he would stare at you if you suggested it. Privilege! Where is the privilege? What profit am I going to get out of it? It will not increase my wages, or find me work, or lower the price of bread! Privilege! What are you thinking about? And so it ends in his finding something better to do! Something, that is, that is pleasing to the senses, or which helps him temporally. In other words, he eats and drinks, and goes his way, and despises his Christian birthright.
2. Or take the case of ones private devotions; the reading of the Bible, and so forth. You are later than you should be in getting up. That puts other things late. There is much to be done which must be done, but something must be sacrificed, something must give way, What is it to be? The adornment of the body must not be neglected; household business must not be interfered with; prayers! they must give way. I have no time to say any prayers this morning! No time! No time for communion with God; for that which will make all the difference to your whole day! But then, it is a spiritual privilege!
3. I need hardly remind you of the contempt of that greatest of all privileges, which is so sadly common, the Holy Communion. (J. B. C. Murphy, B. A.)
How Esau lost his birthright
I. JACOBS BARGAIN. Selfish and impatient.
II. ESAUS SIN.
1. Sensuality.
2. Worldliness.
3. Recklessness. (W. S. Smith, B. D.)
The birthright
This blessing was principally spiritual and distant, having respect to the setting up of Gods kingdom, to the birth of the Messiah, or, in other words, to all those great things included in the covenant with Abraham. This was well understood by the family; both Esau and Jacob must have often heard their parents converse about it. If the birthright which was bought at this time had consisted in any temporal advantages of dignity, authority, or property to be enjoyed in the lifetime of the parties, Esau would not have made so light of it as he did, calling it this birthright, and intimating that he should soon die, and then it would be of no use to him. It is a fact, too, that Jacob had none of the ordinary advantages of the birthright during his lifetime. Instead of a double portion, he was sent out of the family with only a staff in his hand, leaving Esau to possess the whole of his fathers substance. And when more than twenty years afterwards he returned to Canaan, he made no scruple to ascribe to his brother the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power, calling him my lord Esau, and acknowledging himself as his servant. The truth is, the question between them was, which should be heir to the blessings promised in the covenant with Abraham. This Jacob desired, and Esau despised, and in despising such high blessings was guilty of profaneness. (A. Fuller.)
Esau and Jacob
I. THE WEARY HUNTER.
II. THE CRAFTY DESIGNER.
III. THE UNFAIR ADVANTAGE. Learn:
1. Divine wisdom is better than human craft.
2. Generosity is more noble than selfishness.
3. A good object will not justify unworthy means.
4. What was our birthright, compared with what Jesus has secured for us? (J. C. Gray.)
Lessons
1. Gracious hearts take up those spiritual things which carnal men refuse.
2. Good souls may desire the best security for spiritual privileges, even in the way of having them from men. Swear to me, &c.
3. Souls spiritual are instantly desirous of spiritual things. This day.
4. The just desires of good men may be an occasion of sin to the wicked.
5. It is proper for wicked hearts to swear and sell away all the tokens of spiritual advantages.
6. Gods providence orders wicked hearts in putting away from themselves mercy which was otherwise bequeathed by grace to them (Gen_25:33). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Lessons
1. Heavenly souls easily part with earthly for heavenly things, lentils for a birthright.
2. Carnal souls go away very well contented with sensual portions.
3. Sensual men despise and count vile the choicest of spiritual privileges. (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Lentils
Lentils were and are extensively and carefully grown in Egypt, Palestine, and Syria; those of Egypt were, at a later period, particularly famous; and the manner of cooking them is even immortalized on monuments. They are not only used as a pottage, but in times of scarcity, and more generally by the poor, they are baked into bread, either alone or mixed with barley. Lentils and rice, boiled in equal quantities, form still one of the favourite dishes in many parts of the East. When cooked, they are of a yellowish brown colour, approaching to red; some species, growing on a red soil, have this colour naturally; and hence Esau, in his haste, calls the dish simply the red one. The fact, that lentils were among the cheapest and most common articles of vegetable food, enhances the force and point of our narrative. The privileges which the birthright legally confers; the double portion of the fathers property; the higher authority in the family; the greater social influence; all these advantages, in this instance enhanced by spiritual blessings as their most precious accompaniment, could have no value for one who regarded his existence merely as the transitory play of an hour; and who was indifferent to the esteem of others, because he had not risen to understand the dignity of mankind. If we were to expect a historical allusion in this fact also, the probable supposition offers itself, that indeed the Edomites, who were masters of the wide tracts from the Red Sea along the whole mountain of Seir, up to the very frontiers of Palestine, might, with a little exertion, have extended their dominion over the land of Canaan; that, with a little degree of ambition and self-control, they might have become a respected and mighty nation; but that their thoughtless and ferocious habits kept them in the dreary solitudes, far from the chief scenes of history and civilization. It is known that the Mohammedans long kept the memory of this transaction alive by distributing daily to poor people and to strangers lentils prepared in a kitchen near the grave at Hebron, where they believed the cession of the birthright took place. (M. M. Kalisch, Ph. D.)
Fondness for pottage
The people of the East are exceedingly fond of pottage, which they call keel. It is something like gruel, and is made of various kinds of grain, which are first beaten in a mortar. The red pottage is made of kurakan, and other grains, but is not superior to the other. For such a contemptible mess, then, did Esau sell his birthright. When a man has sold his fields or gardens for an insignificant sum, the people say, The fellow has sold his land for pottage. Does a father give his daughter in marriage to a low-caste man, it is observed, He has given her for pottage. Does a person by base means seek for some paltry enjoyment, it is said For one leaf (namely leaffull) of pottage he will do nine days work. Has a learned man who has given instruction or advice to others stooped to anything which was not expected from him, it is said The learned one has fallen into the pottage pot. Of a man in great poverty, it is remarked, Alas! he cannot get pottage. A beggar asks, Sir, will you give me a little pottage? Does a man seek to acquire great things by small means, He is trying to procure rubies by pottage. When a person greatly flatters another, it is common to say, He praises him only for his pottage. Does a king greatly oppress his subjects, it is said, He only governs for the pottage. Has an individual lost much money by trade, The speculation has broken his pottage pot. Does a rich man threaten to ruin a poor man, the latter will ask, Will the lightning strike my pottage pot? (Roberts.)
Brutishness of worldlings
Luther was told of a nobleman who, above all things, occupied himself with amassing money, and was so buried in darkness that he gave no heed to the word of God, and even said to one who pleaded with him, Sir, the gospel pays no interest. Have you no grains? interposed Luther; then he told this fable:--A lion making a great feast, invited all the beasts, and with them some swine. When all manner of dainties were set before the guests, the swine asked, Have you no grains? Even so; continued Luther, even so it is in these days with carnal men; we preachers set before them the most dainty and costly dishes, such as everlasting salvation, the remission of sins, and Gods grace; but they, like swine, turn up their snouts and ask for money. Offer a cow a nutmeg and she will reject it for old hay. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Appetite gratified and appetite held in check
Which brother presents the more repulsive spectacle of the two in this selling of the birthright it is hard to say. Who does net feel contempt for the great, strong man, declaring he will die if he is required to wait five minutes till his own supper is prepared; forgetting, in the craving of his appetite, every consideration of a worthy kind; oblivious of everything but his hunger and his food; crying, like a great baby, Feed me with that red! So it is always with the man who has fallen under the power of sensual appetite. He is always going to die if it is not immediately gratified. He must have his appetite satisfied. No consideration of consequences can be listened to or thought of; the man is helpless in the hands of his appetite--it rules and drives him on, and he is utterly without self-control; nothing but physical compulsion can restrain him. But the treacherous and self-seeking craft of the other brother is as repulsive; the cold-blooded, calculating spirit that can hold every appetite in check, that can cleave to one purpose for a life-time, and, without scruple, take advantage of a twin-brothers weakness. Jacob knows his brother thoroughly, and all his knowledge he uses to betray him. He knows he will speedily repent of his bargain, so be makes him swear he will abide by it. It is a relentless purpose he carries out--he deliberately and unhesitatingly sacrifices his brother to himself. Still, in two respects, Jacob is the superior man. He can appreciate the birthright in his fathers family, and he has constancy. (M. Dods, D. D.)
Despising spiritual gifts
Had the birthright been something to eat, Esau would not have sold it. What an exhibition of human nature! What an exposure of our childish folly and the infatuation of appetite! For Esau has company in his fall. We are all stricken by his shame. We are conscious that if God had made provision for the flesh we should have listened to Him more readily. But what will this birthright profit us? We do not see the good it does: were it something to keep us from disease, to give us long unsated days of pleasure, to bring us the fruits of labour without the weariness of it, to make money for us, where is the man who would not value it--where is the man who would lightly give it up? But because it is only the favour of God that is offered, His endless love, His holiness made ours this we will imperil or resign for every idle desire, for every lust that bids us serve it a little longer. (M. Dods, D. D)
Three bad bargains
A Sunday-school teacher remarked that he who buys the truth makes a good bargain. I inquired if any scholar recollected an instance in Scripture of a bad bargain. I do, replied a boy, Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. A second said, Judas made a bad bargain when he sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver. A third boy observed, Our Lord tells us that he makes a bad bargain who to gain the whole world loses his own soul. (Old Testament Anecdotes.)
.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v29 Gen_25:29. Sod pottage.] “That is, seethed or boiled—a soup.…
CRITICAL NOTES.—
Gen_25:29. Sod pottage.] “That is, seethed or boiled—a soup. This pottage is a very common dish in that country. It is made up of different grain or lentiles, bruised and boiled as a broth. There was a red pottage, made chiefly of a red grain.” (Jacobus.)—
Read full note →
Gen_25:30. Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage.] The words run in the Hebrew, “Give me to eat, I pray thee, of the red, the red, the this.” In the weakness and impatience of his hunger, he omits the name and merely describes the dish by its outward appearance. Edom, meaning red, was given to him as a name from this incident. At least, that name might from hence be confirmed which was first given to him on account of the complexion of his hairy skin. “Therefore was his name called Edom.—
Gen_25:32. Behold I am at the point to die.] “This may be understood in three ways: the words may have
(1) a general meaning—I care only for the present: I shall die, and the birthright will pass on and be of no use to me;
(2) a particular one, referring to his way of life—I am meeting death every day in the field, and am not the man to benefit by the birthright, constantly exposed as I am to the risk of life; or
(3) one belonging to the occasion then present;—“I am ready to die of faintness and fatigue, and so hold a present meal of more value than a distant contingency.” Of these the A.V. by rendering, “I am at the point to die,” chooses the third.” (Alford.)—
Gen_25:34. Bread and pottage of lentiles.] Heb. “Food, even pottage of lentiles.”
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Gen_25:29-34
THE SALE OF THE BIRTHRIGHT
In this transaction Esau is the marked man,—the warning example to all ages. His conduct has given rise to the established expression which denotes the barter of honour and fame for some passing pleasure, some present satisfaction of gross appetite; and in a higher application it denotes that worldly temper by which a man parts with eternal treasures for the sake of the fleeting treasures of this present world. Esau may be regarded as the founder of the Epicurean sort, of all whose motto and philosophy of life is, “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.” Such is the chief lesson of this history. But this history, considered in itself, shows us that both the parties to this bargain are to blame. It was an unrighteous business, and altogether discreditable to the two brothers engaged in it. This is evident if we,—
I. Consider the parties engaged in this transaction as ordinary members of society.
1. As to Jacob’s conduct.
(1) It was marked by unkindness unworthy of a brother. Esau came tired and hungry from the violent toil of the hunter’s field. The food which so seasonably appealed to his appetite, and for which he craved so pathetically, was prepared by his brother’s hands who did not need it now. It was natural and seemly that one brother should ask food of another; and surely no one worthy of that name would refuse, especially in the extreme of necessity. To drive a hard bargain at such a time was most infamous. And even if it was necessary at all to bargain, surely something less might have been demanded. Jacob might have been contented with some portion of the proceeds of the day’s chase. He grossly failed in the duty due to a brother. His conduct was most unfeeling.
(2) It was marked by low cunning. To take an unfair advantage of his brother’s need was a mean device.
2. As to Esau’s conduct.
(1) He abandoned himself to the delights and temptations of appetite. He saw the savoury food, and the language he used in asking for it shows how eager and craving was his hunger,—“Give me to eat, I pray thee, of the red, the red, the this” (Heb.). “Let me swallow some of that red, that red there” (Delitzsch). The present satisfaction of appetite overwhelmed all higher considerations, and sunk the nobility within him. We can scarcely regard him as being in very great straits for food, or really perishing for want. He was simply a tired and hungry man. There was surely some other food in his father’s house which he could have provided himself with. But he would have, at all costs, this savoury dish. He had, probably, been accustomed to indulge in the pleasures of the palate so much as to render his principle weak in the hour of temptation from this source.
(2) He was lacking in a true sense of honour and nobility. Had he possessed the honour of a man of the world, such as he was, he would have spurned such a pitiful proposal as this, and preferred a crust of bread and a cup of water to dainties offered to him on such conditions. He would have indignantly rebuked the meanness which dared to make such a proposal. If he had any nobility left in him he should have maintained his position in the family, at any inconvenience to himself.
(3) He was unconcerned for the peace of the future. The transaction of this day could not fail to be a source of endless trouble for his family in the future, giving rise to disputes and bitter recriminations. It would tend to perpetuate enmities, and revive continually the flames of jealousy.
II. Consider the parties engaged in this transaction as religious men.
1. As to Jacob’s conduct.
(1) It was irreverent. This birthright was a sacred thing, dignified with a religious importance; yet Jacob, in a most profane manner, mixes it up with things secular. He makes it a commercial business of the meanest order. And this irreverence is all the more manifest if we consider (what is highly probable), that Jacob does not appear, from the subsequent history, to have enjoyed the rights of the firstborn in any temporal sense. If he then considered the birthright as a spiritual privilege, why does he think to purchase it with money? Is the inheritance of the heavenly Canaan to be bought for a mess of pottage?
(2) It showed a want of faith in God. By the Divine oracle Jacob knew that he was the chosen heir to the highest privileges of the birthright. But he used human means for bringing about the purposes of God. He showed a want of faith in not trusting God to accomplish His own designs. Infinite wisdom has no need of our crude suggestions and poor help. Faith is content to rest upon the promise, and to wait. It is no part of our duty to go out of our way for the purpose of fulfilling prophecy.
(3) It was contrary to the broad free spirit of true piety. No truly pious soul could think of making a purely spiritual matter the subject of bargain and sale.
2. As to Esau’s conduct.
(1) It showed a powerlessness to resist temptation. He was tired and hungry, and this savoury dish meeting his eye at such a time became a strong temptation. When he hears the artful conditions proposed, instead of resisting the tempter, he yields easily and speaks contemptuously of his birthright (Gen_25:34). Such men may have much good nature in their dispositions, and be equal to the practice of easy virtues, but they are weak in the hour of temptation.
(2) It was profane. This is the special point upon which the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews insists (Heb_12:16). He regards Esau as the type of a “profane” or worldly man. (a) He preferred the present to the future. The mess of pottage was there before him, all ready for his enjoyment. The high privileges of his birthright were far away in the future. The claims of the future are vague and indistinct in worldly minds; but those of the present are vivid and powerful, prevailing over every other. This preference of the present to the future is the very essence of worldliness. (b.) He preferred the sensual to the spiritual. The sense of the pure and exalted blessings of the birthright was weak in him, but the desire for carnal indulgence was strong. Such is the temper of the children of this world, and such their choice. The claims of the flesh are paramount. (c.) He preferred the near and certain to the distant and probable. The mess of pottage was before him. There was no question but that it was a present and certain good. He could make sure of it. But the promised advantages of the birthright were far away. He might not live to enjoy them. “Behold,” he said, “I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me?” (Gen_25:32.) A distant and spiritual good can only be realised by a strong faith. With most of the children of this world the things of heaven are either not thought of at all, or they come to be regarded as a great perhaps. The things of this world have the important advantage that they are sure. We know beyond all chance of mistake when we possess them. Such is the tyranny which this present world exercises over its children. Unless a strong deliverer comes to our rescue and saves us, we cannot escape from this house of bondage.
ESAU’S CONTEMPT OF HIS BIRTHRIGHT IMPROVED
Heb_12:16
“Lest there be any profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.”
A “profane” person is one who despises or makes light of sacred and Divine things,—as the name, day, or Word of God, His ways and people. “As Esau,” who, though the firstborn of Isaac, circumcised, and partaking of the worship of that holy family, was yet profane. His sin was his making light of the birthright and the blessings annexed to it. “The firstborn, as the root of the people of God, conveyed to his posterity all the blessings promised in the Covenant; such as a right to possess the land of Canaan, and to be the father of Him in whom all the nations were to be blessed, and to explain and confirm these promises to his children in his dying blessing to them.” (Macknight.) These great advantages did Esau profanely despise, and when afterwards “he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected.” Having lived, it seems, forty or fifty years in careless unconcern, he at length began to perceive how unwise a part he had acted, and sought to alter his father’s mind but found no means of doing it, though “he sought it carefully with tears” (Gen_27:38). Let us consider—
I. Whether there be not a birthright, which we may sell; or blessings to the enjoyment of which we are born, but which we may forfeit. If we compare our state with that of the inferior creatures, and consider ourselves first as human beings, we shall find we are born to privileges far beyond any they are capable of possessing. We are rational, and capable of that knowledge of God, of His nature and attributes, His works and ways, which they have no capacity of attaining; knowledge which enlightens and enlarges, refines and purifies, entertains and delights; nay, and even feasts the mind. But this blessing we may sell. We are capable of loving Him, and being beloved by Him peculiarly, which they are not. The felicity of fixing our esteem and love on an adequate and worthy object, and of knowing ourselves to be noticed, regarded, and loved by a Being infinitely great and good!—this also we may sell. We are born capable of resembling Him, of bearing His image and likeness, which no inferior creature is. (Gen_1:26-27.) The glory and happiness of resembling the first and best of Beings!—this also we may sell. We are born capable of fellowship with Him; but how many rest contented without it? Compare our state with that of the fallen angels, and consider us as sinners fallen, but redeemed by the life and death of the Son of God: in consequence of which we are born to enjoy blessings which they are precluded from. (Heb_2:16.) Compare our state with that of the heathen, and consider us, called Christians, as born within the pale of the visible Church; and we are born to the privilege of having the Word and ordinances of God, and all the means of grace, in which the heathens have no share. Compare the condition of such as are the children of religious parents, or whose lot is cast among the wise and pious with those who are not so: and consider the privileges of a religious education. Compare the state of those who have obtained a spiritual birth with that of the rest of mankind. And yet these various birthrights, and all the blessings included in them, may be sold.
II. For what consideration they who sell this birthright part with it. “For one morsel of meat”—For sin,—perhaps for one single besetting sin,—as drunkenness, uncleanness, injustice, defrauding, over-reaching, or dishonest gain.—There may be in the carnal heart a desire for this, as in the body an appetite for food, and it may appear desirable, useful, and even necessary; but it is only “one morsel of meat,” its pleasure unsatisfying, and of short duration. The appetite returns as eager as before, and the vicious principle is nourished and increased, and becomes daily more unruly.—For the world, “the desire of the flesh.” The gratifications of sense, the appetite and passion, in eating, drinking, and such like animal gratifications. This is parting with our birthright; which we have above the inferior creatures, viz., the dignity, glory, and felicity of our rational and immortal nature, for the pleasures of brutes; nay, for pleasures which many of them enjoy in greater perfection than we.—“The desire of the eye;” pleasing the eye of the body or of the mind with laying up money, with dress, furniture, planting, building, etc., with things grand, new, and beautiful. This is also unsatisfying, and of short duration. It is parting with heaven for earth, eternity for time, the Creator for the creature. It is parting with an infinite good for what is only at best finite, but is very small, if it be not rather an evil than a good; an eternal for a temporal one; a good belonging to, and necessary for, the soul, the better part of man, for one belonging to the body, the worse part. In other words, it is selling our birthright for “one morsel of meat.”—“The pride of life:” the pomp, show and glitter of the present world; glory, honour, preferment, the praise of men; the gratification of pride, self-will, discontent, impatience, anger, malice, envy, revenge. This is parting with the pleasures of the saint or angel, for (not the pleasures, for pleasures they have none), but for the miseries of a devil. It is selling our birthright, not for one or many morsels of meat, but doses of poison; for what is sure to disorder, enfeeble, and destroy us. Now all this proceeds from, and manifests PROFANENESS. To be profane, taking the word actively, is, to make light of, and despise spiritual and Divine things, which men do because of their ignorance of them; their unbelief; their insensibility, and hardness of heart (Rom_2:4-5); their carnal, earthly, and devilish mind. To be profane, taken passively, implies a person or place separated, or cast out from the society of things sacred. So holy things are said to be profaned when the veneration due to them is taken off, and they are exposed to common use and contempt. Thus those who reject, neglect, or treat with contempt their spiritual privileges and blessings, are already, like things common or unclean, cast out from the society of things and persons sacred and holy. Continuing to be so, they shall be everlasting outcasts from God, and shall find “no place of repentance, though they seek it with tears” (Mat_7:22-23; Mat_25:11; Luk_13:25-28).—[Rev. J. Benson’s Sermons, and plans.]
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Gen_25:29. What a trifing circumstance in human life may lead to the greatest consequences!
Jacob had become a sage in the practical comforts of life. This pottage is a very common dish in that country. It is made of different grain or lentiles bruised and boiled as a broth. There was a red pottage, made chiefly of a red grain. While Jacob had this pottage fresh Esau comes in from hunting, and is faint and weary.—(Jacobus.)
Our appetites expose us to the dangers of temptation, both when they want and when they are satisfied. The greater portion of the trials of human life arise from this question of food.
The people of the East are exceedingly fond of pottage. It is something like gruel, and is made of various kinds of grain, which are first beaten in a mortar. For such a contemptible mess, then, did Esau sell his birthright. When a man has sold his fields or gardens for an insignificant sum, the people say, “The fellow has sold his land for pottage.” Does a father give his daughter in marriage to a low caste man, it is observed, “He has given her for pottage.” Does a person by base means seek for some paltry enjoyment, it is said, “For one leaf (i.e., leafful) of pottage he will do nine days’ work.” Has a learned man stooped to do anything which was not expected from him, it is said, “The learned one has fallen into the pottage pot.” Has he given instruction or advice to others, “The lizard which gave warning to the people has fallen into the pottage pot.” Of a man in great poverty it is remarked, “Alas! he cannot get pottage.” A beggar asks, “Sir, will you give me a little pottage?” Does a man seek to acquire large things by small means, “He is trying to procure rubies by pottage.” When a person greatly flatters another, it is common to say, “He praises him only for his pottage.” Does a king greatly oppress his subjects, it is said, “He only governs for his pottage.” Has an individual lost much money by trade, “The speculation has broken his pottage pot.” Does a rich man threaten to ruin a poor man, the latter will ask, “Will the lightning strike my pottage pot?”—(Roberts.)
Gen_25:30. Let me feed now on that red, red broth. He does not know how to name it. The lentile is common in the country, and forms a cheap and palatable dish of a reddish brown colour, with which bread seems to have been eaten. The two brothers were not congenial. They would therefore act each independently of the other, and provide each for himself. Esau was no doubt occasionally rude and hasty. Hence a selfish habit would grow up and gather strength. He was probably wont to supply himself with such fare as suited his palate, and might have done so on this occasion without any delay. But the fine flavour and high colour of the mess, which Jacob was preparing for himself, takes his fancy, and nothing will do but the red, red. Jacob obviously regarded this as a rude and selfish intrusion on his privacy and property, in keeping with similar encounters that may have taken place between the brothers.—(Murphy).
Esau becomes Edom, and therefore, still the more remains Esau merely; Jacob, on the other hand, becomes Israel (Ch. Gen_32:28). Jacob is the man of hope. The possession that he greatly desires is of a higher order; hopes depending on the birthright. He never strives alter the lower birthright privileges. Esau’s insight into the future extended to his death only. But Jacob is as eager for the future as Esau is for the present.—(Lange).
Esau gained a second title to his name, as Jacob did afterwards (Gen_27:36). Thus the same name may owe its application to more than one occasion; and it is most important to remember this fact in reading these early histories.
Gen_25:31. These are the principal privileges which constituted the distinction of the firstborn:
(1) They were peculiarly given and consecrated to God (Exo_22:29).
(2) They stood next in honour to their parents (Gen_49:3).
(3) Had a double portion in the paternal inheritance (Deu_21:17).
(4) Succeeded in, the government of the family or kingdom (2Ch_21:3).
(5) Were honoured with the office of the priesthood, and the administration of the public worship of God. The phrase “firstborn,” therefore, was used to denote one who was peculiarly near and dear to his father (Exo_4:22), and higher than his brethren, (Psa_89:28); and typically pointed to Christ and all true Christians, who are joint heirs with Him to an eternal inheritance, and constitute the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven (Heb_12:23). It should be understood that previously to the establishment of a priesthood under the law of Moses the firstborn had not only a preference in the secular inheritance, but succeeded exclusively to the priestly functions which had belonged to his father, in leading the religious observances of the family, and performing the simple religious rites of those patriarchal times. It is certainly possible, but not very likely, that in the emergency, Esau bartered all his birthright for a mass of pottage; but it seems more probable that Esau did not properly appreciate the value of the sacerdotal part of his birthright, and therefore readily transferred it to Jacob for a trifling present advantage. This view of the matter seems to be confirmed by St. Paul, who calls Esau a “profane person” for his conduct on this occasion; and it is rather for despising his spiritual than his temporal privileges that he seems to be liable to such an imputation.—(Bush.)
This brings to light a new cause of variance between the brothers. Jacob was no doubt aware of the prediction communicated to his mother that the elder should serve the younger. A quiet man like him would not otherwise have thought of reversing the order of nature and custom. In after times the right of primogeniture consisted in a double portion of the father’s goods (Deu_21:17), and a certain rank as the patriarch and priest of the house on the death of the father. But in the case of Isaac there was the far higher dignity of chief of the chosen family and heir of the promised blessing, with all the immediate temporal and eternal benefits therein included. Knowing all this, Jacob is willing to purchase the birthright, as the most peaceful way of bringing about that supremacy which was destined for him. He is therefore cautious and prudent, even conciliating in his proposal. He availed himself of a weak moment to accomplish by consent what was to come. Yet he lays no necessity on Esau, but leaves him to his own free choice. We must therefore beware of blaming him for endeavouring to win his brother’s concurrence in a thing that was already settled in the purpose of God. His chief error lay in attempting to anticipate the arrangements of Providence.—(Murphy.)
The weakness and exhaustion of the body is a time of temptation. Jesus was tempted when He was “an hungred;” so was Esau. Jesus kept His birthright; Esau sold it away.
All temptations to worldliness resolve themselves into solicitations to sell our birthright. We were made for God and to show forth His glory, and to gain the distinctions and heritage of His children. If we serve the world we forfeit all this.
We have liberty to sell our heavenly birthright. It is a glorious gift this of liberty, but still an awful one.
Gen_25:32. Just because of the faintness that came over him, and his extreme desire to partake of this food, he sees nothing in the future so pleasant as his present repast would be. It seems amazing that he should so have seriously judged and acted. But it is no more amazing than the conduct of men every day, who put their present trifling gratification before eternal blessings. Often, indeed, in more temporal matters, men will sell a promise to pay, or a bond that has a long time to run, for a very small sum, to expend upon present indulgence. They argue as Esau did. Perhaps the idea was included that he could not live on promises. He might die soon, and then the birthright would do him little good; and hence he would prefer a small pleasure in hand. Esau seems to have set no estimate upon the spiritual privileges of the birthright.—(Jacobus.)
1. The good things of this world are present—those of the other, remote and distant. Now, we know that a present good has a great advantage above a far distant and late reversion. A candle that is near affects us more than the sun a great way off. So it is in regard to distance of time—there is more force and virtue in one single now than in many hereafters. The good that is present opens itself all at once to the soul, and acts upon it with its full and entire force. But that which is future is seen by parts and in succession, and a great deal of it is not seen at all; like the rays of a too distant object which are too much dispersed before they arrive at us, and so most of them miss the eye. This makes the least present interest outweigh a very considerable reversion, since the former strikes upon us with the strong influence and warmth of the neighbouring sun, the latter with the faint and cold glimmerings of a twinkling star.
2. The good things of this world are sure and certain. That is, as far as we are concerned. Our senses inform us of this. As for the place of happiness, we have heard the fame thereof indeed with our ears, but have neither seen it ourselves, nor discoursed with those who have; and although it is assured to us with as much evidence as is consistent with the nature and virtue of faith, yet darkness and fear commonly go together, and men are generally very jealous and distrustful about things whereof they are ignorant. Though the principles of faith are in themselves as firm and firmer than those of science, yet to us ’tis not so evident; nor do we ever assent so strongly to what we believe as to what we know.
3. The good things of this world strike upon the most tender and impressible part of us—our senses. They tempt us, as the devil did Adam, in our weaker part, through the Eve of our natures. A sensible representation even of the vanity of the world would work more with us than the discourse of an angel about it; and I question not but that Alexander the Great was more inwardly affected when he saw the ruins of the grave of Cyrus, when he saw so great power reduced to such narrow limits, such majesty seated on such a throne; the monarch of Asia hid, or rather lost in an obscure cave, a stone for his bed, cobwebs for his tapestry, and all his pomp and glory turned into night and darkness; I say, he was more convinced of the vanity of greatness by this lively appeal to his senses than he ever was or could be by all the grave lectures of his master, Aristotle. The Devil, when he tempted the Son of God, might have entertained him with fine discourses about the wealth and glory of the terrestrial globe, and have read Him a geographical lecture upon the kingdoms and empires of it, but he knew his advantage better than that, and chose rather to draw a visionary landscape before him, and present him with a sensible idea of all this, knowing by old experience how much more apt the senses are to take impression than any other faculty of man.—(Norris).
These two lads are figures—Passion, of the men of this world, and Patience of the men of that which is to come; for, as here thou seest, Passion will have all now, this year; that is to say, in this world. So are the men of this world: they must have all their good things now. They cannot stay till next year, that is, until the next world, for their portion of good. That proverb, “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush,” is of more authority with them than all the Divine testimonies of the good of the world to come. But as thou sawest that he had quickly lavished all away, and had presently left him nothing but rags, so it will be with all such men at the end of this world.—(Bunyan.)
Men seldom abstain from anything they are anxious to do for want of some excuse, on the ground of expediency or necessity to justify it. So it was with Esau. He was willing to part with his birthright to obtain this food, though he was too well aware of the value of his inheritance to alienate it without presenting to himself the semblance of a reason for so unequal a barter. He therefore makes the exposedness of his condition a pretence for the step. With this flimsy apology he endeavours to hide from himself the infatuation of his conduct. The spirit of his language was, “I cannot live upon promises; give me something to eat and drink, for to-morrow I die.” Such is the spirit of unbelief in every age; and thus it is that poor deluded souls continue to despise things distant and heavenly, preferring to them the momentary gratifications of flesh and sense.—(Bush.)
Gen_25:33. With fickle men make all firm and fast.—(Trapp.)
Jacob will make a serious transaction of it, because he is alive to its import, and knew and valued what he was getting, as Esau did not value it. And so the transaction was solemnly concluded. Jacob held the birthright by a lawful tenure, and the transfer was valid. How many baptized youth sell their Christian birthright for such a mess of pottage! For present indulgence they turn their back upon Church privileges, and their covenant heritage, and barter away their future all.—(Jacobus.)
There was never any meat, except the forbidden fruit, so dear bought as this broth of Jacob: in both, the receiver and the eater is accursed. Every true son of Israel will be content to purchase spiritual favours with earthly, and that man hath in him too much of the blood of Esau who will not rather die than forego his birthright.—(Bishop Hall.)
Gen_25:34. It would have been a strong proof of his indifference to religious privileges had he sold them for all the riches that Jacob could have given him in return; but what can be thought of the infatuation of throwing them away for so very a trifle? How justly does the Apostle, writing as moved by the Holy Ghost, affix the epithet “profane” to the character of the man who “for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.” It may, indeed, be said that it was unjust and unkind in Jacob to take advantage of his brother’s necessity and thoughtlessness, but still this affords no real palliation of the conduct of Esau. The scriptures nowhere represent Jacob as a perfect character. There is no apology for Esau, whose criminality was enhanced by his evincing no remorse on account of what he had done. He expressed no regret for his folly, nor made any overtures to his brother to induce him to cancel the bargain. On the contrary, it is said that “he did eat and drink, and rose up and went his way,” as if he were perfectly satisfied with the equivalent, such as it was, which he had obtained. But let us not forget how many there are that virtually justify his deed by following his example. Though living in an economy of light and love, yet what numbers are there who manifest the same indifference about spiritual blessings, and the same insatiate thirst after sensual indulgence as did Esau! The language of their conduct is, “Give me the gratification of my desires; I must have it, whatever it cost me. If I cannot have it but at the peril of my soul, so be it. Let my hope in Christ be destroyed; let my prospect of heaven be for ever darkened; only give me the indulgence which my lusts demand.” Thus they go on in their worldly career regardless of consequences; they do not acknowledge and bewail their sin and folly; they do not repent and pray for pardon; they do not resort to the means which God in mercy has provided for the forgiveness of offenders. Alas, what a fearfully close resemblance in all this to the mad career of their prototype. We can only earnestly beseech all such to reflect deeply on their folly and danger, and to contemplate that moment when they shall be “at the point to die.” Let them think what judgment they will then form of earthly and eternal things. Will they then say contemptuously, “What profit will this birthright be to me?” Will it then appear a trifling matter to have an interest in the Saviour, and a title to heaven?—(Bush.)
Esau was the type of the carna man. He is the man of unbelief, as Jacob is the man of faith. He proves himself by his conduct to be unfit for the birthright, and so the plan of God is justified. We are all, like Esau, heirs of the election until we forfeit it.
Frivolity is the mark of the carnal mind. The children of this world “eat and drink, and rise up to play,” regardless of the claims of God, and of the future.
“Thus Esau despised his birthright.” He counted all the precious blessings of the covenant, both temporal and spiritual, as of less value than a mess of pottage. And thus men despise their spiritual birthright by practically reckoning it as nought.
The privileges of our election are not taken away from us until we learn first to despise them.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v34
Genesis
A BAD BARGAIN
Read full note →
POTTAGE VERSUS BIRTHRIGHT
Gen 25:34.
Broad lessons unmistakable, but points strange and difficult to throw oneself back to so different a set of ideas. So
I. Deal with the narrative.
Not to tell it over again, but bring out the following points:-
{a} Birthright.-What?
None of them any notion of sacred, spiritual aspect of it.
To all, merely material advantages: headship of the clan. All the loftier aspects gone from Isaac, who thought he could give it for venison, from Esau, and from the scheming Rebekah and the crafty Jacob.
{b} The Bargain.
It is not clear whether the transaction was seriously meant, or whether it only shows Jacob’s wish to possess the birthright and Esau’s indifference to it.
At any rate, the barter was not supposed to complete Jacob’s title, as is shown by a subsequent piece of trickery.
Isaac’s blessing was conceived to confer it; that blessing, if once given, could not be revoked, even if procured by fraud and given in error.
The belief would fulfil itself, as far as the chieftainship was concerned.
It is significant of the purely ‘secular’ tone of all the parties concerned that only temporal blessings are included in Isaac’s words.
{c} The Scripture judgment on all parties concerned.
Great mistakes are made by forgetting that the Bible is a passionless narrator of its heroes’ acts, and seldom pauses to censure or praise-so people have thought that Scripture gave its vote for Jacob as against Esau.
The character of the two men.
Esau-frank, impulsive, generous, chivalrous, careless, and sensuous.
Jacob-meditative, reflective, pastoral, timid, crafty, selfish. Each has the defects of his qualities.
But the subsequent history of Jacob shows what heaven thought of him.
This dirty transaction marred his life, sent him a terrified exile from Isaac’s tent, and shook his soul long years after with guilty apprehensions when he had to meet Esau.
All subsequent career to beat his crafty selfishness out of him and to lift him to higher level.
II. Broad General Lessons.
1. The Choice.-Birthright versus Pottage.
{a} The Present versus The Future.
Suppose it true that to both brothers the birthright seemed to secure merely material advantage, yet even so the better part would have been to sacrifice material present for material future. Even on plane of worldly things, to live for to-morrow ennobles a man, and he is the higher style of man who ‘spurns delights and lives laborious days’ for some issue to be realised in the far future.
The very same principle extended leads to the conviction that the highest wisdom is his who lives for the furthest, which is also the most certain, Future.
{b} The Seen versus The Unseen.
However material the advantages of the birthright were supposed to be, they then appealed to imagination, not sense. There was the pottage in the pan: ‘I can see that and smell it. This birthright, can I eat it? Let me get the solid realities, and let who will have the imaginary.’
So the unseen good things, such as intellectual culture, fair reputation, and the like, are better than the gross satisfactions that can be handled, or tasted, or seen.
And, on the very same principle, high above the seeker after these-as high as he is above the drunkard-is the Christian, whose life is shaped by the loftiest Unseen, even ‘Him who is invisible.’
2. The grim absurdity of the choice.
The story seems to have a certain undertone of sarcasm, and a keen perception of the immense stupidity of the man.
Pottage and a full belly to-day-that was all he got for such a sacrifice.
‘This their way is their folly.’
3. How well the bargain worked at first, and what came of it at last.
No doubt Esau had his meal, and, no doubt, when a man sells his soul to the devil {the mediaeval form of the story}, he generally gets the price for which he bargained, more or less, and oftentimes with a dash of vinegar in the porridge, which makes it less palatable.
What comes of it at last. Put side by side the pictures of Esau’s animal contentment at the moment when he had eaten up his mess, and of his despair when he wailed, ‘Hast thou not one blessing?’
He finds out his mistake. A sense of the preciousness of the despised thing wakes in him.
And it is too late. There are irrevocable consequences of every false choice. Youth is gone: cannot alter that. Opportunities gone: cannot alter that. Strength gone: cannot alter that. Habits formed, associations, reputation, position, character, are all determined.
But there is a blessed contrast between Esau’s experience and what may be ours. The desire to have the birthright is sure to bring it to us. No matter how late the desire is of springing, nor how long and insultingly we have suppressed it, we never go to our Father in vain with the cry, ‘Bless me, even me also.’
‘What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?’
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v31 The "birthright" had three elements:
birthright
The "birthright" had three elements:
Read full note →
(1) Until the establishment of the Aaronic priesthood the head of the family exercised priestly rights.
(2) The Abrahamic family held the Edenic promise of the Satan-Bruiser Gen 3:15. --Abel, Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Esau.
(3) Esau, as the firstborn, was in the direct line of the Abrahamic promise of the Earth-Blesser Gen 12:3.
For all that was revealed, in Esau might have fulfilled those two great Messianic promises. This birthright Esau sold for a momentary fleshly gratification. Jacob’s conception of the birthright at that time was, doubtless, carnal and inadequate, but his desire for it evidenced true faith.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v29 Esau Sells His Birthright
Esau Sells His Birthright
v. 29. And Jacob sod pottage, he cooked a dish of lentils; and Esau came from the field, where he had evidently been engaged in his favorite occupation, and he was faint, ravenously hungry after his strenuous exertions.
Read full note →
v. 30. And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint. Therefore was his name called Edom (red). So great was his craving for food that he was ready to swallow the entire mess of pottage at one gulp, that he could not even think of the name of the vegetables whose sight made him so hungry, but merely referred to that red mess.
v. 31. And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. This was not a low form of cunning which took advantage of the opponent’s weakness, but the believing Jacob made use of the opportunity to acquire legally what belonged to him by the promise of the Lord.
v. 32. And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die; and what profit shall this birthright do to me? The character of Esau was evidently such as to make him think lightly of the great privilege of being the first-born, since his question conveys the idea: I’m dying of hunger; and why should I worry about my birthright, anyway? Thus he yielded the entire higher import of his birthright, the specific blessing of Abraham, the inheritance of his posterity, the right and land of the covenant: all for the satisfaction of a moment.
v. 33. And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; and he sware unto him; and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. Thus Jacob pursued the advantage which he had gained to the point where he was sure of his gain, for the oath of Esau ratified his promise.
v. 34. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentils; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright. So it was not a mere momentary whim of Esau, for his contempt of his birthright continued even after he had eaten and drunk his fill and was restored to his normal frame of mind. Thus Jacob was filled with a holy seriousness concerning the privileges of the birthright, realizing how much depended upon it in the family of Abraham, while Esau considered the entire matter a joke and acted accordingly. Jacob is a type and example of those that seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness first, while Esau represents such as renounce the eternal blessings for the sake of temporal gain and enjoyment.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv29, 31 Jacob cooked
Jacob cooked
Since this is the beginning of a story about something that happened one time, some translators may want to start it with a phrase like "One day, Jacob cooked" in a similar manner to the UDB.
Read full note →
cooked some stew
"boiled some food" or "cooked some soup." This stew was made of boiled lentils. (See: Genesis 25:34)
he was weak from hunger
"he was weak because he was very hungry" or "he was very hungry"
I am exhausted
"I am weak from hunger" or "I am very hungry"
Edom
Translators may add a footnote that says "The name Edom means 'red.'"
translationWords
Jacob
Esau
Edom
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv29, 30, 31, 33 25:29 Ironically, Jacob proved the more cunning hunter. The…
25:29 Ironically, Jacob proved the more cunning hunter. The word cooking (Hebrew wayyazed, “boiling”) sounds like the word for “hunter” (Hebrew tsayid). While boiling stew, Jacob was laying a trap for the hairy red animal. He may have waited a long time for this opportunity. This word for “boil” was also used for presumptuous action (like water boiling over the rim of the pot). Jacob overstepped his boundaries when he seized the promise for himself. By contrast, Abraham knew the promise was his and was secure in giving the land away (see study note on 13:8-13). • Esau was exhausted and hungry, but his life was not in danger (25:32; see study note on 25:33-34).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.