Genesis

 

1

 

vs. 6-7 "separate water from water"

            Many scientists believe that the atmosphere prior to the flood was a canopy or “expanse” of water.  This canopy eliminated much of the ultra-violet light present today.  This separation of water in the atmosphere and water on the earth helps to explain why people prior to the flood lived for so many years. 

           

vs. 24 "according to their kinds"

            Although evolutionists claim that animals have evolved from less complex organisms to more complex organisms, it states emphatically here that animals must reproduce according to their kind.

           

2

 

v. 14 "the Tigris and Euphrates"

            It is generally accepted that the Garden of Eden was found where the Tigris and Euphrates are located today.  This, however, is probably not the case.  Firstly, the Flood (Genesis 6-8) caused great changes to the land.  Secondly, the rivers we see today were probably renamed the Tigris and Euphrates possibly because of their resemblance to the rivers before the flood or simply because humans are sentimental.  As an example, compare English and Scottish town names with those found in the United States and Australia.

 

v. 19 "naming of the animals"

            This verse indicates the high degree of intelligence possessed by Adam.  To be able to name thousands of animals and also had the memory to recall them. Adam was supreme over the animals (Genesis 1::28 – 30).

 

3 

 

v. 15 "the head and heel"

            Already we are given the promise of a Saviour.  Here God speaks to Satan and tells him that although he will strike the heel, through the woman would come One who would strike his head (a mortal blow as opposed to a superficial one).  The head here is a symbol of authority which had to be destroyed.  This is done by Christ, whose incarnation (seed of a woman) is followed by His death (strike the heel) and His resurrection (strike/crush his head). (Heb. 2:14 – 15)

 

v. 20    “the name of Eve”

            Eve’s name is of special significance considering what had just happened.  By naming her Eve, he demonstrates his faith in God’s promises of a future Saviour; she would be the mother of the living and through the woman salvation would indeed come into the world!

            Note also from 4:1 and the naming of Cain, they thought this was the man-child promised by God who would deliver them from sin, death, and hell.

 

v. 21 "first death"

            For those Christians that believe that God created the world through evolution this passage is indeed a stumbling block. For evolution to occur, death had to occur and yet if death had already occurred then the whole ethos of death covering sin is demolished which in turn refutes Christ's death on the cross. 

            This is also a very significant verse in that it God Himself killed animals so He Himself could clothe Adam and Eve. God also clothes us upon belief, He clothes us in garments of His righteousness, and we are justified.

It is important to note the sequence of events:

Sin brings death into the world

Promise of a Saviour from death

Acceptance of this Promise

Clothed by God who covers our sinfulness.

 

v. 22 "us"

            The word us in this passage indicates the Trinity of the Godhead of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is a whole can of worms which I cannot claim to know enough about to try to explain. 

            The trinity is first spoken of in Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God”.  The word for God – Elohim – is the plural form of the word God.  It is also mentioned in Genesis 1:26.

 

4

 

v. 15 “the mark on Cain”

            The Hebrew word for Cain’s “mark” is oth and this is better translated as sign.  This could mean that there was no outward distinguishing mark placed on Cain.

            This is purely speculation but this “mark” might also be used in the times of Revelation (7:3).  There are those who God seals and they bear His name, also those who carry the mark of the beast!

 

v. 17 “where did Cain get his wife?”

            This is a common question which is answered in Genesis 5:4.  Because of the longevity of humans families became very large very quickly and the population exploded. 

             

 

vs. 23-24 “Lamech’s song?”

            Lamech was the 7^th Generation of mankind from Cain’s side. Lamech here boasts (note that it was to his wives) that if God can promise a vengeance sevenfold on anyone killing Cain then he could promise seventy sevenfold punishment on anyone who even injures him.  Note the contrast to Jesus’ command in Matthew 18:22.

           

5

 

v. 24 “Enoch taken”

            No explanation is given as to how God took Enoch except that he was taken because of his faith and that he pleased God (Hebrews 11:5).  All previous Generations – incidentally Enoch was the 7^th – are specifically recorded as dying. 

            Genesis chapter 5 is about death until you come to Enoch, the exception who should not see death.        The sons of Cain endeavour to improve a cursed world, but Enoch not only found a better one, but also lived it. Life and walk were one and the same thing with Enoch.  He did not live as the rest and he did not die as them either.

It has been said that from the sacrifice of Abel to the transfiguration of Enoch is a type of the church age from the cross until the 2^nd coming of Christ.

            It has been suggested that his taking was for a future purpose namely as one of the two a witnesses in Revelation 11:7-12.  Because these witnesses die and are raised on the third day it is thought that Enoch and Elijah will be those witnesses as according to Hebrews 9:27 man is destined to die once and these two are the only recorded men never to die.

            There is another popular belief that the two witnesses will be Moses and Elijah due to their appearance with Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration.  Malachi 4:5-6 and Matthew 17:11 confirm that Elijah, at least will one day return before the Lord’s final coming.

           

v. 27 “Methuselah”

            Although this is not so apparent today, people’s names in Genesis often carried specific significance. An example of this is found in Genesis. 3:20 where Eve is named “living” because she would become the mother of all the living. Now Methuselah is thought to mean, “When he dies, it shall be sent”.  On observation of the time scale in Genesis he was alive in the year of the Flood (Genesis 6-8). He either died in the Flood or died before it so that his death would be a sign to the people to signify that now the judgement would come.

 

6

 

v. 2 “the Sons of God and the daughters of men”

            There are two distinct opinions as to who the Sons of God (bene elohim in Hebrew) actually are.  The first opinion is that they are the line of Seth. There are two obvious divisions and lines from Adam, that of Cain whose entire family went away from God and that of Seth who started to call upon the Lord. Thus the sons of Seth can also be called sons of God as they followed after Him.

            The other opinion is that they were the fallen angels.  Bene elohim is mentioned only three other times in the Bible (Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7) where the meaning applies to angels.  It is thought, therefore, that this passage refers to fallen angels as they were opposing God’s will.

            Can, therefore, angels have sexual relations with humans?  Who can say but it is known that Abraham ate with them (Genesis 18:8) and those at Sodom saw them sexually appealing (Genesis 19:5). 

            If this passage is supposed to mean that the sons of Seth married the daughters of Cain then why did the author not simply say so?  This book has been written in a factual nature and so why would the author change his style?  

            Does our definition of a giant differ from the giants mentioned in this passage? 

            However it is important not to forget the lesson here that mixing the things of God and the things of this world result in corruption. We are called the sons of God (1 John 3:1-3).

 

v. 4 “the Nephilim”

            The word Nephilim stems from the Hebrew naphal meaning, “to fall” and its probable meaning is “those who have fallen”.  The name also became to be known as giants and the same word is used in Numbers 13:33 when the Israelites described the giants that they saw in Canaan.  If the Sons of God were fallen angels, it would help to explain why this offspring were so unusual. 

            If the same word is used in Numbers 13 then surely they are but men, fallen men, for they were literal giants in size and so on. The fallen angels are held in judgement in Jude and 1 Peter 3 though no one can explain that sufficiently either.

 

7         

 

v. 11 “the Flood”

            This eruption of equilibrium was something never seen on the earth.  Note that the waters sprang forth “on that day”.  Because of this complete disruption of water, huge amounts of earth would have been displaced to later resettle.  This immediate “dumping” of earth on life itself is what creationists believe caused the numerous fossils that can be found today.

The French have a good translation meaning to sweep the earth clean, which is similar to an expression we often use in “making a clean sweep if it.”  The earth was purged, cleansed by water – interesting that!

It has also been suggested that Enoch was a type of the rapture being taken before judgement and Noah was a type of Israel being taken through it. 

The water above the earth fell causing a dramatic increase in UV rays hitting the earth and consequently causing a decrease in a human’s life span (Genesis 11:10-32).

            The example of the Flood demonstrates our own salvation.  This was a deluge, a burial, as they passed from the old life into a new, just as we do through baptism (1 Peter 3:21).

 

8

 

v. 11 “the olive tree”

            There were two purposes to the olive tree.  Firstly, it signified peace between God and His creation and more practically, it grows at low elevations thus indicating that the water had nearly receded. 

            Where had the raven gone and why? The dove was a clean bird, but raven did not return. The raven is a scavenger and a type of the old rotten flesh.  That is what it probably did feeding on scraps of debris since it did not come back

           

9

 

vs. 18-28 “similarities”

            It is interesting to note the similarities of this passage and that in Genesis 3:15-19.  In both

-    there is the commandment to fill the earth

-         sinned by eating fruit

-         each became naked and was covered by someone else

-    each knew shame as a result of their nakedness

 

10

 

v. 5 “chronological order”

            This verse suggests that in actual fact chapter 10 of Genesis was written after the mixing of languages in chapter 11.

Who was Nimrod? He is said to be the builder of the great Babylonian Empire, and of Nineveh, Some say he was the originator of the tower of Babel. No good thing is said of him anyway.

 

11

 

v.6 “impossibility”

            Sometimes although God often allows humans the maximum amount of leniency, His divine plan for the world becomes so endangered that He must intervene.  Such examples of this are the fall of man and the Flood.  But here, yet again, man defiles God’s command to spread throughout the earth. 

            Now the NIV states that “nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them”.  This statement, in my opinion anyway, would suggest that humans could accomplish anything they set their mind to do which would actually contradict the Bible itself.  However, the KJV has another version to the text, which states that “nothing will be restrained from them…”. 

            There has to be a restraint on the wickedness of man. It's a bit like a form of speech as God coming down to see them, does that mean He couldn't see them from where He was? Of course not! It's making a point again. God interests Himself in man and calls a halt to the wickedness that prevails and takes over. We thankfully have the Holy Spirit as a restraining force in our lives and the world today. Once again the point here is deliberate disobedience.  It is said that when His people are taken (in the rapture) then wickedness will be unleashed as never before – there will be no retraining force to prevent it! This results in unprecedented evil on the earth. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12)

Man’s provision for himself was Babel, yet God’s provision for man was Abraham.

Man is ever self-seeking, self-exalting and endeavouring to make a name for himself. God however will only let him go so far – us also.  God will not give His glory to another.

Some of those towers (ziggurats) were 300 feet tall and wide! We too build monuments to ourselves and they take the place of God in our lives!

 

13

 

v. 10 “like the garden of the Lord”

            How did Lot know that this land was like the garden of the Lord? The garden of the Lord = the land of Egypt.  Abraham had taken his family down there during the famine.  The Nile is well known for its fertile valley, and this is referred to as the garden of the Lord, not the Garden of Eden that was obviously obliterated after the flood.

We walk by faith and not by sight. (2 Corinthians. 5:7) How often we go by outward appearances. Note it was his choice, one would have thought the younger would be guided by the older, or allow him to choose first. We see some selfishness and greed, what we certainly do not see is Lot asking God for guidance and direction in it.

 

14

 

vs. 18-21 “Melchizedek”

Melchizedek was indeed an interesting character.  His identity has been a constant discussion though the ages.  He was referred to both by David (Psalm 110:4) and the author of the Hebrews (Hebrews 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:1-21).  His name is translated as “king of righteousness” and “king of peace”.  This is an astonishing name considering that he was a Gentile – Jewish kings could not come from a priestly tribe and yet Melchizedek was both – and was a man of God in a sinful and corrupt land.  Salem is Jerusalem, not known as a city of peace.  The fact that Abram gave him a tenth of everything suggests that he recognised Melchizedek as his spiritual superior (Hebrews 7:7). 

            Melchizedek’s praise of God includes the name El Eyon translated “God Most High” which emphasises God’s superiority over all the other gods worshipped in Canaan. 

            So how did Melchizedek come to lead a city in Canaan inhabited by idolatrous worshippers?  And why, if Melchizedek was already in place, was he not used to create God’s nation?  And how did he come to be viewed as a priest?

            There have been many theories as to who Melchizedek really was.  Some theologians believe that Melchizedek was an ordinary man used as a type of Christ.  Others have suggested an angel.  Some believe that he was Shem and assuming there are no time gaps this is theoretically possible. And finally, others believe that Melchizedek  was not just a type of Christ, but Christ Himself.  Hebrews 7:3 is an argument behind this theory as it states that Melchizedek without father, mother, genealogy, beginning of day or end of life.  An obvious argument is that also in Hebrews 7:3 is states that Melchizedek is like the Son of God”, but a similar occasion can be seen in Daniel 3:25 at the fiery furnace. 

            If this were a clear-cut case then there wouldn’t be the discussion.  What must remain in focus, however, was his example of complete homage to the one true God.  Whether Melchizedek was a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ, or a type of him, whether his name merely was as Pharaoh (representing the Kings of Jerusalem as he did Egypt) is not the point. It detracts from the relationship and reverence Abraham bestowed him.

           

15

 

v. 17 “the smoking fire pot and the blazing torch”

            The smoking fire pot and the blazing torch, which represented God, passed through the sacrifice.  Normally in an agreement both sides must pass through the sacrifice, but in this case God put Abram to sleep so that only He would pass through.  This ensured that only God was required to uphold His agreement ensuring the eternity of the promise.            

            The smoking fire pot represents periods in their history when they (the Israelites) were brought through trial. To name but a few you have Egypt, Canaan, Captivity, and Dispersion. (Deut. 4:20, 1 Kings 8:51, Isaiah 48:10)

            The blazing torch represents when Jehovah graciously appears for their help, relief, and deliverance (as from the power of kings, judges, and captivity).  Also note that light denotes deliverance from the furnace and God’s Word is a lamp.

There is some conflict here as come claim that this was not a sacrifice, but a ceremony whereby men pledged their promise to an agreement,

There are two mainstream thoughts here, not too very different in idea.  The first is that the Israelites inheritance much be reached through the furnace.  The darker the smoke of the furnace, the brighter and more cheering will be the lamp of God’s salvation.  We endure the furnace before we enjoy the lamp so that we are tried and found faithful.  The second is that the affliction of his seed in Egypt before comfort in that affliction.  In context of verses 18 – 21 the second seems the most likely, though the first is a  principle that applies to Israel and us today also. God was going to take them through the fire down in Egypt, but then He was going to bring them forth in a glorious manner.

 

19

 

vs. 1+2 “ the city gate”

            For Lot to sit at the city gate suggests that he was prominent within the city (Ruth 4).  Note the Lot first chose to “pitch his tents near Sodom” (Genesis 13:12), followed by dwelling in Sodom (Genesis 14:12) and to finally sitting at the city gates (Genesis 19:1).

            But what is also worth noting is that the angels must have appeared visibly prominent because when he saw them he got up to meet them and bowed before them calling them lords.

 

v. 8 “depravity of the city”    

            The fact that Lot had kept his daughters from being defiled in what was obviously a depraved city indicates that Lot was not without integrity.  Whether Lot knew who the angels were or not, their obvious importance to him is shown by his willingness to give away his daughters even though it could be argued that angels did not want to accept his hospitality in the first place (v. 2).  Note as well that it doesn’t mention whether these were his only daughters.

 

v. 11 “blindness”

            This type of blindness is only mentioned in this passage and in 2 Kings 6:18 when Elisha was saved by the sudden blindness of the Syrian army. 

            Now although immediate blindness would cause confusion, if you were facing a door Generally walking forward would lead you to it.  In 2 Kings 6:18-20, Elisha was able to guide the Syrian army to Samaria.  This blindness, therefore, could be more one of disorientation and confusion as opposed to complete blackness. 

 

vs. 17-21; 30 “going against God”

                Something worth noting is that although God wanted Lot in the mountains, Lot chose otherwise.  In the end, however, he did end up in the mountains.  It begs the question as to whether he would have suffered vs. 30-38 by following God’s plan in the first place.  It is foolish to think of a city of our choosing is better that a mountain of God’s appointing. Instead of fleeing to God and His salvation he seeks his own refuge.

 

v. 26 “the pillar of salt”        

            There are many theories as to how Lot’s wife became a pillar of salt.  Whether she was buried by slat deposits unearthed in the explosions or it was simply an unnatural act of God, it is important to realize that Lot’s wife is a warning to us all about hanging on to the old way of life (Luke 9:62; 17:32).  The pillar was probably a memorial for quite some time and gave a warning to others who turn back.  (They often had memorials then as in Joshua 4 (crossing the Jordan), 7:26, 22:28, Mizpah, and Ebenezer (1 Sam.7:12).

           There are some important lessons to be learnt from this whole episode.  Firstly, Lot’s sons-in-law thought he was joking.  Many in this day and age will do the same to us in their unbelief. 

Secondly, many people feel that they should remain in a particular place or situation because they want to change it.  Did Lot have any influence at all on Sodom? The influence of the world is great and we are called to come out from among them and to be separate. In 2 Peter 2:7-8 it states that he was tormented, but he didn’t have to be.  This does not mean that we should remain distant from the world, but we should love what the world has to offer (I John 2:15-17).

Thirdly, prayer does work.  Abraham prayed for his family, and God graciously spared those who would be saved (James 5:16).

 

20

 

v.2 “little white lies”

            Once again Abraham tells his half-lie even after his previous experiences of God’s faithfulness to protect him.  But before judging him too harshly bear in mind that we also do the same thing in our own lives.  Abraham did seem to learn his lesson this time as we never read of anytime again when he questions God.

Why be interested in an old woman? Sarah was probably coming back into her former beauty as her body was preparing for pregnancy and the coming of an heir to the promises of God.

 

22

 

vs. 22-24 “family ties”

            The point of this little passage in the Bible?  Probably to indicate that Abraham had not lost contact with his family and show the origin of Rebekah, Isaac’s future wife.

 

23

 

vs. 16-17 “burial fields”

            This business transaction has caused some discrepancy within the Bible.  Abraham bought Ephron’s field and cave in Machpelah.  The following people were buried there; Sarah (Genesis 23:19), Abraham (Genesis 25:9), Isaac (Genesis 35:27), Leah and Rebekah (Genesis 49:31) and Jacob (Genesis 50:13).

The contradiction appears in Acts 7:16 where Stephen states that Abraham had bought the tomb from the sons of Hamor at Shecham.  In Genesis 33:19 Jacob actually buys a plot of land from the sons of Hamor at Shecham. 

A possible solution to this contradiction is that there were two different burial grounds; one bought by Abraham and the other by Jacob.  The site purchased by Jacob was where Joseph was finally laid to rest (Joshua 24:32).  Although never recorded and this is purely speculation it is possible that after Sarah’s death Abraham did buy some land in Shecham.  Remember that Abraham lived a further 38 years after Sarah’s death.  Then long after Abraham’s death Jacob returned to Shecham and re-purchased the same piece of land.

Although this is simply speculation, it is important to note that there was no rebuttal to Stephen’s story in Acts 7 by the high priest or the Sanhedrin  and so presumably the knew something that we don’t.  

 

24

 

vs. 2+9 “hand under thigh?”                       

            Although this does indeed sound strange and its meaning not quite clear what it does suggest is the seriousness of the promise.  The act was also used in Genesis 47:29 when Jacob made Joseph promise not to bury him in Egypt.  It was basically an oath that today would be considered as a handshake or the signing of a contract.

“Putting the hand under the thigh was the taking of an oath. This was their solemn way of signifying that if the oath was violated the children, yet unborn, would avenge the act of disloyalty. By means of the oath the servant would be bound more effectively to secure an acceptable wife for Isaac. Abraham assured him of God’s help.”

 

 

25                   

 

v. 32 “about to die”   

            Somehow the picture here is all too familiar.  At least for me it is.  The phrase “I’m starving” is all too familiar in my household and although Esau was probably not about to die (he got up and left in v. 34) his expression displayed his extreme hunger.  Incidentally, if Esau was a great hunter then why did he come home so hungry?

            Note the true thinking of the human mind: The present is everything, gratification of his flesh, live for the now, no interest in things of eternal value, despised the promises of God, A bowl of stew means more than a title to the inheritance of Canaan (Hebrews 12:16).

            There are a few lessons that can be learnt from both Jacob and Esau.  Jacob did not need to take matters into his own hands.  God, in His own appointed time and way, would have arranged it all. We like to make God’s will work for Him. (As Sarah & Abraham had done too)

            Esau also made some crucial mistakes.  Fleshly appetites that, in this day and age, can lead to serious repercussions guided him.  Esau also made a monumental decision while he was tired and hungry. 

 

27

 

vs. 1-2 “the role of Isaac”

Consider the role of Isaac in this matter.  According to him, he was about to die and yet he lived for many years after this, he was still very much alive after all those years Jacob passed in Haran. However his mother did not and never did see her son again - such is the cost of sin.

Isaac too had his eyes dim – not just physically either. He knew what God had promised, how dare he think to go against that? Esau was his best loved not because he was the firstborn, but because Isaac liked his cuisine. Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage, while Isaac gives away his blessing for a mess of venison!  Beware of the lust of food, the sensual appetites, and having favourites.

Isaac acted hastily and it cost him years of happiness as his younger son goes away with the blessing. Both Rebekah and Isaac lacked the faith to believe God and take Him at His Word. In either case there was no waiting upon God.

 

vs. 6-17 “the role of Rebekah”

            Although Rebekah must have taken quite a risk in taking matters into her own hands, the problem was that it was in her own hands and not in God’s.  Note that it wasn’t Jacob that went to Rebekah for help but vice versa.  Although the Bible never rebuke either Rebekah or Jacob for their actions, the result is seen in v. 41 as Jacob has to flee from his family and spend twenty years in exile. 

Many people might claim that God was being a hypocrite by choosing such a man to continue a nation?  However, we – as created beings – do not have the right to question God’s own judgement.  The apostle Paul in Romans 9 stated that we have no right to question God’s choices in light of how little we really know compared to God’s infinite wisdom.  Can we really claim to be better than Jacob? 

There is always a cost to sin. We do not need to work God’s will out for Him! We need to walk in obedience and trust Him for the rest.  “The more pressing the temptation to take us out of His hands, the richer the blessing for leaving ourselves in them.” Of course our supreme example is Christ.

 

28

 

v.9 “too little too late”

            Esau, when he saw that Jacob was now being openly blessed by Isaac, decided that perhaps if he married someone other than a Canaanite woman then he might also find favour in Isaac’s eyes.  However, although he did not marry a Canaanite, he chose to marry a descendant of Ishmael who had already been cast out by God.  It is a case of doing too little, far too late.

            We see his total lack of any spiritual insight. Why did he never consult his father in the first place? We make wrong choices, and then as any sin instead of confession we endeavour to work it out and make more bad choices. We end up deeper in trouble.

 

29

 

vs. 8+10 “uncommon strength”

            Here in v. 8 the shepherd boys tell Jacob that the stone is too heavy which is why they had to wait and move it together.  Yet Jacob, perhaps with some newfound adrenaline upon seeing Rachel, removes the stone by himself.

 

v. 25 “irony”

            It was the custom in those times to have a festive week following the wedding.  On the first night, after the wedding ceremony had been completed, the bride was presented to the husband.  It goes without saying that Leah must have been of similar stature to Rachel as, although the bride would be veiled, it would be pretty obvious if there were blatant differences.  The ironic thing here is that Jacob learnt his deceitfulness from Rebekah who was Laban’s sister.

            Blindness seems to be a family trait here.  Jacob the deceiver now commences to reap what he has sown.  Just as his father was blind, so too is he.

 

30

 

v. 16 “mandrakes?”

            The mandrake is a small fruit that looks very similar to a berry.  Some say they are a sweet smelling flower, others call them love apples.  It was thought of in ancient times to act as an aphrodisiac and an inducer of fertility.  The possibility of the mandrake promoting fertility is probably why Rachel was willing to strike this “bargain” with Leah as Rachel still hadn’t produced offspring.  All said and done it is God who gives life and He who takes it. (vs. 22-24)

 

v. 30 “the gods”

                Something that begs to be asked is why Rachel took the gods in the first place and for what purpose?  There is no obvious answer to this question but it is thought that they might have represented something like a title deed for the family inheritance.  Whatever their purpose, foreign gods became a stumbling block to the Israelites for many generations to come.

 

vs. 37-42 “selective breeding”

            Did the branch peeling actually make a difference?  It’s obvious that Jacob knew what he was doing when he mated the animals, but in all honesty critics would claim this technique to have no effect.  Bear in mind, however, that this had been Jacob’s job for many years - he would have been over ninety years old by this time – and so perhaps it was not just a mere wives tale.

            Although not in the NIV, the King James Version uses the word “conceive” in v. 28.  The actual Hebrew word for this passage is yacham, which translated means “to be hot”.  The possibility therefore, is that the sticks were meant as a means not of causing the animals to produce dark colored skin but as a means of promoting reproduction. 

            Obviously, the fact that Jacob’s “techniques” worked wonders were not a result of his doing but of God’s which he later acknowledges in Genesis 31:7-9.

 

32

 

vs. 24-31 “wrestling with God”

            This passage has raised many different arguments over the centuries.  Was Jacob actually wrestling with God, an angel, or was it just a dream he experienced?  Now according to Jacob’s testimony (v. 30) Jacob believed it to be “the Angel” as he says, “I have seen God face to face”.  Hosea 12:3-5 also indicates the actual physicality of the contest.

            Although Jacob wrestled with God and won, it does not mean that God could not defeat Jacob.  Perhaps the wrenching of the socket was an indicator to Jacob that God was still God.  It also shows that God desires persistence in prayer and is more than willing to uphold them (Luke 18:7).

 

This is the story of how God wrestled with Jacob and his way to blessing:

-         God Corners His Man

-         Providential Event (Here he is trapped, in a position where he is left utterly alone.)

-         Providential Encounter (All night shows his arrogance and stubbornness!)

-         God Conquers His Man (Consecrated what He had Dedicated v. 25)

-      By questioning his confidence in the flesh  (Philippians 3)                                 

-         By causing repentance (Hosea 12:4 and Revelations 2 & 3)

-         By claiming his reliance and dependence upon God (v. 26, Galatians 2:20)

-         God Crowns His Man                                                                         

-         God Crowns His Man

-         Given a new name (27-28)                                                      

-         Given new power (v. 28 and Acts 1:8)                                                 

-         Given a new vision (v. 30)

 

35

 

v. 18 “why did Jacob change his name?”

            Rachel, when dying, named her son Ben-Omi, which translated, means son of my trouble.  The fact that Jacob’s son would go throughout his life bearing a name that reminded him of how he came into the world was what probably caused Jacob to change it to Benjamin which means son of my right hand.  This parcel of land, incidentally, later became the title of the inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin.

 

v. 22 “the purpose of this verse?”

            This verse seems to be completely unrelated to events surrounding it and yet it plays a key part in Reuben’s life.  Although no punishment is indicated here, Jacob never forgot and his sin later cost Reuben his birthright (Genesis 49:3-4).

            Recorded here as this is the first complete list of the 12 tribes of Israel is which Reuben is the first born and as such entitled to a double portion of the inheritance, the position of family leadership and the blessings and promises of God.  However all this is to be forfeited and given to another.  God always looks at the heart.  Other examples are of course Abel and then Seth, David and his son Solomon just to name a few.  The first-born is not necessarily God’s choice, as Jacob knew only too well.

 

36

 

vs. 2-3 “contradiction in wives”

            According to Genesis 26:34 and Genesis 28:9 Esau married;

-         Judith, daughter of Beeri

-         Bashemath, daughter of Elon

-         Mahalath, daughter of Ishmael

And yet according to these passages Esau married;

-         Aholibamah, daughter of Anah

-         Adah, daughter of Elon

-         Basemath, daughter of Ishmael

There are a couple of possible solutions to this possible contradiction.  Firstly, it was common for people to have two names.  It is also possible that at the time of marriage the women were given new names.  Bear in mind also that although given by God, Abraham, Sarah and Jacob all had their names changed in their lifetime. It is important not to get sidetracked here from the fact that Esau married three foreign wives completely contrary to the will of God.

 

v. 24 “mules or hot springs?”

            There is some discrepancy here as the KJV claims that Anah discovered mules in the desert and yet in the NIV she discovers hot springs.  The Hebrew word yēmim only occurs once in the Bible and has not been seen in any other writing so its meaning remains a mystery.  The discovery was of some note to the author, however, as he suspends his genealogy in order to note this fact.

           

37

 

vs. 21-22 “the role of Reuben”

            This action to save his brother was remembered many years later by Joseph when instead of imprisoning the eldest who was Reuben) he imprisoned Simeon (Genesis 42:22-24).

 

vs. 25 + 28 “Ishmaelites or Midianites?”

            This is not a contradiction as it may at first seem as both Midian and Ishmael were both sons of Abraham (Genesis 16:15; 25:2).  Their names have often been used interchangeably throughout the Bible.  Compare Judges 8:24 + 26 as an example.  It is also very possible that both groups were in the travelling party.

 

38

 

vs. 1-26 “the stepping stones of sin”

            Here is one strange story indeed.  Listed here are the mistakes of Judah resulting in his own undoing.

 

-         Judah moves away and marries a Canaanite (v.2).

-         He decides that it’s best if he chooses a wife for his son without consulting God (v. 6).

-         In v. 8 he does follow the law in that it became the job of the brother next in line to provide offspring for the deceased (Numbers 25:5-10).

-         But when Onan dies (v. 10) he does not let Shelah take the responsibility for fear of his life (v. 11).  Incidentally, Shelah must have married at some point as in Numbers 26:20 Shelah is recorded as being the father of the Shelanite clan.

-         He eventually sleeps with Tamar causing her to become pregnant thinking that she is a prostitute (vs. 15 – 18).

-         Judah realizes the reason for her deception in that she wanted an heir as opposed to his own physical lusts (v. 26).

 

The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life are all represented in this passage.  It is easy to see the speck in someone else’s eye, but not the plank in our own.   Although many people believe that they can live in a depraved land completely unaffected by the traditions, beliefs and actions of those around, slowly but surely these things will work away at our lives trying to trip us up.  Consider Lot as another example of this.

 

41

 

v. 56 “famine in Egypt”

It is interesting to note that this famine occurred throughout the area including Egypt.  And yet it is also well known that the Nile runs through the country making it one of the most fertile places in the world.  Practically speaking, the Nile probably ran low at its source causing a drought, but more providently it was the hand of God that actually caused the famine as the dream predicted

God allowed the famine, but it is nothing to Him to withhold water as He did in the time of Elijah for three and a half years (I Kings 17:1). Indeed famine has always been one of the judgements of God to turn people to Himself. In those days there was no relief or aid such as today. Consider the devastation today  and think of how much more so in those times. It would have ruined the country.

 

42

 

v. 21 “confession”

This is the only place in Genesis where there is an open confession of sin.  The blame of their misfortune is placed upon themselves rather than the governor for placing them in custody.

Imagine what it must have been like for those who had felt guilty about their actions.  They had to live with the fact that they had sold their brother into slavery for year.  We all have a conscience (Romans 2) and it will not go away.  There is a reaping to what we have sowed, we are all aware of that in some way, and now they knew it had caught up with them.  They could have, of course, hardened their hearts completely towards God and the things of the Lord as Pharaoh did in Exodus 7:13, but here we see this was not the case.  Indeed their hearts must have been tender still and open to the working of God so that they were able to confess their sin and thus find mercy and a complete pardon (Proverbs 28:13). God’s grace cannot be displayed unless there is first a confession of sin. 

 

43

 

v. 34 “why did Benjamin receive so much food?”

            The obvious thought here is that both Benjamin and Joseph both had the same mother, but it might actually go deeper than this.  Because Jacob spoiled Joseph when he was younger, the older brothers became resentful and got rid of him.  The reason for giving Benjamin so much was probably to determine whether the brothers held the same resentment toward Benjamin. 

           

45

 

v. 3 “Jacob”

            If Judah had already told Joseph about his father in chapter 44 then why did Joseph ask them if he was still living?  What the question is trying to convey is the more specific details of a son rather than that of a standoffish official. 

           

v. 24 “don’t quarrel on the way”

            This comment seems to make no sense until it is put in the context of both the Hebrew and the scene.  Remember that the brothers had just discovered the identity of Joseph and were probably very frightened of what revenge he could do to them.  The Hebrew for this is ragaz, which translated means “fall out” or “be troubled”.  What Joseph was trying to tell them is that they shouldn’t doubt or fear him after they had left him.

            Another interesting point here is what Joseph omits.  In this day and age time is of the essence and I’m sure that we would try and rush things along to ensure that we saw our father before he died.  There is no mention of haste in their endeavour, however, as Joseph knew that since God had kept his father alive this long He would indeed bring him down to Egypt where he would yet see him again

 

vs. 25-28 “Jacob and Israel”

            Note that in verses 25, 26 and 27 the author calls Jacob by his old name whereas in verse 28 he is called Israel thus helping to demonstrate the effect this news had on him.

            Jacob always stands for that old nature he had; that which tricks, deceives, does not tell the truth or rejoice in it.  Israel is often called Jacob thereafter in the Old Testament, and it is always in relation to their nature at that particular time.  The tribulation to come is called the Day of Jacob’s Trouble (Jeremiah 30:7).

            Israel, however, means a Prince with God and denotes their new nature, that transformation that came with submission to Him.  This again is used of them in the Old Testament where relevant.  They are God’s very particular and chosen people.