Let me set this up just a little. As most Christians know, Hebrew culture places a large emphasis on the "firstborn son." The firstborn son is the heir, he is the head of the family once the patriarch dies, etc. However, despite this very clear cultural idiom, it seems that over and over, especially in Genesis, God by His sovereign will chooses the younger son over the elder. Some quick examples:
- Cain and Abel. Gen. 4:1-5
- Ishmael and Isaac. Gen. 17:15-19
- Esau and Jacob. Gen. 25:23
- Manasseh and Ephraim. Gen. 48 :12-14
All right, let's dig a little deeper. Another element that is fascinating about this, is that in none of these scenarios is the younger son somehow more worthy of God's favor, or of divine blessing. Though many have tried to explain it, I see nothing to indicate why Abel's sacrifice was accepted, and Cain's not, except for the fact that God simply decided that it would be so. Ishmael and Isaac are maybe a little easier to figure out, but still it had nothing to do with the virtue or worthiness of Isaac that he was chosen. Jacob was actually less worthy than Esau, since he tricked his older brother out of both his birthright and blessing by deceit (yet this outcome had been foretold before they were even born!). And again, with the story of Manasseh and Ephraim, Jacob, seemingly led by divine impulse, crossed his hands and blessed the younger with the "right hand" blessing instead of the elder . Thus, time and time again the younger brother receives the blessing that should have been given to the elder, and he receives it, not through his own merit, but by God's grace alone.
Paul deals with one of these stories in Galatians 4:21-31 (you should read it on your own). In it, he essentially presents an allegorical/typological interpretation of the story, comparing these two mothers and their children with the two covenants. God made a promise to Abraham that he would have a son by Sarah. When the promise lingered, Abraham attempted to fulfill the promise with Hagar. A son was indeed born, but not according to the promise. In this allegorical sense, Ismael was a child of the flesh, a child begotten by human works. Whereas Isaac was simply a gift received through grace. Do you catch the parallel?
The first covenant was a covenant of Law - of works. The second a covenant of grace - of Promise. There is not one thing that a person can do to earn Christ's salvation or to procure it for himself; he must simply receive it as a gift from God's hand. He must believe the Promise of God - as Abraham did - if he is to be made righteous.
So I've come to recognize that any time there is a clear pattern in scripture, there is usually some sort of prophetic message that God is trying to communicate through it. With this younger-over-elder-son pattern, I believe that God is communicating a truth about the two covenants he has made with man. The covenants are like two brothers, and the younger is the accepted brother.
Like Cain and Abel, the sacrifices of the younger brother are accepted over that of the elder. And the elder despises and persecutes the younger.
Like Ishmael and Isaac, the younger brother was begotten by promise, not by works.
Like Esau and Jacob, the younger brother, by grace, receives the favor of God, despite the fact that he is far more sinful and far less deserving of it. Again the older brother despises the younger because he is favored (but they ultimately experience reconciliation - another prophetic message?).
Like Manasseh and Ephraim, God disrupted the natural course and "crossed his hands," so-to-speak, to bless the younger over the elder.
What an awesome God we serve! How awesome is His word! How grateful we should be day-by-day that He has saved us by His grace!!!
Well, I'm off to church...
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment