The Lure of a Mess of Pottage

This week I have been reflecting on the birth and growth of Esau and Jacob in Genesis 25:19-34. I recognize that numbers and time lapses, as with plenty of other things in the Bible, convey metaphorical and symbolic significance. I am also aware that both in the text and culturally, ages were viewed differently than we view them today. I have no interest in delving into any of that, though it can be fascinating. Without insisting on post-Enlightenment literalism, just taking the story at face value has prompted some observations in my mind that probably don't have much significance beyond that.

I am also aware that the story is stripped down and spare. It does not include the sorts of details our curiosity craves. Filling in those gaps is hazardous at best, yet a couple of questions come to mind.

Verse 20 says Isaac was 40 years old when he married Rebekah and 60 years old when Esau and Jacob were born. Rebekah was repeatedly referred to as a girl in Genesis 24 when Abraham's servant secures her to be Isaac's wife. (vv. 14, 16, 28, 55, 57) If Rebekah was still considered to be in good child bearing years when Isaac prayed for her to be able to have a child, it would be reasonable to presume that she was a teen when she was married to 40 year old Isaac. While she consented (24:58), the text is clear that the arrangements were made by her father and brother. Her consent may have just been a matter of timing.

Genesis 24:67 says that Isaac loved Rebekah. No details of a love story are included (though the Hebrew Scriptures do report some wonderful love stories). Perhaps that love is part of what prompted Isaac to appeal to God for her to have a child (25:21). The text says nothing about expectation of the covenant with Abraham that his descendants would come through Isaac, though there does seem to be some echo of that in the oracle Rebekah received (25:23). Pure speculation, of course, but I easily imagine 20 years of marital joy for a couple without children, but still the longing for children leaves a vacancy.

The NRSV sets Rebekah's oracle (you can choose a different word if you like) in 25:23 as poetry - twin couplets. I am not equipped to comment on the poetic use of Hebrew here, only suggesting that this rises from a deep reality in how God works with people - pretty consistently working with the unlikely as instruments of redemption and grace. It is part of the great reversal that Jesus expressed so eloquently in the beatitudes (that permeated his life and teaching).

At a very human level, the arrival of children upsets the marital equilibrium. In part this is a cautionary tale about parents playing favorites with their children. But it is also a window into how children bring more change to married couples than getting married did.

Then comes the vignette between Esau and Jacob and the "mess of pottage." I can't help but wonder if we have not been given a glimpse of sibling rivalry and how banter between them can get out of hand. Sure, Esau was famished, but I doubt at risk of starvation. Jacob taunts him about the birthright. To be sure, "Esau despising his birthright" (25:34) may suggest not that he thought he was trading it for the lentil stew, but that he allowed it to become trivialized in brotherly banter. Again, I don't know that. In Genesis 27, Esau and Isaac both think the birthright is going to Esau. It take deception on the part of Rebekah and Jacob to pull it off.

Rebekah's role suggests to me just how far the marriage has deteriorated since the obvious joy and love of Genesis 24:67.

Trading the birthright for a mess of pottage has become a metaphor for loosing sight of something of enduring value and trading it for something appealing but transitory. In my pastoral experience with marriages damaged and destroyed by adultery, it seems one spouse is lured away by the excitement of a fling and looses the value of the marriage. Yes, there may have been deterioration in the relationship, but that too seems to me to often be part of treating something as "banter" that should have been protected and treasured..

I must say that as I have watched the interaction between religion and politics in my time, I sense that a depth of integrity and vitality has been traded in the banter for the lure of the mess of pottage of immediate power and influence. This is hardly the only example, but I have pondered how "evangelical Christians" let themselves be lured into becoming identified as a political voter block.