Strengths and Weaknesses of Old Testament Interpretation on the Stolen Blessing - Essay Example

Assessing the Strengths and Weaknesses of Old Testament Interpretation on the “Stolen Blessing” Between Esau and Jacob The purpose of this essay will be to evaluate some of the strengths and weaknesses of some theological interpretation that pertains to Genesis 25: 19-28; the birthright which was traded by Esau, for a simply pot of stew. Later, Isaac, the father of Esau and Jacob, grants Jacob a blessing that belongs to Esau. It can be said that this blessing was essentially stolen by Jacob from Esau through trickery. This essay will look closely at several interpretations as well as establish some of its own interpretations on the traded birthright and the stolen blessing as they pertain to Esau and Jacob. In reading Genesis 25: 23, one finds a conversation between God and Rebekah (Jacob’s wife), where God is prophesying as to the future of the twins she is carrying in her womb: “And the Lord said to her: ‘Two nations are in your womb, two peoples shall be separated from your body; one people shall be stronger than the other and the older shall serve the younger.” Of course, we find out that Esau is the slightly older twin followed by Jacob. It is Jacob who ultimately ends up with the birthright of Esau, because in a moment of desperate hunger, Esau trades his birthright for a pot of stew. Many narratives found in the Old Testament are ambiguous and lack a certain amount of character development. They are allegorical in nature and therefore open to countless interpretations. Many critics will argue that the Old Testament, more specifically the Pentateuch, can be taken virtually any way someone could hope to translate it except for literally: “we should not confuse a historical individual with his historical representation” (Berlin 1). To begin looking at criticisms on the “stolen promise” between Esau and Jacob, one journalist argues that Jacob essentially waited his whole life for the opportunity to “take” the birthright of Esau: The brothers speak face to face only twice, and these two meetings, twenty years apart, reveal the changes in their relations and the growth in their characters. Both are scenes of bargaining. The first is brief: each gets what he wants; Jacob gets the birthright, and Esau gets the stew. How many times has Esau come home from the hunt in just such a mood, dog-tired--"faint"--demanding food? Picture him pointing: "some of that red, red pottage." This time Jacob is ready for him (Howland, 2003). It would seem that this is the easiest argument to make on the situation, and a weak one at that. It is forgotten here that God spoke to Rebekah and specifically told her that the older son (Esau) would serve the youngest (Jacob). By Jewish birthright as written in the Old Testament, the first born male son is entitled to the birthright. This is a given; this situation is different, however, because God himself foretold that the roles of the two sons would be reversed. Why would God take time to prophesy that the twins might become subject to a bit of typical sibling rivalry as opposed to an actual role reversal? This is in fact an actual role reversal which was predestined by God himself. Therefore, this criticism offered by Howland is weak, as it does not acknowledge this facet of the story. The strength of the argument made by Howland is in her criticism on the blessing bestowed by Isaac onto his son Jacob. Originally, the blessing would have gone to Esau, but Esau traded his birthright for a meal of stew and bread. Howland notes that this is in and of itself symbolic: “Jacob gives Esau bread with his stew, as Rebecca bakes bread for Isaac, invoking the symbolism of the Covenant meal.” She does, however, fail to get into detail about the deceptive measures taken by Jacob and his mother Rebekah. Howland’s argument on this aspect of the passage is that when Jacob receives the blessing bestowed by his father Isaac (the blessing stolen by deception on Jacob‘s part), Esau is truly feeling hurt: Bless/blessed/blessing. Our sympathies here have to be with Esau, presenting himself so proudly, so hopefully for the reward which by rights is his. Yet the very repetition of the word suggests that, like birthright, blessing has little meaning for Esau; its only a word. What we are hearing is the plaintive cry of a child pleading for lost favor--as if Jacob has stolen Isaacs love. She is making the case for Esau in that she is pointing Jacob out as not only “stealing” the birthright from Esau but “stealing Isaac’s love” from Esau. This is a powerful and well made point. Certainly one can argue that the blessing given to Jacob was stolen from Esau along with the birthright. But one can also argue that God predestined Jacob to have the birthright therefore sealing the fate of both Jacob and Esau. Some interpretations on these passages which reveal the story of the “stolen birthright and blessing” will reflect a sort of struggle between one’s fate and one’s name in reference to Biblical characters. In examining a specific interpretation which discusses this aspect, it is clear that the interpretation exudes the idea that Jacob was a man who made his own destiny or fate through being a “sneak”: “Esau is asserting here that Jacob must act like a sneak since that is the Hebrew root of his very name”(Rubin, 2002-2006). Rubin asserts that because of the name given to Jacob, he acts accordingly, thus fulfilling the prophecy of God. The action of sneakiness that Esau speaks of is Jacob’s deception of his father. Jacob deceives his father into thinking that he (Jacob) is in fact Esau, because he presents himself as a hairy man. His father being nearly blind and very old assumes Jacob to be Esau and therefore gives Jacob his blessing which is intended for Esau. This can be viewed as a relatively weak argument, since it is hard to say through time and translation if “Jacob” was truly the birth name of Jacob, or if through thousands of years and numerous translations if Jacob was so named due to his actions. Rubin goes on to illustrate that this particular Biblical tale is a representation of human will or free will: But the Torah narrative overrides natural history and shifts the blessing to the younger son, Jacob. Thus, the seemingly ironclad rule of destiny as represented in primogeniture is shattered when Jacob and his mother Rebecca, acting on their sense of moral right, demonstrate that human action can defeat rigid fate. The story of Jacob’s blessing is an affirmation of the freedom of humans to act in the world according to their sense of right and justice and not be bound by seemingly natural laws like the privilege of the first born. The idea of making sense of this passage as a demonstration of human will is an excellent one and strongly made at that. The Bible makes many references to the struggle of human free will throughout its pages. To use this story in particular is wise because the law was the law in Biblical days (either allegorically or historically speaking). The idea that tradition was broken (the tradition of the birthright going to the first born male, which should have been Esau) by human actions and human will. This argument also substantiates the idea that ultimately the prophesy of God was upheld by the actions of the players involved: Rebekah, Isaac, Jacob, and Esau. It is important to note that Rebekah favored her son Jacob. She was his accomplice in deceiving her husband Isaac into giving the blessing to Jacob instead of Esau. Going back to the very prophecy made by God to Rebekah, God ultimately had decided that He favored Jacob and not Esau. Esau, the first born came out of the womb first, red and covered with hair. He was named accordingly. Jacob, came out of the womb, holding onto the heel of Esau. This action sets a precedence for the entire narrative to follow. One can argue that God hated Esau the hunter because he was after the flesh or carnal knowledge. Jacob found favor in the eyes of God in Utero as he sought after spiritual things and not earthly things. Rebekah, always having favored Jacob, assisted him in steeling the blessing bestowed by Isaac. If it were not for her, the act of stealing the blessing may not have been possible. This is another strong point made by Rubin: “It is no accident that the chief orchestrator of the story of the blessing is a woman, the Matriarch Rebecca. Frequently, when the Bible wants to shatter a pattern, it is a woman who will step forward to discard the old and champion innovative thinking.” It is important to look at the actions of Rebekah in all of this as the Bible often appeals to the patriarchal nature of men. It is, however, the woman in almost every story that acts as somewhat of a catalyst. This is something that many scholars miss when interpreting Biblical allegories and lessons. It was Rebekah whom God chose to speak to, and it was Rebekah who bore the twin boys that would father nations. It was Rebekah who played a centrifugal role in tricking Isaac into thinking that Esau was the one who was receiving the blessing when it was in fact Jacob, Rebekah and God’s favorite of the two: “In each of these instances, the normal male-dominated world of the Bible is shaken by the emergence of a female who, through her decisive action, represents that everyday assumptions about the world can be broken by humans acting with a sense of purpose and justice” (Rubin). Other interpretations take a more broad approach to the tale of Jacob and Esau (also known as Edom). In fact, some arguments exist which attempt to date the clash in nations of present day back to the rivalry first between Ishmael and Isaac and then to Jacob and Esau: ”the off and on enmity between Israel and Edom that existed in the Biblical period is also explained by the Jacob-Esau tales; these later nations did not get along because the original brothers did not get along; in fact, they even hated each other in utero”(Kugel). This is of course a slippery slope and an attempt at explanation for long time rivalry between neighboring nations of the Middle East. This is an easy way of either substantiating the Biblical allegories or justifying the current conflict between nations. It is therefore a weak argument, as it is simply too broad and presumptuous. Also, it suggests that God singled out one nation over another at the very origin of their said beginnings. That is not conducive to the idea of a loving and just God. Clearly, the individuals who presume to think that one nation is better than another simply because God may like one better is ill justified and a Biblical contradition. There is, however, a strong argument made by the same critic who would argue in favor of nations’ quarreling dating back to being preordained by God Himself. This argument is in favor of the possibility that Jacob was not lying or intending to lie to Isaac at all: ”The Hebrew Bible, it will be recalled, was transmitted for centuries without capital letters or punctuation. Where a sentence began and ended was thus often a matter of speculation” (Kugel). It is here that Kugel goes on to suggest that Jacob merely intended to possibly answer his father in two sentences instead of one, exclaiming two truths; I am (your son) and Esau is your first born. It is represented in the verse as one reply which exclaims: “I am Esau, your first born”( Genesis 27:19). This argument is an interesting one and certainly a possibility if it weren’t for the following versus which tells us that Jacob had disguised his hands to appear as Esau’s in order to deceive his father into thinking he was Esau so that he (Jacob) may receive the blessing instead. This is also substantiated by the verse before the 19th verse of the twenty-seventh chapter of Genesis where Rebekah and Jacob plot to trick Isaac. Isaac has asked Esau, the hunter, to go out and bring him some meat. This is where Rebekah finds opportunity to help disguise Jacob as his brother Esau with the smell of game and with hair on his hands, so that he will be the recipient of the blessing his father intends to give Esau. It is impossible to know through thousands of years of interpretations whether this tale is an allegory or bares somewhat accurate description of historical events. In looking at in Biblical context and taking it for the story that it delivers, one can assume that the take home message is that there is a certain amount of fate to be expected (preordiance from God) and a certain degree of freedom provided by human will. Revisiting the idea of the possibility that God disliked or knew He would dislike Esau, it may make sense to one that believes the Bible to a fault that Jacob chose the will of God and acted accordingly: “Jacob and Esau became as different as night and day. Esau became earthy and violent, hunting in the fields and serving idols, while Jacob became domestic and studious, learning Torah in his tent. Esau was a patently wicked man, murderous and crude, and yet his father Isaac always loved and favored him” (Paroly). Once again, the question presents as to whether Jacob became who he was ordained to be, or did he choose to be who he was, or both. It does not seem rational that Esau was simply hated by God before he was born and so became the very person later that God knew He would hate. In other words, this is not fair or allowing for human will. If Esau knew that God would hate who he would become, would he have turned out differently? Would he have endeavored to be more of a man after God’s own heart like Jacob eventaully was? The argument made by Paroly goes on to attempt an answer: He used the trappings of Jacob’s goodness to his own ends. He asked questions about Torah law which sounded intelligent, but were really just empty. He also served his father with the utmost effort and care, bringing him delicacies he hunted and waiting on him hand and foot. It is in this way that Esau took the tools of Jacob’s trade of righteousness and used them to fool his father. Paroly argues that Esau sought the favor of his father Isaac who he in fact had always won over. It was apparently not ultimately in Esau’s favor to simply persue the favor of his father as the blessing, by deception, ultimately went to Jacob, and God still hated Esau. Furthermore, the strong argument made by Paroly in agreement with Esau’s failure overall goes on to say: “rabbinic lore tells us that when Esau died, even the angels thought he was a righteous person”(Paroly). It would seem that the partial moral of the allegory is that if God has decided to hate someone before they have even been born, then perhaps human will or not, one does not stand a chance. Later in the twenty-seventh chapter of Genesis, there is a reconciliation between Jacob and Esau after a 20 year exile on Jacob’s part. He had essentially betrayed Esau not once but twice. The first insult was the trading of the birthright for the stew. He waited for a weary Esau and talked him into trading his birthright over stew, a covenant meal which sealed the deal. The second insult came when he acted as though he were Esau and tricked Isaac into giving him the blessing, intended for Esau. It is not until the time during Jacob’s exile that he is anointed by an angel of God as Israel (one who battles with God). Ultimatey, he returns to Esau and bows to him in a gesture of good will. As has been shown, it is extremely difficult to state a definitive interpretation of an Old Testament story. Whether there has been much lost through time and translation, or if it was the nature in which the Old Testament was written, it practically seems as if the point of it was for a person to decide upon a way to interpret the text and live one’s life in that manner. There are quite a few religious leaders that would argue against this view, but of course that is still just there interpratation against another one. Works Cited: Howland, Bette, Retelling Genesis, First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life No. 138, 2003. Questia Online Library, 08.03.20. Berlin, Adele, Poetic Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, The Almond Press, Sheffield, England, 983 Fokkelman, Jan, Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide, Deo Publishing, Scholeksterstraut, The Netherlands, 1999. Rubin, Gary, 2002-2006, Overcoming Destiny, Weekly Torah Commentaries, available from: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/texts/Weekly_Torah_Commentary/toldot_ujafedny5762.htm Kugel, James, How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now, Simon & Schuster, New York, 2007 The Holy Bible, courtesy of the Gideon foundation, Nashville, Tennessee. Klitsner, Shmiel, Wrestling Jacob, Urim Publications, New York, 2006. Williams, James G., The Comedy of Jacob: A literary Study, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 1978. Questia Online Library, 08.03.20. Paroly, Brandon, 2008, Learning from Others, University of Pennsylvania, available from: http://www.jliconline.org/blog_entry/325/C36 Fraade, Stephen D., From Tradition to Commentary, Albany, New York, State University of New York Press, 1991. Questia Online Library, 08.03.20. Read More