1 THEN again Abraham took a wife, [ Again, chronology, in section 132 it says, "Abraham married his wives and concubines." Plural. Here she is called a wife. Abraham, knows that he was yet to have more offspring, so now he will marry a woman named Keturah, who according to an early Christian sources suggests that she was the daughter of a powerful desert monarch.(See Budge, Cave of Treasures, 154. ] and her name was Keturah. [ Rabbinic sources are divided over whether Keturah was Hagar, with one tradition insisting that Keturah was not Hagar, so that Abraham in his life married three women. See, for example, Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 3:225-27; Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 5:264- 65; and Harris, Hebraic Literature, 241. That Keturah was not Hagar seems certain from a latter-day revelation stating that "Abraham received concubines [note the plural, and they bore him children." Doctrine and Covenants 132:37. Rabbinic sources assert that Keturah was descended from Noah's son Japeth, and that Abraham, who would father children by Keturah, would thus have descendants among all three branches of Noah's posterity, because Sarah was descended from Shem, and Hagar from Ham. With Keturah, Abraham fathered six sons (verses 2-4). Muslim tradition insists that Abraham also took a fourth wife, a tradition that seems to be substantiated by the Lord's statement in latter-day revelation that Abraham received "concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness" (D&C 132:37). Keturah would not be a concubine, or a secondary wife because Sarah was no longer alive. So the only way Abraham would end up with more than one concubine is if he married yet a fourth wife while Keturah, the primary wife, was still alive. From his fourth wife, according to Islamic tradition, Abraham fathered five additional sons.(See Brinner, History of al-Tabari, 129; and Brinner, Lives of the Prophets, (al-Thalabi) 164) Both Jewish (Sanhedrin 57b, in Epstein, Babylonian Talmud) and Islamic(Al-Rabghuzi, Stories of the Prophets, 2:92) tradition mention that Abraham also had at least one daughter. Little is said of her except that "Abraham loved her dearly, and taught her all that he had learned, and she was the center of Abraham's household." Later after his passing, she is said to have carried his teachings far and wide. (Schwartz, Tree of Souls, 345, citing various Talumdic and midrashic passages) ]

2 And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, [ Side note: Moses was ordained to the priesthood by his father-in-law Jethro, who was a priest of Midian (Ex 2:21). Why is Jethro so important to Moses? Not just because he's got a daughter, Zippora, that Moses marries. But what does Jethro do for Moses? Moses received the priesthood from Jethro (D&C 84:6) We could suppose Midian was ordained to the priesthood by his father Abraham which then was bestowed upon Jethro. What priesthood did Jethro ordain Moses too? The Melchizedek priesthood. So we can see that the priesthood was here because they too were covenanted son's of Abraham. It's not just Isaac. I think there's more happening here. And this covenant, they're blessed. Those other sons, he sends them off, but he gives them gifts for six. The sons of the concubines which Abraham had, he gave them gifts and sent them off. What I understand about this, like sons of concubines, the law didn't require that, but he gets them something to really make a good life for them and then sends them off so that they make their own clans. But they've taken priesthood. Could I even suggest that? And knowledge of the covenant and knowledge of God and their worship. However we will see in verse 5 that it is Isaac that receives the birthright blessings. ] and Ishbak, and Shuah. [ So Abraham has 6 sons - we do not know how many daughters with his new wife. It would be reasonable to assume that Abraham would have given the Melchizedek Priesthood to each of them if they were worthy. ]

3 And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim.

4 And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epher, and Hanoch, and Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah. [ Suggested by bible scholars that this might still be Hagar. ]

5 ¶ And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac. [ Isaac has be willed the entire inheritance of Abraham including: His principal flocks, and especially his right to the land of Canaan, including a confirmation to him and his posterity of whatever was contained in the promises of God. Isaac is the one who's going to succeed him in leadership and with birthright, with the bulk. This is his estate, so to speak. ]

6 But unto the sons of the concubines, [ Abraham had other wives and they bore him children; these would have been second class wives. ] which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, [ Abraham's had great resourses from which to draw for he had accumulated much. As a result he gave each of his children gifts, flocks and land that they might start out on their own and raise their own families ] and sent them away from Isaac his son, [ Why would he send them away? I suppose that because the gifts which he gace were the lands at the outer edges of his property, and with everyone in the same business or at least in part it would only make sense that Abraham would send them with the flocks to graze away from the middle so that Isaac did not have flocks scattered all over the place but could remain in the center together. ] while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east country. [ Arabia Deserta, which was eastward of Beer-sheba, where Abraham lived. some scholars believe that Abraham set these other sons away so that he did not have to hear them complain about how he had given Issac all of the inheritance. Just a side note do you think that this has any effect on the hostility between the poeple that inhabit this portion of the world even to today? Jokshan - said to be the father of the Arabs. ]

7 And these are the days of the years of Abraham’s life which he lived, an hundred threescore and fifteen years. [ 175 years old. ]

8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. [ Was gathered to his people; reunited with his wife Sarah. Wow I love that as an expression of death. He was just moved to a different place. something that Abraham was quite aware of doing. This shows that the early patriarch's had a knowledge of life after this life, and this phrase denotes a reunion with those who have passed on before. The Hebrews call this place Sheol - which is the world where the spirits go when we die. The Hebrews had not only a concept of the Spirit world but a correct one as well. As they believe in a place that will hold our spirits until the resurrection. the Jewish Publication society renders this phrase “he was gathered to his kin” and their Torah Commentary on Genesis states:
This phrase, peculiar to the Torah, as of the corresponding figure “to lie down with one's fathers”, testifies to a belief that, despite his mortality and perishability, man possesses an immortal element that survives the loss of life. Death is looked upon as a transition to an afterlife where one is united with one's ancestors. This interpretation contradicts the widespread, but apparently erroneous, view that such a notion is unknown in Israel until later times. Abraham was resurrected at the time of the Savior's resurrection D&C 133:55 ]

9 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah, [ This is where Sarah his wife had been buried some 48 years ago. Note that is is both of his son's who are there to bury him. I think that this gives us some idea that Abraham never lost site of Ishmael , and I suppose Hagar as well. They were in contact and they're here together. I'm going to stand up as Ishmael, as a covenant son. He's not the leader of the covenant, but I'll get there. He was circumcised. They went back and lived there with Abraham. Part of my reasoning, is found in verse one. ] in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre;

10 The field which Abraham purchased of the sons of Heth: there was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife.

11 ¶ And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed his son Isaac; and Isaac dwelt by the well Lahai-roi. [ Located in southern Israel some fifty plus miles south of Jerusalem. ]

12 ¶ Now these are the generations [ The descendants; some daughters because Esau will marry one of Ismael's daughters Gen 28:9 and 12 sons in total who will become the Arab nations that we know today. ] of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s handmaid, bare unto Abraham:

13 And these are the names of the sons of Ishmael, by their names, according to their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael, Nebajoth; and Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam,

14 And Mishma, and Dumah, and Massa,

15 Hadar, and Tema, [ Supposed to be a place in Arabia Deserta, the same of which Job speaks, Job vi. 19. ] Jetur, [ From whom came the Itureans, who occupied a small tract of country beyond Jordan, which was afterwards possessed by the half-tribe of Manasseh. ] Naphish, and Kedemah:

16 These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, by their towns, and by their castles; twelve princes [ Leaders of tribes or nations. ] according to their nations.

17 And these are the years of the life of Ishmael, an hundred and thirty and seven years: [ Ishmael lived to be 137 ] and he gave up the ghost and died; and was gathered unto his people.

18 And they dwelt from Havilah unto Shur, that is before Egypt, as thou goest toward Assyria: and he died in the presence of all his brethren.

19 ¶ And these are the generations of Isaac, [or this is the history of Isaac] Abraham’s son: Abraham begat Isaac: [ The genealogy of Abraham is mentioned and this will be the last time that and of Abraham's posterity is mentioned with the exception of Isaac. It serves as a point at which the rest of Abrahams seed is ignored and all further mention of lineage will be through Isaac to whom the covenant blessings flow.]

20 And Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padan-aram, the sister to Laban the Syrian.

21 And Isaac intreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: [ Isaac fervently prayed to the Lord. Isaac and Rebekah had now lived nineteen years together without having a child; for he was forty years old when he married Rebekah, ver. 20, and he was threescore years of age when Jacob and Esau were born, ver. 26. Hence it is evident they had lived nineteen years together without having a child. I think that we can assume that Rebekah has been praying for children, pleading with God. That might be a source of a little contention in the home as well as they try with no results. So here we have Isaac go to the Lord and plead with him as well. The first syllable of "testimony" is test and the first symbol of "question" is quest. ] and the LORD was intreated of him, [ The Lord answered his prayers. ] and Rebekah his wife conceived.

22 And the children struggled together within her; [ Children - or twins; JST ("within her womb") they dashed against or bruised each other, there was a violent agitation, so that the mother was apprehensive both of her own and her children's safety; and, supposing this was an uncommon case, she went to inquire of the Lord, as the good women in the present day would go to consult a surgeon or physician; for intercourse with God is not so common now, as it was in those times of great primitive simplicity. There are different opinions concerning the manner in which Rebekah inquired of the Lord. some think it was by faith and prayer simply; others, that she went to Shem or Melchizedek; but Shem is supposed to have been dead ten years before this time; but as Abraham was yet alive, she might have gone to him, and consulted the Lord through his means. It is most likely that a prophet or priest was applied to on this occasion. It appears she was in considerable perplexity, hence that imperfect speech, If so, why am I thus? the simple meaning of which is probably this; if I must suffer such things, why did I ever wish to have a child? A speech not uncommon to mothers in their first pregnancy. Adam Clarke. ] and she said, If it be so, [ JST "If I am with child". ] why am I thus? [ What is going on inside of me. ] And she went to enquire of the LORD. [ From Elder McConkie: Now note it well. She did not say, Isaac, will you inquire of the Lord. You are the patriarch; you are the head of the house, which he was. She went to inquire of the Lord, and she gained the answer. ]

23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, [ She knows the Lord, she hears his voice for herself. You are going to have twins ] and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; [ Each of your twins has a different personality they clash with each other; and likewise so will their descendants. ] and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; [ The descendants of one child will be stronger than those of another - Jacob proved to be stronger in relation to living and keeping gospel principles. ] and the elder shall serve the younger. [ Or the younger will have the birthright blessings. It is the Lord telling her this, and he is telling her before they are born. She see's she know's their individual destinies. Do you think that Rebekah understood what this poem meant until later? If so, how would she have? If not, why was she given this answer when she asked? Since the Lord could control birth order, why do you suppose he arranged things in this way, a way contrary to what would be expected? Or in other words if the Lord wanted it this way way did he not just have them come out in different order to begin with? Is the Lord trying to teach the principle here as well in other scripture that while the birth order is important - it is righteousness that really counts. This knowledge will come into play later on in chapter 27. According to Josephus, it was Isaac rather than Rebekah who enquired and received the answer that the elder would serve the younger (F. Josephus, The Antiquities (New), 1:18:1). According to BYU professor Catherine Thomas, “This divine announcement prophesied that Jacob, even though second born, should have the birthright and the attached patriarchal blessing. The Lord’s description of these two nations reflects choices made by these people in the premortal world as well as the choices they would yet make in mortality.” C. Thomas, Jacob Rightly Received. By prefacing the story of Jacob with this prophecy, the scripture reader is informed that Jacob’s blessings eventually would be realized through divine intervention, not through “the improper means [Jacob] later employed to obtain his rights.” We will see in the story that transpires that Jacob will not wait upon the Lord for his promised blessings and will become impatient and attempt to secure the blessings through improper means. 1. his attempt to buy of the birthright from Esau for a “mess of pottage”;   2. his conspiring with Rebekah to trick Isaac into giving him Esau’s blessing; 3. his effort to possess as many as possible of the flocks of his wily father-in-law Laban (though in this latter instance, it was eventually revealed that he was helped by the Lord). In each case — by way of contrast to Abraham  and Eliezer — Jacob does not ask in faith  and wait patiently for the Lord to bring about promised blessings “in his own time, and in his own way, and according to his own will,”  but tries to force God’s hand through his own anxious manipulations. ]

24 ¶ And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.

25 And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau. [ Means "hairy" later hes was given the name Edom which means "Red" – the nation that grew out from him were referred to as the Edomites. The Hebrew “esau” is a synonym of the Seir, which is a play on the Hebrew “se`ar” which translates to the English “hair”. ]

26 And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau’s heel; [ And the second son comes out grasping the first one’s heel so he is called “Jacob”- which means to defraud, deceive, to supplant, i.e., to overthrow a person by tripping up his heels. ] and his name was called Jacob: [ Means "supplanter" also the name is a play on the Hebrew “`aqeb” which translates to the English “heel”. By this, his original name Ya-akov-’el ( = May the god El protect) was supplanted by the nickname ‘Akev ( = “heel”), referring to the reputation he acquired as a “heel-holder.”] and Isaac was threescore years old [ 60 years old. So 40 years old when he was married, 60 years old when they had the children, there's 20 years there. ] when she bare them.

27 And the boys grew: and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; [ Hunter and farmer. Why or how did Esau get to become such a great hunter? Hugh Nibley summarizes “Jewish lore, [which tells of how] Nimrod had [the garment of the priesthood]; then Esau was jealous of Nimrod, who was another great hunter. He lay in ambush, slew Nimrod, took the garment from him(Book Of Jasher 7:), and… ran exhausted to Jacob… [This garment was the birthright which Jacob got from Esau.] That was the deal: he was willing to sell it in a financial sense. … somebody is always trying to steal the garment; somebody is always trying to fake it. …[A]lways there is the false version of the garment going around” (H. W. Nibley, Vestments, pp. 130-131). For more extensive discussion of this topic, see J. M. Bradshaw et al., God’s Image 2, pp. 309-311; J. M. Bradshaw, Ark and Tent, pp. 35-36. ] and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents. ["plain man," It's the same word used to describe Noah in Genesis 6:9. It's the very same word. It says Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations. And the same word here for 27, a plain man dwelling in tents. Perfect in all his generation. Perfect. Oh, see, you can see in this footnote it says Hebrew whole complete, perfect, plain simple. It's the same word. A herder – keeper of flocks. The Hebrew word used there means “whole, complete, or perfect, well rounded” so it is a very positive adjective. ]

28 And Isaac loved Esau, [ Or favored, preferred. ] because he did eat of his venison: [ Issac favored Esau because he was such a good hunter and provided such good meat & such good fruits from his fields. Probably had good stories from the hunts as well. So they really bonded we might say Isaac bonded differently with Esau than he did with Jacob. ] but Rebekah loved Jacob. [ Favored. Remember she knows in the back of her mind that Jacob is favored of the Lord as well. See verse 23. It is quite often that one parent will get. In the Old Testament, the matriarch’s priesthood responsibility was to prepare and present her children to her husband for the administration of the necessary ordinances of salvation and exaltation. This is readily seen in the story of Rebekah and Isaac, and their sons Jacob and Esau. The time had come for Isaac to bestow the birthright blessing to his son, the son who would be the next Patriarch. The record explains that Rebekah told Jacob exactly what to do. ]

29 ¶ And Jacob sod pottage: [ "Beans, lentiles, kidney beans, and garvancos, are the chiefest of their pulse kind; beans, when boiled and stewed with oil and garlic, are the principal food of persons of all distinctions; lentiles are dressed in the same manner with beans, dissolving easily into a mass, and making a pottage of a chocolate colour. This we find was the red pottage which Esau, from thence called Edom, exchanged for his birthright." ] and Esau came from the field, [ From hunting. If we look at the Book Of Jasher the story is a little different and makes a little more sense. (Jasher 27:10-12) In Jasher it says that Esau had just killed King Nimrod and two of his chief guards, he was running from them and trying to hide. He was exhausted from the battle with them and after he salyed king Nimrod and his two guards the rest of the guards were after him. So he come running home and being exhausted he trades the garment that he has taken from King Nimrod for pottage because he knows that the guards are going to catch up with him and when they do they will most likely kill him - so the garment is now of no value to him - he see's his life aas being over. ] and he was faint: [ How bad was he really? ]

30 And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, [ The Jewish Publication society (JPS) translation renders this “Give me some of that red stuff to gulp down, for I am famished”. The JPS Torah Commentary on Genesis states, “In rabbinic Hebrew the stem l-`-t is employed for the feeding of animals. Its use here, unique in the Bible, is suggestive of Esau's boorish manners.” The intent of the Hebrew is to show that Esau is not just a man of the wild, he is pretty much an animal himself. “red pottage”, the JPS renders it “red stuff” and the Torah Commentary on Genesis states: Hebrew ha-`adom ha-`adom. The repetition may indicate “deep red”. The description provides another etiology, this time explicit, for Esau being called Edom. At the same time `adom is close in sound to dam, “blood”. Word play involving “Edom” and dam occurs in several texts. Blood was considered to constitute the lifeessence and was widely believed to contain magical properties. It was a symbol of strength and vitality.
A suggestion that Esau though the “red stuff” to be blood broth is most plausible. His primitive instincts were aroused by the sight. He expected his vitality to 25.5 be renewed by drinking it.” Thus, Esau is expressing his willingness and desire to eat blood, something explicitly prohibited under the Noachide covenant, cf. 9:4. Jacob’s plan is to tempt Esau with what he will think is blood stew. This would be especially tempting on an occasion when Esau came back from an unsuccessful hunting expedition. ] I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: [ Sarna observes that the repetition of the word “red” may indicate “deep red.” He suggests that Esau may have expected blood rather than lentils as the main flavoring of the stew (N. M. Sarna, Genesis, Genesis 25:30): Blood was considered to constitute the life-essence and was widely believed to contain magical properties. It was a symbol of strength and vitality. A suggestion that Esau thought the “red stuff” to be a blood broth is most plausible. His primitive instincts were aroused by the sight. He expected his vitality to be renewed by drinking it. Why don't you just say soup? But potage has the same three consonant root as does red, as does Edom. It's yod, dolet, mem or Y D M and the Y sound is kind of that... Yeah, but it is kind of this play on word that is really very fun. Feed me I pray thee, some of that red potage. I think the reason potage is in italics is you almost didn't have to say that. That's what the translators added because it's almost the same word. It is red and it is this fixed stewish kind of potage with lentils. ]  therefore was his name called Edom. [ They named him red. But I think it is, it's kind of like red symbolizes Esau, but his descendants in the Old Testament are called the Edomites and you will lose that if you don't put this connection that these are the descendants of Esau. They're not the Esauhites. They're the Edomites because of that red associated with him. ]

31 And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. [ The Patriarchal Law of Inheritance in the Old Testament put forth that the first ‘righteous’ son would receive the birthright, becoming the Grand Patriarch with Melchizedek authority. The book of Genesis discusses both a firstborn son and a birthright son. In most cases, these should be the same son, but the birthright responsibility is to be passed to the first righteous son, as in the case of Jacob or Israel and his sons. Ruben was the firstborn son, but Joseph became the birthright son. Esau was the firstborn son of Isaac, but Jacob became the birthright son. Ishmael was the firstborn of Abraham, but Isaac became the birthright son. The firstborn son of Joseph (who was sold into Egypt) was Manasseh, but the birthright son was Ephraim. There is a birthright blessing that it seems families at this time all had and it typically went to the oldest son. The son that gets the birthright gets twice as much as any of the others. But the idea is there's a responsibility with it that if down the line... So the father dies and you've got a widowed mother. You take care of that mother as long as she lives and if you have sisters that something happens and they don't marry or something else... You are responsible for the entire clan. And you have that double portion specifically to help them. It's not for you, it's for them. A priesthood blessing is... What we've seen it's oftentimes combined with the birthright. some have argued, it doesn't have to be. Three things. The birthright blessing, a father's blessing and then the blessing that would say you are in charge of the covenant. You're succeeding in being the guardian of the Abrahamic covenant for your generation and the responsibility of being the leader of the covenant people, a spiritual assignment of leadership responsible for all families of the covenant. All that was given to Isaac. It's possible all three of those are going to be given to Jacob, but it's also possible it's three different things and birthright is a separate thing and Esau and Jacob are kind of fighting it out for it here.. One could suppose that Rebekah his mother had shared her revelation with him as to the fact that he was to have the birthright; and Jacob saw this as an opportunity to make that happen. There is much to the stroy that we do not know. It is generally supposed that the following rights were attached to the birthright:
1. Authority and superiority over the rest of the family.
2. A double portion of the paternal inheritance.
3. The peculiar benediction of the father.
4. The priesthood, previous to its establishment in the family of Aaron. Calmet controverts most of these rights, and with apparent reason, and seems to think that the double portion of the paternal inheritance was the only incontestable right which the first-born possessed; the others were such as were rather conceded to the first-born, than fixed by any law in the family. However this may be, it appears, 1. That the first-born were peculiarly consecrated to God, Exod. xxii. 29. 2. Were next in honour to their parents, chap. xlix. 3. 3. Had a double portion of their father's goods, Deut. xxi. 17. 4. Succeeded him in the government of the family or kingdom, 2 Chronicles xxi. 3. 5. Had the sole right of conducting the service of God, both at the tabernacle and temple; and hence the tribe of Levi, which was taken in lieu of the first-born, had the sole right of administration in the service of God, Num. viii. 14-18; and hence we may presume, had originally a right to the priesthood previous to the giving of the law; but however this might have been, afterwards the priesthood is never reckoned among the privileges of the first-born. That the birthright was a matter of very great importance, there can be no room to doubt; and that it was a transferable property, the transaction here sufficiently proves. privileges of the birthright so coveted by Jacob were purely spiritual. In primitive times, the head of the clan or the firstborn acted as the priest. Esau's general behavior hardly accorded with what was due from one who was to serve the Supreme God; and Jacob suspected that his brother did not value the dignity and privilege of being the firstborn as they should be valued. When, therefore, an opportunity suggested itself, Jacob determined to put his brother to the test. He knew full well that the withholding of the pottage would not have fatal consequences. He would, however, find out what Esau really thought of his birthright." ]

32 And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: [ How seriously should we take Esau’s statement that he is about to die? What kind of death could he be referring too? Spiritual? Is there anything in the story that will help us decide whether he is actually on the verge of death or whether he is just exaggerating because he is hungry? How about the fact that he is in camp and there is sufficient food everywhere. How does what we say in answer to this question affect what we take to be the meaning of the last half of this verse? the JPS renders this “I am at the point of death”. The JPS Torah Commentary on Genesis then states, “Literally, 'I am going to die'. This statement either refers to the generally perilous life he led as a hunter or is an exaggerated description of his present condition.” It is probably the former over the latter as if Jacob was in camp then Esau could have easily obtained food from anyone else there as well. My own speculation here - Could this also imply that since I am not keeping and doing as I know that I should - I am dead spiritually any way - and Esau was smart enough to know that the blessing were predicicated upon personal righteousness as well. so if he were dead spirituall and was not going to get the blessings why not give them away for they were really of no value. ] and What profit shall this birthright do to me? [ "I don't see the value in it." It's more responsibility than it is profit. So it's not really a trick here. It's Jacob saying, "Look, I want this. You obviously don't care about it." Can you think of any reasons why Esau might have thought that his birthright was of no value to him? If he was about to die spiritually, he was not living as he knew he should, then he full well knew that the blessings would not be his anyway. Elder Dallin H Oaks. October, 1985 general conference. He said the contrast between the spiritual and the temporal is also illustrated by the twins Esau and Jacob and their different attitudes toward their birthright. The firstborn Esau despised his birthright. Jacob, the second twin desired it. Jacob valued the spiritual while Esau sought the things of the world. When he was hungry, Esau sold his birthright for a mess of potage. Behold he explained, I'm at the point to die in what profit shall this birthright do to me? Many Esaus have given something of eternal value in order to satisfy a momentary hunger for the things of the world.

Jacob and Esau Object lesson --
Life is full of choices...if you knew them what you know now would you have made the decision any differently?
How do you feel because you did not wait?
Would you be willing to trade today?
Are you glade that you waited?
How do shortsighted decisions play in our everyday lives?
How do we emulate this object lesson in our daily lives?
What can we apply from this example?]

33 And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; [ Jacob responds with what is, in Hebrew, a three-word reply that we can represent as “swear to-me now.” Why is everything that Jacob says in this story so curt? There are traditional Jewish stories that say the birthright was represented by a holy garment of skins (the garment given to Adam, the garment Noah was not wearing when Ham mocked him). If we accept those stories, what might we infer about the transaction between Esau and Jacob? ] and he sware unto him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob.

34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; [ Either Jacob made use of an Egyptian lentils which are red or he added something to the stew to make it look red, because the typical middle eastern lentil is yellowish or light brown in color when cooked. Thus, Jacob was setting a trap for Esau knowing he liked to eat blood. Returning from an unsuccessful hunt would have his appetite whetted for such a dish. So it is quite probable Jacob set Esau up planning all along to get the birthright from him, rather than relying on some happenstance situation.] and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: [ Notice the terseness of “and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way.” The Hebrew is even more terse. We could translate it, “He ate, drank, got up, and went away.” What might Moses be trying to show us by writing in that way? Why does Esau, who has previously in the story been rather talkative, say nothing at all now? The rapid-fire description in verse 34 of Esau’s subsequent behavior (“he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way”) “nicely expresses the precipitous manner in which Esau gulps down his food and, as the verse concludes, casts away his birthright.” ] thus Esau despised his birthright. [ Notice that Moses inserts his own commentary into the story here - this is very rare for Moses to make a commentary. He moralizes that thus we can see Esau had contempt for his birthright. Esau was a wild man who spent more time hunting than tending to the things around camp, it is no surprise he doesn’t value a greater share of his father’s domestic life. What use does a hunter have for such sedentary things? However, Jacob was quite the opposite. He was in camp pretty much all of the time. For Jacob, obtaining the larger share of his father’s camp was essential for the camp’s long term well-being. Under Esau’s majority control his father’s camp would languish, but under Jacob’s control the camp would flourish (cf. ch. 30-31 where Jacob exhibits his skill at livestock). What revelation did Rebekah receive about her unborn twin sons?
vs 22-23
How did esau feel about his birthright?
While the accounts are not overly detailed as far as personalities are concerned, some safe deductions can be made. It is plain that Esau cared nothing for his birthright, as he gave it up for some stew (Genesis 25:34). It is not surprising Esau would give up the birthright so easily as he was a man of the field and the birthright entitled him to a double share of Isaac's possessions. But, of what use are tents, sheep and land to a hunter? Esau obviously failed to look beyond the physical benefits of obtaining the birthright.
How do our words and actions show how we feel about our birthrights?
What is the nature of the birthright?

1. The posessor of the birthright may deed the birthright over to another by legally binding oath. Genesis 27:36-40

2. The birthright and the father's blessing are independant.

3. The father can give one and only one son of his choosing a preeminent blessing.

4. The father can give blessings in addition to the one preeminen blessing at his discression.

5. Father's blessings are prophetic in nature. Genesis 21:9-13 (Gal. 4:30)

6. If the firstborn male is the son of a legally married bondwoman (concubine) he is eligable to be heir even if the bondwoman is not Hebrew.

7. If a married free woman produces male offspring, then her firstborn male will be considered the firstborn, regardless of birth order, over any bondwoman's male offspring.

8. A legally married bond woman's male offspring are considered legal offspring regardless of the presence of other male offspring. Numbers 27:8-11

9. In the absence of any male heir, the inheritance is to be divided among all legal female offspring.

10. In the absence of legal female offspring, the inheritance is to be divided among the nearest male family relations. Numbers 36:6-9

11. Female posession of inheritance is transferred to husband upon marriage.

12. Only unmarried female offspring are eligeable to receive a portion of their father's inheritance in the absence of a legal male heir. Dueteronomy 21:15-17

13. In the event of polygamy of free wives, birth order is maintained in determining which male is firstborn.

14. The birthright is the right of the possessor, the father canno displace the birthright.

15. The birthright entitles the posessor to a double portion of the father's physical posessions. 1 Chronicles 5:1-2

16. The posessor of the birthright may forfeit the birthright by committing adultery.

17. In the event of a forfeited birthright, the birthright goes to the next birth order firstborn son of a legally married free woman. Joshua 17:1-2a (Genesis 48:14-19)

18. The father's blessing of preeminance has no impact on the transfer of birthright.

BYU professor Arthur Henry King (1910-2000) noted that even though “Esau was obviously wrong,” it does not mean that Jacob is right. Jacob’s mother had no doubt already told him about God’s promise that he would receive the birthright, and his attempt to buy it from Esau was not merely unnecessary but also an offensive vote of no confidence in the Lord. Besides, although “the gift of God” may be sold, it cannot “be purchased,” as Nahum Sarna observed:  [I]t is highly significant that the text only mentions Esau’s sale of the birthright but does not state that Jacob bought it. This is contrary to the usual biblical legal style. … The omission in the present story is another way of dissociating Jacob’s eventual ascendancy from the means he adopted. ]