EXPOSITION
And Rebekah took goodly raiment of her eldest son Esau,—literally, the robes of Esau her son the elder—the desirable, i.e. the handsome ones. The בֶּגֶד was an outer garment worn by the Oriental (Genesis 39:12, Genesis 39:13, Genesis 39:15; Genesis 41:42),—στολὴ, LXX.,—and was often made of beautiful and costly materials (cf. 1 Kings 22:10). That the clothes mentioned as belonging to Esau were sacerdotal robes possessed by him as heir of the patriarchal priesthood (Jewish Rabbis), though regarded by many as a probable conjecture (Ainsworth, Bush, Candlish, Clarke, Wordsworth, 'Speaker's Commentary,' Inglis), is devoid of proof, and may be pronounced unlikely, since the firstborn did not serve in the priesthood while his father lived (Willet, Alford). They were probably festive garments of the princely hunter (Kalisch)—which were with her in the house,—not because Esau saw that his wives were displeasing to his parents (Mercerus, Willet), or because they were sacred garments (Ainsworth, Poole), but probably because Esau, though married, had not yet quitted the patriarchal household (Kalisch)—and put them upon Jacob her younger son. The verb, being in the hiphil, conveys the sense of causing Jacob to clothe himself, which entirely removes the impression that Jacob was a purely involuntary agent in this deceitful and deeply dishonorable affair.
And she put the skins of the kids of the goats—not European, but Oriental camel-goats, whose wool is black, silky, of a much finer texture than that of the former, and sometimes used as a substitute for human hair (cf. So Genesis 4:1); vide on this subject Rosenmüller's 'Scholia,' and commentaries generally—upon his hands, and upon the smooth of his neck—thus cautiously providing against detection, in case, anything occurring to arouse the old man's suspicions, he should seek, as in reality he did, to test the accuracy of his now dim sight and dull hearing by the sense of touch.
And she gave the savory meat and the bread, which she had prepared, into the hand of her son Jacob—who forthwith proceeded on his unholy errand.
And he came unto his father,—by this time a bed-ridden invalid (vide Genesis 27:19)—and said, My father. If he attempted to imitate the voice of Esau, he was manifestly unsuccessful; the dull ear of the aged patient was yet acute enough to detect a strangeness in the speaker's tone. And he said, Here am I who art thou, my son? "He thought be recognized the voice of Jacob; his suspicions were aroused; he knew the crafty disposition of his younger son too well; and he felt the duty of extreme carefulness" (Kalisch).
And Jacob (either not observing or not regarding the trepidation which his voice caned, but being well schooled by his crafty mother, and determined to go through with what perhaps he esteemed a perfectly justifiable transaction) said unto his father, I am Esau thy firstborn. A reply for which laborious excuses have been invented; as that Jacob spoke mystically, meaning not that he individually, but that his descendants, the Church, were Isaac's firstborn; or figuratively, as importing that since he had already bought Esau's birthright, he might justly regard himself as standing in Esau's place (Theodoret, Aquinas). It is better not to attempt vindication of conduct which to ordinary minds must ever appear questionable, but rather to hold that "Jacob told an officious lie to his father" (Willet). I have done according as thou badest me. If the former assertion might be cleared of mendacity, it is difficult to see how this can. By no conceivable sophistry could he convince his conscience that he was acting in obedience to his father, while he was knowingly implementing the instructions of his mother. This was Jacob's second lie.—Arise, I pray thee, sit and eat of my venison. Lie three. One lie commonly requires another to support or conceal it. Few who enter on a course of deception stop at one falsehood. That thy soul may bless me. It was the blessing of the Abrahamic covenant he craved.
And Isaac (still dissatisfied, but still resolving to proceed with caution) said unto his son, How is it that thou hast found it so quickly, my son? Giving expression to a natural surprise at the speedy success which had attended Esau's hunting expedition; an interrogation to which Jacob replied With daring boldness (Murphy), with consummate effrontery (Bush), not without perjury (Calvin), and even with reckless blasphemy (Kalisch, Alford). And he said, Because the Lord thy God brought it to me. Literally, caused it to come before me; by the concurrence, of course, of his providence; which, though in one sense true, yet as used by Jacob was an impious falsehood. Solemn as this declaration was, it failed to lull the suspicions or allay the disquiet of the aged invalid. And Isaac said unto Jacob, Come near, I pray thee, that I may feel thee, my son,—the very thing which Jacob had suggested as likely to happen (Genesis 27:12)—whether thou be my very son Esau (literally, this, my son Esau) or not.
And Jacob (with a boldness worthy of a better cause) went near unto Isaac his father; and he (i.e. Isaac) felt him (i.e. Jacob), and said, The voice is Jacob's voice, but (literally, and) the hands are the hands of Esau. And he discerned him not, because his hands were hairy, as his brother Esau's hands: so he blessed him. Isaac must either have forgotten the heavenly oracle which announced the destinies of his sons at their birth, and distinctly accorded the precedence to Jacob, or he must not have attached the same importance to it as Rebekah, or he may have thought that it did not affect the transmission of the covenant blessing, or that it did not concern his sons no much as their descendants. It is hard to credit that Isaac either did not believe in the Divine announcement which had indicated Jacob as the heir of the promise, or that, believing it, he deliberately allowed paternal partiality to interfere with, and even endeavor to reverse, the will of Heaven.
And he said (showing that a feeling of uneasy suspicion yet lingered in his mind), Art thou my very son Esau? Luther wonders how Jacob was able to brazen it out; adding, "I should probably have run away in terror, and let the dish fall;" but, instead of that, he added one more lie to those which had preceded, saying with undisturbed composure, I am—equivalent to an English yes; upon which the blind old patriarch requested that the proffered dainties might be set before him. Having partaken of the carefully-disguised kid's flesh, and drunk an exhilarating cup of wine, he further desired that his favorite son should approach his bed, saying, Come near now, and kiss me, my son—a request dictated more by paternal affection (Keil, Kalisch) than by lingering doubt which required reassurance (Lange).
And he came near, and kissed him. Originally the act of kissing had a symbolical character. Here it is a sign of affection between a parent and a child; in Genesis 29:13 between relatives. It was also a token of friendship (Tobit 7:6; 10:12; 2 Samuel 20:9; Matthew 26:48; Luke 7:45; Luke 15:20; Acts 20:37). The kissing of princes was a symbol of homage (1 Samuel 10:1; Psalms 2:12; Xenoph; 'Cyrop.,' 7. 5, 32). With the Persians it was a mark of honor (Xenoph; 'Agesil.,' 5. 4). The Rabbins permitted only three kinds of kisses—the kiss of reverence, of reception, and of dismissal. The kiss of charity was practiced among disciples in the early Christian Church (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1Th 5:26; 1 Peter 5:14; vide Kitto's' 'Cyclopedia,' art. Kissing). And he smelled the smell of his raiment,—not deliberately, in order to detect whether they belonged to a shepherd or a huntsman (Tuch), but accidentally while, in the act of kissing. The odor of Esau's garments, impregnated with the fragrance of the aromatic herbs of Palestine, excited the dull sensibilities of the aged prophet, suggesting to his mind pictures of freshness and fertility, and inspiring him to pour forth his promised benediction—and blessed him (not a second time, the statement in Genesis 29:23 being only inserted by anticipation), and said,—the blessing, as is usual in elevated prophetic utterances, assumes a poetic and antistrophical form (cf. Esau's blessing, verses 39, 40)—See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field—the first clause of the poetic stanza clearly connects with the odor of Esau's raiment as that which had opened the fount of prophetic song in Isaac's breast, so far at least as its peculiar form was concerned; its secret inspiration we know was the Holy Ghost operating through Isaac's faith in the promise (vide Hebrews 11:20)—which the Lord hath blessed. The introduction of the name Jehovah instead of Elohim in this second clause proves that Isaac did not mean to liken his son to an ordinary well-cultivated field, but to "a field like that of Paradise, resplendent with traces of the Deity—an ideal field, bearing the same relation to an ordinary one as Israel did to the heathen—a kind of enchanted garden, such as would be realized at a later period in Canaan, as far as the fidelity of the people permitted it" (Hengstenberg).
Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven,—literally, and the Elohim will give thee, with an optative sense; i.e. and may the—Elohim give thee! The occurrence of הָאֱלֹהִים in what is usually assigned to the Jehovist (Tuch, Bleek, Davidson) is not to be explained as a special Jehovistic formula (Colenso), or as a remnant of the fundamental Elohistic writing (Kalisch), or as indicating that the personal God, and not Jehovah, the God of the covenant, was the source of the blessing (Keil, Gosman in Lange), or as intimating a remaining doubt as to whether Esau was the chosen one of Jehovah (Lange); but as identifying Jehovah with Elohim, the art. being the art. of reference, as in Genesis 22:1. The blessing craved was substantially that of a fertile soil, in Oriental countries the copious dew deposited by the atmosphere supplying the place of rain. Hence dew is employed in Scripture as a symbol of material prosperity (Deuteronomy 33:13, Deuteronomy 33:28; Zechariah 8:12), and the absence of dew and rain represented as a signal of Divine displeasure (2 Samuel 1:21; 1 Kings 17:1; Haggai 1:10, Haggai 1:11)—and the fatness of the earth,—literally, of the fat-nesses, or choicest parts, of the earth (Genesis 45:18)—and plenty of corn and wine—i.e. abundance of the produce of the soil (cf. Deuteronomy 33:28).
Let people serve thee (literally, and will serve thee, peoples; at once a prayer and a prophecy; fulfilled in the political subjection of the Moabites, Ammonites, Syrians, Philistines, and Edomites by David; the thought being repeated in the next clause), and nations bow down to thee (in expression of their homage): be lord over thy brethren,—literally, be a lord (from the idea of power; found only here and in Genesis 27:37) to thy brethren. Imminence among his kindred as well as dominion in the world is thus promised—and let thy mother's sons bow down to thee (a repetition of the preceding thought, with perhaps a hint of his desire to humble Jacob, the favorite of Rebekah): cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee—framed on the model of the Abrahamic benediction (Genesis 12:3); but not so full as that, either because Isaac felt that after all Esau was not to be the progenitor of the holy seed (Murphy), or because, not being actuated by proper feelings towards Jehovah and his promises, the patriarch could not rise to that height of spiritual benediction to which he afterwards attained—Genesis 28:3, Genesis 28:4 (Keil), or because the prerogative of pronouncing the Abrahamic blessing in all its fullness Jehovah may have reserved to himself, as in Genesis 28:14 ('Speaker's Commentary').
HOMILETICS
The stolen blessing: a domestic drama.-2. Isaac and Jacob, or the successful stratagem.
I. JACOB'S DECEPTION OF ISAAC. Jacob's impersonation of Esau was—
1. Deftly prepared. The ingenious Rebekah, having dressed him in the fragrant festal robes of the princely hunter, covered his smooth skin with the soft, silky hide of the camel-goat, and put into his hand the simulated dainty dish which she had cooked. It is a melancholy thing when either woman's wit or man's sagacity is prostituted to unholy ends.
2. Boldly avowed. Entering his father's tent, and approaching within easy reach of the invalid's couch, at the same time imitating Esau's intonations, the heartless impostor calls upon his aged parent to arise and eat of his son's venison, in response to his father's inquiry also openly declaring himself to be Esau; in which was a fourfold offence—against his venerable father, against his absent brother, against himself, and against God. Never is a lie, and seldom is a sin of any kind, single or simple in its criminality. That scheme cannot be a good one of which the first act is a lie.
3. Persistently maintained. In the face of his father's searching interrogation, careful examination, and manifest trepidation, Jacob brazens out the imposture he had begun, covering his first falsehood by a second, and his second by a third, in which he Verges on the limits of blasphemy, allowing himself to be handled by his aged parent without betraying by a word or sign the base deception he was practicing, and at length capping his extraordinary wickedness by a solemn asseveration of his identity with Esau that carried with it in the hearing of Isaac much of the impressiveness and weight of an oath,—"I am thy very son Esau!" It is amazing to what depths of criminality those may fall who once step aside from the straight paths of virtue.
4. Completely successful. Critical as the ordeal was through which he passed, he was not detected So God sometimes allows wicked schemes to prosper, accomplishing his own designs thereby, though neither approving of the schemes nor holding the schemers guiltless.
II. ISAAC'S BENEDICTION Or JACOB. The patriarchal blessing which Isaac uttered was—
1. Divinely inspired as to its origin. It was not within the power of Isaac to either conceive or express it in any arbitrarily selected moment, or in any particular way or place that he might determine. Least of all was it the production of -Isaac's ordinary faculties under the physical or mental impulse of delicious viands or paternal affection. It was the outcome of an unseen afflatus of the Divine Spirit upon the venerable patriarch's soul (Hebrews 11:20).
2. Providentially directed as to its destination. Intended for the firstborn, it was pronounced upon the younger of his sons. Had Rebekah and Jacob not interposed with their miserable trick, there is reason to suppose that God would have discovered means of defeating the misguided patriarch's design; perhaps by laying an embargo upon his lips, as he did on Balaam (Numbers 22:38); perhaps by miraculously guiding his speech, as afterwards he guided Jacob's hands (Genesis 48:14). But nonetheless is the Divine finger discernible in carrying the heavenly blessing to its predestined recipient, that he does not interfere with Rebekah's craft, but allows it, beneath the guidance of his ordinary providence, to work out its appropriate result.
3. Richly laden as to its contents embraced—
(1) Material enrichment, represented by the dew, corn, and wine, which may also be regarded as symbolic of spiritual treasures;
(2) personal advancement in the world and the Church, foreshadowing both the political supremacy and ecclesiastical importance to which Israel should afterwards attain;
(3) spiritual influence, emblematic of the religious priesthood enjoyed first by the Hebrew people as a nation, and latterly by Christ, the true Seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob.
4. Absolutely permanent as to its duration. Though Isaac subsequently learnt of the deception which had been practiced towards him, he felt that the words he had spoken were beyond recall This was proof decisive that Isaac spake not of himself, but as he was moved by the Holy Ghost. His own benediction, uttered purely by and from himself, might, and, in the circumstances, probably would, have been revoked; the blessing of Jehovah transmitted through his undesigned act he had no power to cancel.
Learn—
1. That those who attempt to deceive others are not infrequently themselves deceived.
2. That those who enter on a sinful course may speedily sink deeper into sin than they intended.
3. That deception practiced by a son against a father, at a mother's instigation, is a monstrous and unnatural display of wickedness.
4. That God can accomplish his own designs by means of man's crimes, without either relieving them of guilt or himself being the author of sin.
5. That the blessing of God maketh rich and addeth no sorrow therewith.
6. That the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.