What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Alright, first off, FYI: I'm a pretty resourceful guy, and the only questions that tend to roll around in my head long enough for me to want to extrovertedly inquire are admittedly theoretical; i.e., where the Bible doesn't consider the what-ifs like I wish it did; or curiosities, the likes of which are never clearly explained—where we're left only to speculate.
That being said... It strikes me as peculiar that God covenanted with all of Jacob's children, but wasn't willing to do so in previous generations. Israel's significance extended to ALL his offspring; i.e., the families of Israel's children formed a single, cohesive nation under God. Why wasn't this so in previous generations?
Despite their initial enmity, if Ishmael & Isaac, or Jacob & Esau had had it in them to fully reconcile and unify as Jacob's children did...do you suppose God's earthly people may have—rather than the Israel we've come to know—instead been named after Abraham/Isaac, and been comprised of the entirety of their offspring?
Abraham desperately wanted Ishmael to be an heir alongside Isaac, but Sarah was against it (and God took her side). And prior to this—a year before Isaac's birth—God gave Abraham assurances that Ishmael would be blessed and become a great nation, but that it would be with Isaac alone He would establish His covenant with. Then God left off speaking, and never explained His reasoning...
And then there's the whole issue of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob...and Isaac was tricked into conferring the greater blessing onto Jacob. The Biblical narrative never really, itself, appraises the true efficacy/portent of these events in the ultimate will of God—it just states that they occurred.
Also—this is highly conjectural—but I kind of suspect there may have always remained a residual enmity/bitter rivalry between Ishmael & Isaac and Jacob & Esau, and that may have had an influence on why God felt like choosing a single line in each of their generations.
Or maybe, with few exceptions, Ishmaelites & Edomites just weren't generally cut out to be God's covenant people, and were thus excluded. I mean, God even nearly wiped out Israel and started all over with Moses after the golden calf incident. And if God had thus made a new Abraham out of Moses, who knows what would have become of his children, or what their nation would have been called.
That being said... It strikes me as peculiar that God covenanted with all of Jacob's children, but wasn't willing to do so in previous generations. Israel's significance extended to ALL his offspring; i.e., the families of Israel's children formed a single, cohesive nation under God. Why wasn't this so in previous generations?
Despite their initial enmity, if Ishmael & Isaac, or Jacob & Esau had had it in them to fully reconcile and unify as Jacob's children did...do you suppose God's earthly people may have—rather than the Israel we've come to know—instead been named after Abraham/Isaac, and been comprised of the entirety of their offspring?
Abraham desperately wanted Ishmael to be an heir alongside Isaac, but Sarah was against it (and God took her side). And prior to this—a year before Isaac's birth—God gave Abraham assurances that Ishmael would be blessed and become a great nation, but that it would be with Isaac alone He would establish His covenant with. Then God left off speaking, and never explained His reasoning...
And then there's the whole issue of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob...and Isaac was tricked into conferring the greater blessing onto Jacob. The Biblical narrative never really, itself, appraises the true efficacy/portent of these events in the ultimate will of God—it just states that they occurred.
Also—this is highly conjectural—but I kind of suspect there may have always remained a residual enmity/bitter rivalry between Ishmael & Isaac and Jacob & Esau, and that may have had an influence on why God felt like choosing a single line in each of their generations.
Or maybe, with few exceptions, Ishmaelites & Edomites just weren't generally cut out to be God's covenant people, and were thus excluded. I mean, God even nearly wiped out Israel and started all over with Moses after the golden calf incident. And if God had thus made a new Abraham out of Moses, who knows what would have become of his children, or what their nation would have been called.
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Well...the apostle Peter seemed to think that God had made a covenant with Abraham. When speaking to the Jews, he said:Hi David, you wrote:It strikes me as peculiar that God covenanted with all of Jacob's children, but wasn't willing to do so in previous generations.
"You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’" (Acts 3:25 ESV)
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Yes. And after Abraham's death, in Genesis 26, we see God establishing covenant with Isaac, like He told Abraham He would in Gen 17:19-20. And part of the deal was that the covenant would be with Isaac and his seed after him (which turned out to only include Jacob's line), but not with Ishmael or his descendants—nor were Abraham's children with Keturah apparently included, either.Paidion wrote:Well...the apostle Peter seemed to think that God had made a covenant with Abraham. When speaking to the Jews, he said:
"You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.’" (Acts 3:25 ESV)
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
David,
I have wondered about this myself in the past. I have found no answer in scripture.
I have wondered about this myself in the past. I have found no answer in scripture.
- robbyyoung
- Posts: 811
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Hi David,David wrote:Yes. And after Abraham's death, in Genesis 26, we see God establishing covenant with Isaac, like He told Abraham He would in Gen 17:19-20. And part of the deal was that the covenant would be with Isaac and his seed after him (which turned out to only include Jacob's line), but not with Ishmael or his descendants—nor were Abraham's children with Keturah apparently included, either.
I think it could be as simple as Ishmael came by the will of man and Isaac came by the will of God. This is God's covenant on His terms that Abraham agree to. So Hagar and Ishmael was not part of the royal seed or agreement, Sarah was. Therefore, despite man's impatience, Isaac receives the continued promise. Your thoughts?
God Bless.
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Good thinking! Yes, that's another plausibly contributing factor.robbyyoung wrote:I think it could be as simple as Ishmael came by the will of man and Isaac came by the will of God. This is God's covenant on His terms that Abraham agree to. So Hagar and Ishmael was not part of the royal seed or agreement, Sarah was. Therefore, despite man's impatience, Isaac receives the continued promise. Your thoughts?
God Bless.
Thanks, and God bless you, too!
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Yes Isaac was the child of promise and Ishmael the child of the flesh. In Gen 22 God twice referred to Isaac as "your only son" even though Abraham had other sons. Perhaps this connects to Duet 7 when God references that He saved Israel because of his love for their Forefathers and the oath he made to them.
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 12:35 am
Re: What set Israel's children apart from Abraham's/Isaac's?
Hi David,David wrote:Israel's significance extended to ALL his offspring; i.e., the families of Israel's children formed a single, cohesive nation under God.
Are we sure this statement is accurate? I'm not sure if Israel himself really envisioned this on the basis of God's promise. For instance, consider the blessings he gave to all his children just before his death in Genesis 49. I wonder if the words translated "blessed" and "blessing" in Genesis 49:28 aren't entirely accurate in our modern translations. In Genesis 49:1, we're told that Israel was going to tell his sons what would happen to them in the days to come. Not all of his predictions sound to me like true "blessings" in the positive sense, although some definitely do. Many statements though, sound almost like curses. This is especially true with Reuben, Simeon and Levi and to a lesser extent with Issachar and Dan. In fact, a word meaning curse (H779) is even used in verse 7 of this "blessing". Also, the Hebrew words for "blessed" and "blessing" in verse 28 are barak (H1288) and berakah (H1293). H1293 derives from H1288. H1288 is actually understood to mean "cursed" in Job 1:5,11; 2:5,9 and "blaspheme" in 1 Kings 21:10,13.
Further, barak (H1288) is also very similar to barar (H1305) which means polished, purified, or refined. It's interesting that one form of the Hebrew word qalal (H7044) also meaning polished or burnished can also mean curse in another form (H7043). qelalah (H7045) which is derived from H7043 also means cursed.
It may also be significant that H1299 is pronounced almost identically to H1288 and means lightnings, as in the lightning flashes associated with God's appearance in judgement.
Additionally, a word that rhymes with barar (H1305) from above is arar (H779) which can also mean curse. Variants of both of these words are often used in close proximity to one another as if they were being used poetically to emphasize a contrast. (e.g. Gen 9:25-26). It's curious too that erets (H776) meaning land is etymologically related to arar (H779).
It may also be worth noting that barar (H1305) is derived from bar (H1250) meaning corn or wheat. A large portion of the narrative just prior to this blessing of Israel speaks of Joseph's stewardship of these very grains during the famine (e.g. Genesis 41:35,49; 42:3,25; 45:23). This famine may be interpreted as a form of judgement on Egypt, supporting the possible implication of curses as well.
It seems possible that despite God's stated covenant, it was revealed through Israel from the very beginning that many of his descendants would not be capable of an enduring faithfulness to the covenant that would enable them to completely realize the blessing of the land promise.
Hopefully, this is helpful to you.
Blessings in Christ.