Abraham's Marriage with Keturah, and Death; Ishmael's Posterity and Death; with the Birth and Characters of Esau and Jacob
This chapter gives an account of several changes in the families of Abraham, Ishmael, and Isaac. In each the sacred writer keeps his eye on the fulfilment of the great promise to the father of the faithful.
29^ Abraham’s marriage Dis. 34.
Ver. 1 — 6. The marriage of Abraham to Keturah is an event which we should not have expected. From the last account we had of him, charging his servant respecting the marriage of his son Isaac, we were prepa;red to look for his being buried, rather than married. I do not know that it was a sin: but it is easy to see in it more of man than of God. No reason is given for it; no marks of divine approbation attend it; five-and- thirty years pass o’er with little more than recording the names of his children, and that not from any respect to the connexion, but to shew the fulfilment of the divine promise of multiplying his seed. During this last period of his life, we see nothing of that extraordinary strength of faith by which he was formerly distinguished; but, like Sampson M’hen he had lost his hair, he is become weak like another man. While the promise of Isaac was pending, and while Abraham was employed in promoting that great object, the cloud of glory accompanies all his movements: but this being accomplished, and his mind diverted to something else, the cloud now rests upon Isaac; and he must walk the remainder of his journey in a manner without it.
“Who Keturah was we are not told: probably she was one of his family. She and Hagar are
Gen. ^5. WITH KETURAH. 297
called “concubines.” This does not mean however, that they were not his lawful wives, but that they occupied a less honourable station than Sarah, who was a fellow-heir with him in the promise. Keturah bare Abraham six sons, amongst whose descendents were preserved in some measure the knowledge and fear of the true God. From one of them, namely, IVIidiam, descended Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses; and it is not improbable that Job and his friends had the same general origin.
We have seen how the last thirty-five years of Abraham’s life fall short of what it was in former periods: it is pleasant however to observe, that his sun does not set in a cloud. There are several circumstances which shed a lustre upon his last end. Amongst others, his regard for Isaac, constituting him his heir, and settling In’s other sons at a sufficient distance from him, shews that his heart was still with God’s heart; or that he whom the Lord had chosen was the object to whom his thoughts were chiefly directed. He was not wanting in paternal goodness to any of his children. Though Ishmael was sent away, and as it would seem by the other parts of the history, with nothing: yet it is here plainly intimated that his father “gave jjjifts” to him, as well as the sons of Keturah. Q q
298 Abraham’s death [Dis. 34r.
Probably he visited and provided for him in the wilderness of Paran, and gave him a portion when he married. But God’s covenant being established with Isaac, his settlement in Canaan is that to which all the others are rendered subservient. All this shews that his faith did not fail; that he never lost sight of the promise in which he had believed for justification; but that as he had lived, so he died.
Ve? 7 — 10. Let us notice the death and burial of this great and good man. His death is expressed by a common, but impressive scripture phrase; “he gave up the ghost:” and his burial by another; “he was gathered to his people.” The one is the parting of bod;* and soul; the other the mingling of our dust with that of our kindred who Imve gone before us. Even in the grave it is natural to Mish to associate with those whom we have known and loved on earth; and still more in the world to come. When all the sons of Adam shall be assigned their portion, each in a sense will be gathered to his people! — The inscription on his tomb, if I may so call it, was, “He died in a good old age.” On this I have two remarks to offer. — (1.) It was according to prGm’ise. Upwards of four-score years before this, the Lord told Abraham in vision,’ saying, “Thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace:
Gen, 25.] and burial. 299
thou shalt be buried in a good old age.* In every thing, even in death, the promises are fulfilled to Abraham. — (2.) It is language that is never used of wicked men, and not t’eri, comjjwtilj, of good men. It is used of Gideon, and of David ;t and I know not whether of any other. The idea answers to what is spoken by the psalmist, “They shall bring forth fruit in old age;” or that in Job, “Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn Cometh in in his season.” — Isaac and Ishmael are both present at his funeral. We have no account of their having seen each other before from the day that Ishmael was cast out as a mocker; but whether they had or not, they met t their father’s interment. Death brings those together who know not how to associate on any other occasion, and will bring us all together sooner or later. — Finally, the place Mhcre they buried him was the same as that in which he had buried his beloved Sarah.
Ver. ]1. The death and burial of so great and good a man as Abraham must have made an impression upon survivors: howbeit, the cause of God died not.” It came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed his sou
* Gen. XV. 15. t Judges viii. 3i?. 1 Cbron. xxi,. C8.
Q q 2
300 isiimael’s posterity [Dis.y.
Isaac.” Isaac was heir to the promise; and though all flesh withereth and fadeth like the grass, yet the word of the Lord shall stand for ever. We shall hear more of Isaac soon: at present we are only told in general that he “dwelt by the well Lahai-roi.” It was necessary in those countries to fix their residence by a well; and it is no less necessary, if we wish to live, that we fix ours near to the ordinances of God. The well where Isaac pitched his tent was distinguished by two interesting events: — (1.) The merciful appearance of God to Hagar, from whence it received its name; the well of him that liteth and seeth inc.* Hagar or Ishmael, methinks, should have pitched a tent there, that it might have been to them a memorial of past mercies: but if they neglect it, Isaac will occupy it. The gracious appearance of God in a place, endears it to him, let it have been to whom it may. — (2.) It was the place from the way of Mhich he first met his beloved Rebecca:)* there therefore they continue to dwell together.
Vcv. 12 — 18. A short account is here given of Ishmael’s posterity, and of his death. His sons were nunierous and great; they had their “towis. and their castles;” nay more, they are denominated “twelve princes, according to their
* Gen. xvi. 14. f Chap. xxiv. CC.
Gen. 25.] AND DEATH. 301
nations.” Thus amply was fulfilled the promise of God concerning him: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly: twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.’“* But this is all. When a man leaves God and his people, the sacred historian leaves him. After living in prosperity a hundred and thirty-seven years, “he gave up the ghost, and died;’’ and was gathered unto his people.” As this language is applicable to men whether good or bad, no conclusion can be drawn from it in favour of his having feared God. It is added, that “he died in the presence of all his brethren;” that is, in peace, or with his friends about him, which, considerino; how his ‘* hand had been ajrainst every man, and “’ of course “every man’s hand against him,” was rather surprising: but so it had been promised of the Lord to his mother at the u ell Labai-roi — “He shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.”! So lie lived, and so he died, an oljject of providential care for his father’s sake; but as to any thing more, the oracles of God are silent.
Ver. 19 — C3. The history now returns to the son of promise. Forty years old was lie when he took Rebecca to Mife; and for twenty
* Gfii. -wii. 20, 1 C’bap. j:vi. 12.
302 THE BiiiTH OP [Dis. 34.
rears afterwards he had no issue. We should have supposed that as the promise partly con-’ sisted in a multiplication of his sed, the great number of his children would have made a prominent part of his history. When Bethuel, and Milcah, and Laban took leave of Rebecca, sayings “Be thou the mother of thousands of millions,” they doubtless expected to hear of a very numerous familv. And she herself, and her husband would, as believing the divine promise, expect the same. But Gods thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. Abra« ham’s other sons abound in children, M’hilehe in whom his seed is to be as the stars of heaven for nmltitude, lives childless. In this manner God had tried his father Abraham; and if he be heir to his blessings, he must expect to inherit a portion of his trials. God bestows his mercies upon wicked men without waiting for their prayers: but his conduct is somewhat different with them that fear him. Isaac had received Rebecca in answer to prayer; and let him not expect to receive seed by her in any other way. Well, the good man is led to pray: “Isaac entreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren; and the Lord was entreated of him, and Rebecca conceived.” During the time of her pregnancy she was the subject of some extraordinary sensations, which filling her mind with perplexity, she “enquired of the Lord.” Both the entreaty of Isaac, and the enquiry of Rebecca might be improper in ordinary cases; but as it was not the natural desire of children that prompted him, so neither was it an idle curiosity that excited her; they each kept in view the promise of all nations being blessed in their posterity, and therefore were not only solicitous for children, but anxious concerning every thing which seemed indicative of their future character. And as Isaac had received an answer to prayer, so it is revealed to Ilebecca that the sensations which she felt were signs of other things — that she was pregnant of twins — that they should become “two nations ‘* — and not only so, but “two manner of nations’* — lastly, that “theeldershouklservetheyounger.’* The struggle between these children, which was expressive of the struggles that should in after ages take place between their posterity, furnished another instance of the opposition between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, both which are commonly found in most religious families. Paul introduces this case as an instance of the sovereignty of God in the dispensation of his grace. The rejection of a great part of the Jewish nation was to some a stumbling-block. It seemed to them as if the word of promise to the fathers had taken none effect. The apostle in answer maintains that it was not
304 THE BIRTH OF [Dls. 34.
the original design of God in the promise to save all Abraham’s posterity; but on the contrary, that from the beginning he drew a line of distinction between Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, though each were alike descended from him according to the flesh. To a farther supposed objection, that such a distinction between children, while they were yet unborn, reflected on the righteousness of God, he contents himself with denying the consequence, and asserting the absolute right pf God to have mercy on whom he will have mercy.*
Ver. 24 — 28. As there were extraordinary sensations during the pregnancy of the mother, so in the birth of the children there was a certain circumstance which betokened that the one should prevail over the other; and that not only in his person, but in his posterity. Hence the prophet Hosea, reproaching the degenerate sons of Jacob, says of him, “He took his brother by the heel in the womb... and by his strength had power with God” — But, as if he should say, are you worthy of being called his children ?f
FroTn the circumstances attending the birth of a child, it was common in those ages to derive their names; and thus it was in the present
* Rem. ix. 6 — 16 t Hos. xii. 3. instance. The first-born, from his colour, was called Esau, i. e. red: the younger, from the circumstance of his taking hold of his brother’s heel, was called Jacob, a supplanter. Both these names were prophetic. Esau was of a sanguine disposition, and his posterity the Edomites always cherished a most cruel and bloody antipathy against Israel. In allusion to this, when the enemies of the church are punished, they are not only represented as Edomites, but God is described as giving them as it were blood for blood .... “Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garm.ents from Bozrah?... Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine-fat? I have trodden the wine-press alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury, and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.”* Jacob on the other hand, supplanted his brother in the affair of the birth-right, as we shall see presently. As his having hold of his brother’s heel seemed as if he M’ould have drawn him back from the birth, and have been before him, so his mind in after life appeared to aspire after the blessing of the first-born, and never to have rested till he had obtained it.
* I?ai. lxiii. 1 — 6. R r As they grew up they discovered a different turn of mind. Esau was the expert huntsman, {j[uite “a man of the field;” but Jacob was simple-hearted, preferring the more gentle employment of rearing and tending cattle. The partiality of Isaac towards Esau on account of his venison, seems to have been a weakness rather unworthy of him: that of Rebecca tOAV’ards Jacob appears to have been better founded: her preference M’as more directed by the prophecies which had gone before of him, choosing him whom the Lord had chosen.
Vcr. Q9 — 34. In process of time a circumstance arose in the family which in its consequences was very serious. Jacob was one day boiling some pottage, perhaps for his dinner; for he lived mostly upon licrbs. -Just then came in Esau from hunting, very faint and hungry, and had a great mind to Jacob’s pottage. Its verv colour corresponding: with his sanguine disposition seemed to take his fancy; on which account he was called Edom, a nan.c commonly applied to his posterity, and of similar import with that M’hich was first given to him. Tlicrc seems, at first sight, to be something ungenerous in Jacob’s availing himself of his brother’s hunger in the manner he did; and if there were, however it may reflect dishonour upon him, it
Gen.i^S.] ESAU and jacob. 307
reflects none upon the event. God often brings his purposes to pass by means which on man’s part are far from justifiable. The Reformation was a great and good work, and we may wish to vindicate every measure which contributed to it; but that is more than we can do. God’s thoughts arc not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. It will be found that “he is holy in all his ways, and righteous in all his works:” but this is more than can be said of his best servants, in any age of the world. A close inspection of this atfair however, will convince us that whether Jacob was right as to the mea?2s he used, or not, his fnoiiv€s were good, and those of Esau were evil. — Observe, particularly, (1.) The birthright attached to seniority. — (2.) It ordinarily consisted in the excellency of dignity, the excellency of power, and a double portion.’”^ — (3.) These privileges of the first-born were in several instances forfeited by the misconduct of the parties; as in the case of Cain, Reuben, &c. — (4.) There was in the family of Abraham a peculiar blessing which was supposed to be attached to the birthright, though God in several instances put it into another direction. This blessing was principally spiritual and distant, having respect to the setting up of God’s kingdom, to the birth of the IMessiah, or in other words, to all those
* Gen. xlix. 3. Deut. x.li. Jf-R r 2 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 birthrio-ht which u-as. bouo-ht 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 life-time. Instead of a double portion, he was sent out of the family M’ith only “a staff” in his hand, leaving Esau to possess the whole of his father’s 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 pypmised in the covenant with
* He could not mean surely, that lie s«l!nul(l then die of hunger, unless he eat of the pottage; for that is scarcely conceivable, while he had full access to all the provision in Isaac’s house: but ihat in a little time he should be dead; and then of uhaf account would these fine proipiises be to him?
Abraham. This Jacol) desired, and Esau despised; and in despising blessings of so sacred a nature, and that for a morsel of meat, he was guilty of profaneness.* 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, and prefer to them the momentary gratifications of flesh and sense.
From the whole we may perceive in this case a doctrine which runs through the scriptures, namely, that while the salvation of those that are saved is altogether of grace, the destruction of those that are lost will be found to be of themselves. From what is recorded of Jacob he certainly had nothing to boast of; neither had Esau any thing to complain of. He lost the blessing; but not without having first despisel it. Thus when the apostle had asserted the doctrine of election, and grounded it upon God’s absolute right to have mercy on Mhom he would have mercy, he nevertheless proceeds to ascribe the cause of the overthrow of them that perish* merely to themselves.” But Israel which ibllowed after the law of righteousness, hath not
“* lUh, xii. 15 — 17.
510 ESAU AND JACOB. [Dls. 34.
attained to the law of righteousness. “Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith; but as it were by the works of the law: for they stumbled at that stumbling stone.“* I am aware that when M-e preach in this manner, many are ready to accuse us of inconsistency. * You preach the doctrine of election, say they; but beibic you have done, you destroy your own “woric, by telling the unconverted that if they perish, the fault will lie at their own door.’ We answer, it is enough for us to teach what the scriptures teach. If we cannot conceive how the purposes of God are to be reconciled with the agency and accountableness of man, let us be content to be ignorant of it. The scriptures teach both; and true wisdom will not aspire to )e wise above what is written.