been before him, so his mind in after life appeared to aspire after 'the blessing of the first-born, and never to have rested till he had obtained it.

As they grew up, they discovered a different turn of mind. Esau was the expert huntsman, quite a man of the field; but Jacob was simple-hearted, preferring the more gentle employment of rearing and tending cattle. The partiality of Isaac towards Esau, on account of his venison, seems to have been a weakness rather unworthy of him: that of Rebekah towards Jacob appears to have been better founded her preference was more directed by the prophecies which had gone before him, choosing him whom the Lord had chosen.

Ver. 29-34. In process of time, a circumstance arose in the family, which in its consequences was very serious. Jacob was one day boiling some pottage, perhaps for his dinner; for he lived mostly upon herbs. Just then came in Esau from hunting, very faint and hungry, and had a great mind to Jacob's pottage. Its very colour, corresponding with his sanguinary disposition, seemed to take his fancy; on which account he was called Edom, a name commonly applied to his posterity, and of similar import with that which was first given to him. There seems, at first sight, to be something ungenerous in Jacob's availing himself of his brother's hunger in the manner he did; but if there were, however it may reflect dishonour upon him, it reflects none upon the event. God often brings his purposes to pass by means which on man's part are far from justifiable. The reformation was a great and good work, and we may wish to vindicate every measure which contributed to it; but that is more than we can do. God's thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. It will be found that he is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works; but this is more than can be said of his best servants, in any age of the world. A close inspection of this affair, however, will convince us that whether Jacob was right as to the means he used, or not, his motives were good, and those of Esau were evil. Observe, particularly, (1.) The birthright attached to seniority. (2.) It ordinarily consisted in the excelVOL. V.

28

lency of dignity, the excellency of power, and a double portion.* (3.) These privileges of the first-born were in several instances forfeited by the misconduct of the parties; as in the case of Cain, Reuben, &c. (4.) There was in the family of Abraham a peculiar blessing, which was supposed to be attached to the birthright, though God in several instances put it into another direction. This blessing was principally spiritual and distant, having respect to the setting up of God's kingdom, to the birth of the Messiah, or in other words, to all those great things included in the covenant with Abraham. This was well understood by the family both Esau and Jacob must have often heard their parents converse about it. If the birthright that was bought at this time had con sisted of any temporal advantages of dignity, authority, or property to be enjoyed in the lifetime of the parties, Esau would not have made so light of it as he did, calling it this birthright, and intimating that he should soon die, and then it would be of no use to him. It is a fact too that Jacob had none of the ordinary advantages of the birthright during his life-time. Instead of a double portion he was sent out of the family with only a staff in his hand, leaving Esau to possess the whole of his father's substance. And when, more than twenty years afterwards, he returned to Canaan, he made no scruple to ascribe to his brother the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power, calling him My lord Esau, and acknowledging himself as his servant. The truth is, the question between them was, which should be heir to the blessings promised in the covenant with Abraham. This Jacob desired, and Esau despised; and in despising blessings of so sacred a nature, and that for a morsel of meat, he was guilty of profaneness. The spirit of his language was, I cannot live upon promises: give me something to eat and drink, for to-morrow I die.' Such is the spirit of unbelief in every age; and thus it is

1

*Gen. xlix. 3. Deut. xxi. 17.

↑ He could not mean surely that he should then die of hunger, unless he ate of the pottage; for that is scarcely conceivable, while he had full access to all the provisions in Isaac's house: but that in a little time he should be dead; and then of what account would these fine promises be to him ?

that poor deluded souls continue to despise things distant and heavenly, and prefer to them the momentary gratifications of flesh and sense.

From the whole, we may perceive in this case a doctrine which runs through the scriptures; namely, that while the salvation of those that are saved is altogether of grace, the destruction of those that are lost will be found to be of themselves. From what is recorded of Jacob, he certainly had nothing to boast of; neither had Esau any thing to complain of. He lost the blessing, but not without having first despised it. Thus when the Apostle had asserted the doctrine of election, and grounded it upon God's absolute right to have mercy on whom he would have mercy, he nevertheless proceeds to ascribe the cause of the overthrow of them that perish merely to themselves. But Israel which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of rightcousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith; but as it were by the works of the law; for they stumbled at the stumbling-stone. I am aware that when we preach in this manner, many are ready to accuse us of inconsistency. You preach the doctrine of election,' say they; but before you have done you destroy your own work, by telling the unconverted that if they perish, the fault will lie at their own door.' We answer, it is enough for us to teach what the scriptures teach. If we cannot conceive how the purposes of God are to be reconciled with the agency and accountableness of man, let us be content to be ignorant of it. The scriptures teach both; and true wisdom will not aspire to be wise above what is written.

DISCOURSE XXXV.

ISAAC AND ABIMELECH.

Gen. xxvi.

We saw Abraham in a great variety of situations, by means of which sometimes his excellencies and sometimes his failings became the more conspicuous. Isaac has hitherto been but little tried, and therefore his character is but little known. In this chapter, however, we shall see him roused from his retirement, and brought into situations in which, if there be some things to lament, there will be many to admire.

Ver. 1--6. We now see him in affliction, by reason of a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. There seem to have been more famines in the times of the patriarchs than usual; which must not only be afflictive to them in common with their neighbours, but tend more than a little to try their faith. Every such season must prove a temptation to think lightly of the land of promise. Unbelief would say, It is a land that eateth up the inhabitants: it is not worth waiting for. But faith will conclude that he who hath promised to give it, is able to bless it. Thus Abraham believed, and therefore took every thing patiently; and thus it is with Isaac. He first went to Abimelech, king of the Philistines, at Gerar. His father Abraham had found kind treatment there about a hundred years before, and there was a covenant of peace between them. It seems, however, as if he had thought of going as far as Egypt; but the Lord appeared to him at Gerar, and admonished him to put himself under his direction, and to go no where without it. Dwell, saith he, in the land that I shall tell thee of : sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee,