Esau and Jacob

January 23, 2010 in Priesthood by Greg | 10 comments

Recently, a friend pointed me to an interesting account of how the birthright blessings of the patriarchal priesthood were given to Jacob, and not Esau. According to the biblical account,

Esau and Jacob by Matthias Stom And Isaac intreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren: and the Lord was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived. And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the Lord. And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger. And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb. And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau. And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau’s heel; and his name was called Jacob: and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them. (Genesis 25:21-26).

Commenting, Bruce H. Porter wrote:

The mother of the twins learned that “two nations” were within her, and that “the elder shall serve the younger.” It must be noted that the revelation concerning the birthright came to Rebekah, and not to Isaac the father of the children. Rebekah, knowing that Jacob was the chosen one of the Lord and the one who should receive the birthright blessing from Isaac, began the preparations.

Twice Rebekah commanded Jacob; “. . . obey my voice . . .” (Gen. 27:8, 13). Holding a position of authority, the matriarch directed her son in the arrangements that were to be made and the information that would be given to Isaac during the ritual blessing. She appeared not only to be fully acquainted with the liturgy, but also played a key role in the blessing itself. Jacob’s fears are manifested in his concern that he might appear to be the “deceiver” (vs. 12) and that there would be “a curse…and not a blessing.” This foreboding of Jacob was quickly silenced when “his mother said unto him, Upon me be thy curse, my son: only obey my voice . . .” Only in a position of authority may one be responsible for the actions of another, as Rebekah promised she would be. Had this been a deception, Rebekah as well as her son Jacob would be held accountable. Yet neither are reprimanded in the scriptural text by Isaac or the Lord. Jacob’s mother accepted full responsibility for the correct or incorrect (as it seemed) performance and acceptability of this priesthood ordinance as executed by the patriarch.

Rebekah prepared the ritual meal, and then took the “goodly raiment of her eldest son Esau.” These ritual priesthood garments she kept in her house, and then clothed Jacob her younger son (vs. 15). Rebekah was in charge of, and maintained possession of the “goodly raiment” or sacred vestments of the birthright son. These are the robes of authority that only the birthright son may wear, as he becomes the birthright son or patriarch.1 Rebekah, in preparation for the blessing clothed Jacob with the “goodly raiment” of the firstborn. This seems to imply that Rebekah’s responsibility was to prepare, clothe, and present the birthright son to her husband and patriarch. Rebekah knew the signs for which Isaac would be looking and prepared Jacob for the ordinance and blessing by placing these “signs of recognition,” that the patriarch would recognize by touching Jacob’s hands through his veil of Blindness.2

Notice the ritual motif taking place in verses 18-29. Verse 18 begins the questions of Isaac who was to endow the firstborn with the blessing. He questions; “who art thou, my son?” or (what is your name?) Jacob responded by stating; “I am Esau thy firstborn.” Here the given name of the first born is given to the patriarch as a key word to legitimize the blessing. The act of Jacob taking upon himself a new name, even the name of the first born may be in response to the command of Rebekah for Jacob to “obey” her voice. It also may be in connection with chapter 25 verses 29-34 where Esau sells his birthright, or that which is sacred for `pot of gold’ lentils to his brother Jacob. In Chapter 25, Esau “swear to” Jacob that he would have his sacred blessing declaring “what profit shall this birthright do to me?” “Thus Esau despised his birthright.” Accordingly, Jacob could claim and take upon himself the name of the firstborn by virtue of purchase, and the acquisition of knowledge (perhaps even signs of recognition) required to be the firstborn. Following Isaac’s question of “who art thou:” and the response “I am Esau thy firstborn;” the initiate continued: “I have done according as thou badest me.” Stating that he has been true and faithful to his father’s commands requests that a greater blessing be bestowed upon him saying: “sit and eat…that thy soul may bless me.”

Isaac then invited Jacob to “come near” (vs. 21) so that he may “feel” or touch Jacob “whether thou be my very son Esau or not.” Isaac must test the birthright son to be assured that his firstborn son is prepared and that he is not there unworthily, or an imposter. In verse 22 Isaac then applied the test of recognition, for which Rebekah prepared Jacob. Isaac states: “The voice is Jacob’s voice but the hands are the hands of Esau” (the hands of the firstborn). Again in verse 24 Isaac asked the questions “Art thou my very son Esau? and he said, I am.” Following the ritual meal, (in verse 25) Isaac requested that his son “come near now, and kiss me” (Gen. 27:26).3 While in this mutual and ritual embrace Isaac surrenders to the signs he was looking for and states: “Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine: Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee: cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.” In the following chapter (Gen. 28:1-5) this blessing is expanded and explained as the familiar Abrahamic covenant. However, this aspect of the blessing is done in connection with the marriage of Jacob so that the rights/rites of this blessing might continue in the family lines.

When Esau returned he was told by Isaac that the blessing given to Jacob would stand, and that Esau would be Jacob’s servant. The Patriarch Isaac, accepted that the blessing given was inspired and could not be rescinded. Jacob had met the requirements, having knowledge of the signs and phrases of recognition, and most important having been prepared and presented by his mother as the birthright son.

The last verse of this chapter reveals that Rebekah realized that the priesthood blessing just given by Isaac would have no effect, and be invalid “if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth.” Discussing the prospect of a Canaanite marriage, Rebekah stated about herself “what good shall my life do me?” If concern for posterity or temporal inheritance were Rebekah’s only reservation the feeling about the spouse of Jacob would not be a disturbing matter. However, if lineage and the blessings of the priesthood could only come through chosen family lines then Rebekah could say “what good shall my life do me?” Had Jacob married as did Esau, he would not be able to pass the patriarchal priesthood to his posterity, thus losing the birthright and patriarchal authority that Rebekah prepared him for.

The mother and matriarch, or Rebekah in this case, is responsible to make sure the blessings and ordinances of the priesthood are given to her offspring. The righteous priesthood holder is a glory to his mother who gave him life and prepares him for ordinances of eternal life. The worthy sons become the matriarch’s inheritance of righteousness as she becomes like Sarah, the `mother of kings and priests unto God.’4 Thus Rebekah, in her right, expressed her concern about the wife of Jacob. In response to Rebekah, Isaac counseled Jacob and “charged him” saying “Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.” Following this command Isaac again blessed him in verses three and four: “And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people; And give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed with thee; that thou mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger, which God gave unto Abraham.”

The involvement of Rebekah in the blessing of Jacob was one of decision and responsibility, not deception, and should not be ignored in an interpretive exegesis of male and female relationships in Genesis. Likewise we should not gloss over the involvement of the wives and mothers of patriarchs, prophets, and kings as recorded in ancient scripture.

Only the mother can verify the father and lineage of the child. She alone may testify who her firstborn is, and to whom the birthright belongs. Thus by revelation, Rebekah knew which child should receive the birthright. She then prepared and presented that son for the endowed blessing from his father when the time had arrived. With this patriarchal authority and right that Rebekah held, Isaac could not rebel against his wife, the presented son, or the inspired blessing given under his hand. The pattern espoused here is a motif inherent in the patriarchal order of Genesis and can be seen elsewhere in Old Testament examples.5

In this article, Mr. Porter went on to describe the patriarchal order which “consists of a husband and wife with equal power but divided responsibilities. The husband’s duty was to administer the ordinances of salvation and exaltation to his family and posterity, setting apart a new patriarch for the extended family before his death. One of the wife’s responsibilities in this order of the priesthood would be to present, or ‘bear’ physically, as well as spiritually her children to the patriarch for his acceptance, naming, and blessing.”6

In addition to discussing the case of Esau and Jacob, he provides many scriptural examples of a righteous mother’s role within the context of the priesthood. For additional insights into the story of Esau and Jacob, see David Bokovoy’s article From the Hand of Jacob: A Ritual Analysis of Genesis 27.

Sources:

  1. Louis Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, Vol 1, (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1968) pp.332-3233. Ginzberg states that these garments or “goodly raiment” were “the high-priestly raiment in which God had clothed Adam, `the first-born of the world,’ for in the days before the erection of the Tabernacle all the first-born males officiated as priests.” See also Harry Sperling and Maurice Simon trans. The Zohar, Vol. 2, (London: The Soncino Press, 1984) pp. 56, 57. The Zoharstates that these were “the precious garments which, originally belonging to Adam . . . but when Jacob put them on they were restored to their rightful place . . . for Jacob inherited the beauty of Adam; hence those garments found in him their rightful owner.” The continuation of the story of Jacob offers further consideration as he gives the “coat of many colors” to his most beloved, or birthright son, Joseph, who is despised by his elder brothers.↩
  2. Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951) pp.972-973. The Hebrew root used in this text is [indecipherable] and has four basic meanings one of which is “be acquainted with, recognize, perceive, visit, and inspect.” Rebekah put in or on the hands of Jacob those things that would allow Isaac to recognize the birthright son.↩
  3. B.D.B., p.676, The root word used in the Hebrew text can mean kiss, smell, gently touch, handle or hold. This same root word is used to describe the touching of the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant which rested in the Holy of Holies behind the veil of the temple of Jerusalem. The touching of the cherubim is described as a physical embrace like that of a man and woman. See Raphael Patai, On Jewish Folklore, (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1983) pp. 61-62.↩
  4. In the Book of Mormon the credit for the righteousness of the sons of Helaman is given to the faith, testimonies and teachings of their mothers. Elder McConkie makes the statement about the role of the mother from the beginning of time: “I rate Eve also as one of the greatest women among all of those who have or will come to earth. She, as the mother of all living, set the pattern for all future mothers with reference to bringing up their children in light and truth. She received all the blessings of the gospel, enjoyed the gifts of the Spirit, and sought to prepare her posterity for like blessings.” (“Our Sisters From the Beginning” Elder Bruce R. McConkie Of the Council of the Twelve, The Ensign, January, 1979).↩
  5. Porter, Bruce H. “Deception versus Decision – The Blessing of Jacob and Esau And Matriarchal Responsibilities in the Patriarchal Priesthood”. B. H. Porter. 22 Jan 2010.↩
  6. Ibid.↩

Tags: Firstborn, Isaac, Jacob, Marriage, Priesthood, Rebekah, Scripture Study

  1. AnnNo Gravatar on January 23, 2010 at 5:50 pm

    The philosophies of men mingled with scripture, indeed. And I do mean “men.” Consider:

    “Mr. Porter went on to describe the patriarchal order which “consists of a husband and wife with equal power but divided responsibilities. The husband’s duty was to administer the ordinances of salvation and exaltation to his family and posterity, setting apart a new patriarch for the extended family before his death. One of the wife’s responsibilities in this order of the priesthood would be to present, or ‘bear’ physically, as well as spiritually her children to the patriarch for his acceptance, naming, and blessing.””

    Notice how the beautiful equality intended by God becomes, in Mr. Porter’s mind, the instrumentalizing of women for the sake of men. It is the patriarch’s acceptance, naming, and blessing that matters here. Women just do the dirty work of bearing and raising children for the patriarch. I do not feel uplifted as a woman by Porter’s account of Rebekah, even though he apparently feels he is honoring Rebekah and “redeeming” her reputation. He honors her only as an instrument of men, and the account is not, in the end, one of equality at all.

    Going to Porter’s original article, we find other things at odds with revealed scripture. He insists Eve was not named “Eve’ until after the Fall, and was not married in the new and everlasting covenant until after the angel appeared to Adam sometime later and imparted to them the gospel of Christ, and so Cain was not born in the covenant. Both these assertions are at complete odds with LDS Church doctrine, and mark Porter’s essay as entirely questionable.

    One day we will have female scriptorians who will rectify some of the more nauseating interpretations of scripture given to us by brothers whose worldview is still infected with fallen patriarchy, as is Porter’s. And fortunately, we are now seeing the rise of male scriptorians, such as Richard Holzapfel, who do a much better job at describing the true equality between men and women before the Lord.

  2. GregNo Gravatar on January 24, 2010 at 10:14 am

    Thanks Ann for your thoughtful comments. I’m very interested in any pieces written by Holzapfel you can point me to that “do a much better job at describing the true equality between men and women before the Lord” if you have time. I have not read much by him in this regard.

    I also agree that Mr. Porter’s article that contains the account above about Esau and Jacob has a number of discrepancies. In fact, I wonder if it is an “unfinished work”.

  4. GregNo Gravatar on January 24, 2010 at 3:21 pm

    Thank you.

  5. JeremyNo Gravatar on January 25, 2010 at 12:20 pm

    Great post, Greg!

    This story has always perplexed me and has now shed a new light on the subject. I would tend to disagree with Ann’s diagnosis of Porter’s comments. Before I read Ann’s comment, what I specifically took from Porter’s comments was that women play a more active role in the priesthood than I’d never seen before. And as such, Rebekah should be revered for her dutiful service.

    Coincidentally, I am about to start reading Holzapfel’s commentary on the OT, and I hope he goes into detail on this troubling scenario. I still am not quite certain about why things were done as they were – or recorded as they were.

  6. GregNo Gravatar on January 27, 2010 at 11:29 am

    From my perspective, I thought it interesting how Mr. Porter views Rebekah’s role in a ritual context.

  7. MaryNo Gravatar on January 28, 2010 at 10:40 am

    I feel bad for Ann, it seems she has some kind of chip on her shoulder. I know Mr. Porter I prefer Brother Porter, and have read the complete article, and the previous one from which this one comes. Ann as stated that: “Notice how the beautiful equality intended by God becomes, in Mr. Porter’s mind, the instrumentalizing of women for the sake of men.” This could not be further than the truth. She obviously has not read the whole or latest article nor does she know his “mind” or what his premise is. Brother Porter has done more to legitimize, through scripture and doctrine the role of women and their equality with men and the priesthood, than anyone else now published, and that includes Brother Holzapfel’s great work on Christ and Women in the New Testament. Again in disagreement with Ann, she seems to feel, in her words: “Women just do the dirty work of bearing and raising children for the patriarch.’ This is not in the article by Bro. P. I feel sorry for Ann if she feels that to carry a child and teach those children is “dirty work” and Bro.P. does not imply that this work is for the patriarch in any way. Ann complains that it is wrong that Eve was not Eve after the fall, but a reading of scriptures assures that it wasn’t until after the fall that she was called Eve, before that it was “woman”. Bro.P. Does not state that Adam and Eve were married after the fall, just that the gospel was taught to them after the fall as the Book of Moses declares. But to many the scriptures are not the standard, tradition and opinion are. A reading of the article here and the latest does not imply nor state that Cain was not born in the covenant. It is a shame that prejudices can blur a persons ability to really see. This article and the one that led to this article by Bro. P. has opened up an understanding that I have not seen elsewhere, in the importance, equality and power that resides in the women in the church.

  8. WinstonNo Gravatar on January 28, 2010 at 11:50 am

    While I appreciate Ann’s use of the mind to interpret Mr. Porter’s words, one cannot interpret scripture without the heart. The words that Bruce writes resonated well to me, and I felt nothing but a great respect for women through his writings. The world tells us there is a hierarchy between man and woman, but in God’s own writings – they are as one. They are Adam. She is a help meet. Taken from his side – they are equal.

    I applaud Dr Porter for seeking the deeper level of things, brushing aside the world and cultural views, and explaining what I believe to be a more accurate explanation of the God of the scriptures that I have come to know and love.

    Truth was never embraced by the masses… I don’t want to spar a debate. Take it to the Lord in prayer.

  9. ShannaNo Gravatar on January 28, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    This may shed some light on things, too.

    Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol.3, PATRIARCHAL ORDER OF THE PRIESTHOOD

    The patriarchal order is, in the words of Elder James E. Talmage, a condition where “woman shares with man the blessings of
    the Priesthood,” where husband and wife minister, “seeing and understanding alike, and cooperating to the full in the
    government of their family kingdom” (Young Woman’s Journal 25 [Oct. 1914]:602-603). A man cannot hold this priesthood
    without a wife, and a woman cannot share the blessings of this priesthood without a husband, sealed in the temple.

    The statement above would indicate that there is another doctrine that would need to be explored: that of the responsibilities of the
    Matriarch in this Order and Priesthood.

    Let’s not jump to any quick conclusions at first glance at reading. I think there is great merit to Bruce Porter’s research for those who are ready.

  10. GregNo Gravatar on January 29, 2010 at 10:49 am

    Thank you for your comments Shanna, Winston and Mary. All very enlightening.

    Shanna, I linked to the EoM in your comment above since I thought there were other statements in that reference that are also very appropriate in light of Esau, Jacob and the birthright blessings.