Genesis

WHEN the Angel at Peniel said, "Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel," the obvious meaning was that from that time forward the man was to be known by the new name only. In similar cases of change of name, Abram to Abraham, Saul to Paul, Simon to Peter, the new name persisted and, at least with Abraham and Paul, the old one was never used again. But what do we find in the story of Jacob? This; that after Peniel the name "Jacob" occurs no less than forty-five times, while "Israel" appears only twenty-three times. And what is equally significant, the usage to which we are familiar is "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," not "Abraham, Isaac and Israel."

Why, then, did not the name "Jacob" disappear entirely and "Israel" take its place? Was it not because Jacob went back from the new position and privilege given him at Peniel? He did not continue true to that Divine revelation; he did not abide in the position and power of a "Prince of God." It is unutterably sad when a believer recedes from a high position of spiritual privilege. To be disobedient to the heavenly vision and revert to the old type of life is one of the most terrible of sorrows and one of the profoundest of mysteries. It is bad for a man to refuse God altogether; it is in some ways infinitely worse for a believer to lose position, peace, and power through unfaithfulness. Let us give heed to this story of Jacob’s failure, and as we mark his steps backward let us ponder well the secret of his fall.

The next morning after Peniel Jacob had yet to face his great problem of the meeting with Esau. The difficulty was still there, Esau and his 400 men, and not even the intercourse with God had removed it. But that intercourse provided him with the secret and means of victory over it if only he had used the opportunity. God does not always see fit to remove obstacles from our pathway, but He always gives power to triumph over them. Instead, however, of Jacob meeting Esau "in the strength of that meat" received by Peniel, we find him still actuated by fear. Leaving household and cattle as arranged the preceding day (Gen 32:7-8), he makes a new disposition of his wives and children, placing them in such order that the best-loved are hindermost. Thus he prepares for the worst, still contemplating the possibility, not to say the probability, of Esau’s vengeance. The fear of man still brings a snare.

Then, putting himself at the head of his family procession, he goes forward to meet his brother, bowing with very great deference -far in excess, so it would seem, even of the customary Oriental courtesy. He is intent on showing his brother all possible consideration, and apparently means to acknowledge Esau’s superior prerogatives. This, after obtaining the birthright and blessing is strange, and perhaps is intended as a tacit acknowledgment of his old sin of craft and deceit. But be this as it may, the response of Esau is very striking. He runs to meet Jacob, and they greet each other amid tokens of genuine feeling. Esau’s anger had gone in the rush of emotion on seeing his brother after all those years of separation. Rebekah was quite right in her knowledge of her elder son’s feelings. He was impulsive, hasty, passionate, but his anger did not last; there was no brooding revenge, no malevolence. And thus, in an instant, Jacob’s fears were proved to be groundless, and all his elaborate precautions for safety seen to be entirely unnecessary.

After making the acquaintance of Jacob’s family, Esau naturally asked the meaning of "all this drove" that he had met. He was told that it was a present, "to find grace in the eyes of my lord." But all this obsequiousness also proved quite unnecessary, for Esau refused the present, saying that he already had enough. Jacob thereupon pressed him to take it, urging as his reason that he was grateful for his favorable reception. He felt that just as God had received him graciously, so Esau’s favor was now equally evident, and in token of his gratitude he pressed the gift upon him.

It is, however, hardly possible to avoid seeing in this urgency a desire on the part of Jacob to purchase Esau’s goodwill. He knew his brother’s fickleness, and was therefore determined to take every possible precaution. We cannot but feel that Jacob does not come quite worthily out of this meeting. After Peniel it does not read well. In the face of that guarantee of power and grace we are disappointed to read of further precautions, manifest fear, obvious fawning, and continued planning. Jacob has still to learn the lesson of absolute trust in his God. It is worthy of note that all the recognition of God was on his side (Gen 33:5; Gen 33:10-11), not on Esau’s; but in spite of it all we feel that he did not remain on the high level of Peniel, or derive all the spiritual power he might have obtained from that memorable occasion of fellowship with God.

Esau proposed that they should journey together, he and his men going forward as the escort. This suggestion was another mark of friendliness, and here we cannot help observing how splendidly Esau showed up on this occasion. Warmth, generosity, unselfishness, willingness to help, friendliness-all these features characterized him. Men of the world often put to shame the children of God in the manifestation of the practical virtues of life. Yet this ought not to be so.

Jacob met this generous proposal in a very characteristic way, and thereby gave another revelation of himself. He called attention to the little children and to the flocks and herds with their young, and pleaded quite naturally for a slow journey, as the children and cattle could bear it. But it was a polite though shrewd way of declining his brother’s invitation. He was evidently still mindful of the diversity of their temperaments, and feared that if they were long together, some occasion of friction would arise and again sever their friendly relations. There was, quite probably, real worldly wisdom in this attitude of Jacob. He had a keener insight into the facts of the case than his more superficial brother. Yet we would rather have seen a hearty response to the proposal and a more definite trust in God as to the consequences. And certainly we could have easily dispensed with the renewed obsequious. ness that marked Jacob’s language to Esau. It was surely unworthy of a brother to a brother, an equal to an equal-yea, rather a child of God to a man of the world. If a believer has to refuse a request to a non-Christian he should not be afraid to give the right reason for his refusal. Testimony to truth, if given in the right spirit and with a right motive, will never be allowed to do harm.

But, whatever may be said of all this, there is one point in the narrative in which Jacob clearly does definite wrong. In declining Esau’s invitation to journey together on account of his own need of a slower progress Jacob distinctly promised to rejoin Esau in Seir. Whereupon Esau naturally offered to leave some of his men as a guide and escort. This again Jacob very politely declined (Gen 33:15), and at length Esau departed. What, then, was Jacob’s next step? Actually this: instead of going after Esau to Seir, which was situated south-east of Peniel, he took his journey in an exactly opposite direction, and went to Succoth, north-west of Peniel. And thus he took the second step backward, deceiving his brother once again. It is surely impossible even to palliate this falsehood. As he had not the courage to give his brother the real reason of his declining the journey together, so also he told an untruth in order to put as much distance as he could between them. We wonder what Esau must have thought when he found Jacob did not arrive. We wonder whether he discounted Jacob’s references to God which he had made on their meeting together. What is the use of our pious verbal acknowledgment of God if we deny Him by our actions and give cause to the men of the world to reflect on our profession of religion and even to blaspheme it? How long will it be before we learn that orthodoxy of profession with unreality of conduct is the most deplorable combination in this world?

Jacob did not content himself with a temporary stay at Succoth. He "built him a house and made booths for his cattle." Hitherto he had lived the pilgrim life, as his father and grandfather before him; but now he seeks for something more permanent, and builds a house. A tent was no longer sufficient for him. But it may be asked, Was this wrong?

Not per se, perhaps, and yet pretty certainly wrong for him. There are many things not essentially sinful which become sinful under particular circumstances. Jacob had forgotten his vow at Bethel (Gen 28:21), and by making Succoth so evidently his home he was showing himself to be on a very low spiritual level in his forgetfulness of the claim of God upon him. When God revealed Himself in Haran it was as "the God of Bethel" (Gen 31:13), and the reminder at that time of the vow made by Jacob was evidence of the prominent and even predominant place Bethel was intended to occupy in the subsequent life of the patriarch. He thus fails to rise to the full height of God’s purpose. He had overlooked all this, and was settling down, at any rate for a time, in earthly ease and prosperity. There were no fine pastures at Bethel! How easily we forget our Bethels and all that we have promised God! How disappointing to God must be the failures and unfaithfulness of His servants! How sad to ignore in prosperity the vows we made when we were in danger! And yet, alas! how true this is to life today!

After a time Succoth was left, and Jacob journeyed on. If we read the R. V., he "came in peace to the city of Shechem," which reminds us of his vow (Gen 28:21, "in peace"), although he did not go back to Bethel. In this case Shechem is the name of the owner of the place (Cf. Gen 34:2). If, however, we read the A. V., he "came to Shalem," a city in the country or neighborhood of what was afterwards Shechem or Sychar (Joh 4:5; Act 7:16). In pitching his tent "before the city" we see another indication of his low spiritual condition. If he had been true to God he would have recognized his danger in the proximity to the inhabitants of the land. And, as we know, this nearness brought untold trouble upon him.

Then, again, he bought some property there, purchasing the land on which his tent was pitched. He was thus actually buying his own promised possessions, the land assured to him by God! Was this necessary? Surely not. Abraham’s purchase was for a very different reason. Why could not Jacob trust God, as Abraham had done? It was because his faith could not rise to the occasion. Jacob’s motto-was "A bird in hand is worth two in the bush," and even the intercourse with God had removed it. But that intercourse provided him with the secret and means of victory over it if only he had used the opportunity. God does not always see fit to remove obstacles from our pathway, but He always gives power to triumph over them. Instead, however, of Jacob meeting Esau "in the strength of that meat" received by Peniel, we find him still actuated by fear. Leaving household and cattle as arranged the preceding day (Gen 32:7-8), he makes a new disposition of his wives and children, placing them in such order that the best-loved are hindermost. Thus he prepares for the worst, still contemplating the possibility, not to say the probability, of Esau’s vengeance. The fear of man still brings a snare.

Then, putting himself at the head of his family procession, he goes forward to meet his brother, bowing with very great deference -far in excess, so it would seem, even of the customary Oriental courtesy. He is intent on showing his brother all possible consideration, and apparently means to acknowledge Esau’s superior prerogatives. This, after obtaining the birthright and blessing is strange, and perhaps is intended as a tacit acknowledgment of his old sin of craft and deceit. But be this as it may, the response of Esau is very striking. He runs to meet Jacob, and they greet each other amid tokens of genuine feeling. Esau’s anger had gone in the rush of emotion on seeing his brother after all those years of separation. Rebekah was quite right in her knowledge of her elder son’s feelings. He was impulsive, hasty, passionate, but his anger did not last; there was no brooding revenge, no malevolence. And thus, in an instant, Jacob’s fears were proved to be groundless, and all his elaborate precautions for safety seen to be entirely unnecessary.

After making the acquaintance of Jacob’s family, Esau naturally asked the meaning of "all this drove" that he had met. He was told that it was a present, "to find grace in the eyes of my lord." But all this obsequiousness also proved quite unnecessary, for Esau refused the present, saying that he already had enough. Jacob thereupon pressed him to take it, urging as his reason that he was grateful for his favorable reception. He felt that just as God had received him graciously, so Esau’s favor was now equally evident, and in token of his gratitude he pressed the gift upon him.

It is, however, hardly possible to avoid seeing in this urgency a desire on the part of Jacob to purchase Esau’s goodwill. He knew his brother’s fickleness, and was therefore determined to take every possible precaution. We cannot but feel that Jacob does not come quite worthily out of this meeting. After Peniel it does not read well. In the face of that guarantee of power and grace we are disappointed to read of further precautions, manifest fear, obvious fawning, and continued planning. Jacob has still to learn the lesson of absolute trust in his God. It is worthy of note that all the recognition of God was on his side (vers. 5, 10, 11), not on Esau’s; but in spite of it all we feel that he did not remain on the high level of Peniel, or derive all the spiritual power he might have obtained from that memorable occasion of fellowship with God.

1. The awful possibilities of spiritual degeneration.

Jacob’s experiences after Peniel are a solemn reminder that Conversion (Bethel) and Consecration (Peniel) are no guarantees of abiding faithfulness. They need to be followed by Concentration and Continuance. There are frequent hints throughout Holy Scripture of the ghastly possibilities of spiritual relapse after the most exalted fellowship with God. We think of David’s sin after such a revelation as is recorded in 2Sa 7:1-29. We think of Simon Peter’s denial after Caesarea Philippi (Mat 16:1-28) and after the Transfiguration (Mat 17:1-27). And we remember the solemn warning of Heb 5:12; Heb 5:14, with its revelation of the awful possibility of spiritual senility, of second childhood, (Heb 5:11-12). It is possible for one who has had great spiritual insight, received great spiritual gifts, done great spiritual service, to lose all by unfaithfulness. Backsliding is a terrible and awful fact, and sometimes the higher the rise the lower the fall. Spiritual experience, however true and rich, does not exempt from danger; rather does it call for greater watchfulness. "So Daniel continued." The grace of continuance is the greatest need of all. Have we not, perhaps, heard of some servant of God who had been honored and blessed, and afterwards fell into sin and shame? Can we not, perchance, think of some who commenced their Christian life, and it may be their ministry, full of hope and promise, but who are now "unfulfilled prophecies," by reason of lack of faithfulness to the heavenly vision? They have virtually ceased to pray, practically ceased to meditate on the Bible, ceased to be unworldly; they have adopted unworthy methods in their ministry, pandered to worldliness and earthly ambitions, and the result is dullness, darkness, dryness, deadness in life and ministry, souls not being saved, believers not being quickened, everything stale and unprofitable in their service. They are "cast away," not in the sense of losing their salvation, but of having lost their usefulness. They are "disapproved," rejected, set aside. While the regenerate can never become unregenerate, he can, alas! become degenerate, and herein lies one of the gravest perils of the Christian life. Moody once said to Canon Hay Aitken that the one thing he feared most was the loss of his testimony for Christ. "I saw that there was a way to hell even from the gates of heaven, as well as from the City of Destruction."

2. The simple secret of spiritual stability.

This lies in obedience to the heavenly vision, faithfulness to the heavenly voice. If only Jacob had kept God first, and refused to listen to the voice of self, how different would have been his record! With absolute trust in God would have come victory over temptation, courage in danger, and preservation from worldliness. We fail because we distrust God, and distrusting we disobey Him. God’s grace is sufficient for every emergency, and the light granted at Peniel would have detected every danger and protected from every disaster. Every spiritual victory lifts us to a higher plane of power and blessing, and thus we go on from "strength to strength," from "glory to glory." There is no need for failure, for backsliding, for defeat, but every warrant for progress, power and preservation. We have only to obey the vision vouchsafed to us, to appropriate the grace provided for us, in order to experience stability, strength and ever-growing satisfaction, to the glory and praise of God.