Deeper Commentary
Gen 26:1 There was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham- The recollection of the famine in Abraham's days is to point up the fact that Isaac found himself in an identical situation to Abraham, and failed in precisely the same way. Circumstances and situations repeat between the lives of God's people, and between our lives and those of Biblical characters. This is so that we might learn the lessons; or upon failure, reflect and discern the similarities.
Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines, to Gerar- He
ought to have learnt from Abraham's mistake, and not led himself into
temptation. The desire to go to Egypt was likely because the famine meant
that his flocks, his wealth, would be decreased- rather than that he would
literally die of famine. So as so often, the fear of losing wealth leads
believers into temptation and failure. And Abraham had failed in
this same way in the very same place, Gerar, again with an Abimelech. And
the failure was whilst Sarah was pregnant with Isaac. Her rejuvenation had
made her physically attractive to Abimelech despite her age. At Gen. 17:21
there were 12 months to the birth of Isaac ("My covenant I establish with
Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this set time next year"). By Gen.
18:10, there were 9 months to the birth of Isaac: "I will certainly return
to you when the season comes round. Behold, Sarah your wife will have a
son". And immediately this incident in Gerar is over, Sarah gives birth
(Gen. 21:2). It is natural for all of creation to be protective of the
pregnant mother of your child. But Abraham says he fears dying for her. He
presents as deeply faithless and selfish. If she, as a pregnant woman, was
accepted into another man's harem, the consequences for her and the child
could have been fatal. For the king would have slept with her and then
discovered she was pregnant with another man's child. Abraham is presented
as absolutely selfish. Just as in Gen. 12:13 he asks her to lie about
their marriage "that it may go well with me because of you". And yet God
allowed that to happen: "And it went well with Abram because of her" (Gen.
12:16).
Gen 26:2 Yahweh appeared to him, and said, Don’t go down into Egypt.
Live in the land I will tell you about- The fact Isaac lived in Gerar
(:6) could be read as rank disobedience. Or perhaps he reasoned that as
Gerar was on the edge of the promised eretz, he was justified in
doing so. But living on the edge of Divine things leads to temptation.
Whether Gerar was in "Egypt" or the eretz of promise was
debatable; and instead of removing himself from temptation, Isaac took
himself to the edge, and therefore fell into it. See on Hos. 4:15 for a
similar failure in later Israel.
Gen 26:3 Live in this land, and I will be with you, and will bless you. For to you, and to your seed, I will give all these lands- As noted on :1, his fear was that he would lose the material blessings of large flocks because of the famine if he remained in "this land". He was being asked to do something counter instinctive. And he didn't want to. He ought to have recalled how Abraham resigned the best pasture land to Lot, and was then told that to look out over the land Lot had chosen, and believe that this land would be his eternal inheritance. And so Isaac was promised that he would be given all Egypt and "all these lands" eternally. The phrase may suggest that certain lands were in view; perhaps like Abraham, Isaac was on an elevated point from where he could view "these lands", and was promised them. Or maybe we have here the first hint that the promise of inheriting one land, the eretz, was to be extended to the inheritance of all lands, "the world", the entire planet (Rom. 4:13).
And I will establish the oath which I swore to Abraham your father- The oath to Abraham would be established or repeated to him. That is evidence enough that the Abrahamic blessing was not simply inherited; it had to be established or confirmed to each individual, on their choice. Ishmael clearly didn't want this, despite being circumcised into the covenant. We read in Jer. 34:18 of those of Israel who did not establish or confirm the covenant oath (s.w.). People today allow the promises to be established to them by baptism into Christ (Gal. 3:27-29). We encounter the same word at the end of the wilderness journey, where Moses urges the peoples' faithfulness so that Yahweh might "establish His covenant" with them (Dt. 8:18; 28:9,13); and we note that despite their disobedience, He still "established" the covenant with them, by grace alone (Dt. 9:5). The idea of an "everlasting covenant" being established with God's people (Ez. 16:60) perhaps means that from that time onwards, it would be unconditional, not requiring the human side of reconfirmation. It may therefore refer to our eternal existence. Or the idea could be that from God's side, His offer is eternally there, He is always offering the covenant- and it is the indifference of men which leads to their not confirming it.
Gen 26:4 I will multiply your seed as the stars of the sky, and will give to your seed all these lands- Paul's point in Gal. 3:16 is that "seed" is singular and ultimately refers to the Lord Jesus. The singular seed becomes many because people from all nations become "in" Christ by baptism into Him and abiding in Him (Gal. 3:27-29). And yet whether Isaac perceived that is doubtful; perhaps he was driven to understand it that way by the fact that so far as we know, he and Rebecca had only two children, the twins. And that after waiting 20 years. This would have been considered a most not blessed marriage and fruitfulness. But again we see the Divine hallmark, of working through human weakness. It was to be through that apparent lack of blessing that the greatest conceivable blessing was to come.
In your seed will all the nations of the earth be blessed-
The Hebrew text says that "a great mixture" of
people "went up also" with Israel out of Egypt (Ex. 12:38). There can
be no doubt that this refers to the many references in the promises that the
seed would come to include such a "mixed multitude" (Gen. 17:6; 22:17;
26:4; 28:3,14; 35:11), thereby showing that by reason of leaving Egypt
and passing through the Red Sea these Gentiles became part of the seed (cp.
1 Cor. 10:1; Gal. 3:27-29). But the supreme fulfilment of these
promises will be after the 'Red Sea' of the last days.
Gen 26:6 Isaac lived in Gerar- S
Gen 26:7 The men of the place asked him about his wife. He said, She
is my sister, for he was afraid to say, My wife, lest, he thought, the men
of the place might kill me for Rebekah, because she is beautiful to look
at- See on Gen. 25:28. If he had remained firmly within the
eretz rather than practicing the spiritual brinkmanship of living in
Gerar (see on :1,2), the situation would not have arisen. He repeats the
failure of Abraham precisely. Rebekah was indeed his relative, but that
was a stretch of the word "sister". The contrast is clearly made with the
way that in the New Testament, a husband should be willing to die for his
wife.
Gen 26:8 It happened, when he had been there a long time, that
Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out of a window, and saw, and,
behold, Isaac was caressing Rebekah his wife- Isaac is an example of a man who wouldn't be whom God intended him to
be- at least, not all the time. His fear stopped him, and it robbed him of
the joy God intended for him. It was due to his
fear, his lack of faith in God's promises, that he passes off his wife as his
sister when he thinks Abimelech or his people have an interest in her. But Isaac and
Rebekah slip off for some intimate time together, and it's noticed that
Isaac was "Isaacing ["playing" / "laughing"] himself with Rebekah"-
Yitshaq metsaheq et Ribqah (Gen. 26:8 Heb.). He was 'being himself'
with her, living up to his name, Isaac, which means 'laughter'. It was his
fear and lack of faith which had led him to not be himself. And
we so very often make the same mistake.
Gen 26:10 Abimelech said, What is this you have done to us? One of the
people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought
guilt on us!- These are the very words the Abimelech had used to
Abraham. See on :9. The fact Rebekah was in this situation for "a long
time" (:8) points up the morality of the Gentiles as being superior to
that of the supposedly holy family. They didn't rape her, nor have casual
sex with her; if indeed she was taken as a wife, she was subject to a long
period of ritual preparation before having sex with her. "Abimelech" is
likely a generic title for the rulers of the area, but it could
conceivably have been the same Abimelech with whom Abraham dealt. He too
realized that sins of ignorance were still reckoned by Yahweh to be sins,
and brought guilt. The idea of sins of ignorance was probably unknown
amongst the local religions; but the one true God was far more sensitive
to sin than they were. "Easily" is literally 'as a light thing'. In their
morality, casual sex with a stranger was a light thing; but Abimelech
tacitly recognizes that they were answerable to Yahweh, and for Him, such
sins of ignorance were not a light thing, and would bring guilt.
Gen 26:11 Abimelech commanded all the people, saying, He who touches
this man or his wife will surely be put to death-
Gen 26:12 Isaac sowed in that land, and reaped in the same year one hundred times what he planted. Yahweh blessed him- One hundred fold yield is incredible; 25 fold yield would be good. Especially as this was in time of famine. Abraham likewise was greatly blessed immediately after making the identical failure. We would rather expect there to be some punishment; but there was none. Instead, the opposite- blessing. Punishment is often an ineffective way of achieving correction and growth. Hence the wicked prosper and the righteous suffer in this life. It was the pouring out of grace which led to Abraham and Isaac realizing the depth of their failure.
The Abraham family's considerable wealth is a theme in the records. Here and :13 provide quite some emphasis of the same point. Eliezer commented on Abraham's material wealth: "The Lord hath blessed my master greatly; and he is become great (note the repetition)"; he then goes on to enumerate a long list of possessions: flocks, herds, silver, gold, menservants, maidservants, camels, asses. Truly "The Lord had blessed Abraham in all things" (Gen. 24:1). This suggests that the patriarchs' material prosperity was a primary fulfillment of the Abrahamic blessing in their lifetime. Peter interprets the blessing as the forgiveness of sins (Acts 3:25,26). The stress on their material blessings therefore points forward to our spiritual riches of blessing in Christ. Even earlier in Abraham's life, "Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver and in gold" (13:1). Other references to Abraham's wealth occur in 13:6; 14:23. Jacob too was blessed with material wealth (31:16; 33:11 AVmg.). His parting with Esau because they were both so wealthy (36:7) echoes the division between Abraham and Lot and Abraham and Abimelech for the same reason (Gen. 13:6). The similarities between these incidents serves to emphasize the wealth of the family. The prosperity of Lot in Sodom is also highlighted (14:12 Heb.). Each of them seems to have accumulated wealth in their own right in addition to inheriting it.
Gen 26:13 The man grew great, and grew more and more until he became very great- "Great" is the same word used in Gen. 12:2; that Abraham's seed would be "great". As noted on Gen. 24:35, the greatness of blessing had a primary fulfilment as demonstration of how the greater, spiritual blessing would likewise become true.
Gen 26:14 He had possessions of flocks, possessions of herds, and a
great household. The Philistines envied him- There is a theme of envy in the accounts of Isaac and Jacob. The Philistines envied Isaac; as (we can assume) Laban did Jacob; Rachel envied Leah (Gen. 30:1); Joseph's brothers envied him (Gen. 37:11; Acts 7:9). Family friction certainly stalked the generations,
as it has done amongst the new Israel. Jacob against Esau, Isaac against Jacob, Ishmael against Isaac, Sarah against Hagar, Joseph's brothers amongst themselves (Gen. 45:24). Envy of Israel by the world and friction within Israel has been a continued characteristic (what similarities with spiritual Israel?). Yet there was also a soft streak there; Esau and Jacob evidently had a certain affection for each other and willingness to truly forgive (Esau more so than Jacob!); Abraham truly cared for
Lot's fate in Sodom on at least two occasions; and the brothers genuinely cared for Benjamin and the grief of their father.
Gen 26:15 Now all the wells which his father’s servants had dug in the days of Abraham his father, the Philistines had stopped, and filled with earth- This was due to their envy (:14). Flocks were the measure of wealth, and to cut off the water supply was a way of diminishing them. This reflects the basic human feature of wanting to bring others down to our level, the tall poppy syndrome. Abraham is repeatedly called "his father" (see on :18). We get the idea that he was living out parental expectation to some degree, as Jacob also did. Abraham was a hard act to follow; and yet unlike many sons in that situation, Isaac did not lose faith because of it.
Gen 26:16 Abimelech said to Isaac, Go from us, for you are much
mightier than we- Moses was primarily writing for the Israelites in
the wilderness, who had suffered the same treatment from the Egyptians. He
was seeking to teach them that circumstances repeat, just as they had in
the lives of Abraham and Isaac; and they were to learn from that.
Gen 26:17 Isaac departed from there, encamped in the valley of Gerar,
and lived there- I suggested on :2 that God had in fact asked Isaac
to remain in the promised eretz, and his living in Gerar was in
disobedience. At best, seeing it was somewhere on the borders of the
eretz, he was practicing spiritual brinkmanship; and because he
placed himself close to the edge, he went over. Like Abraham, he seems not
to have learnt the lesson. For he leaves Gerar town and lives in the
valley nearby; and therefore the friction continued with the local
Philistines [a term which may then have included Abimelech and the people
of Gerar]. The record of the patriarchs is full of such examples of not
learning lessons, partial obedience, rank failure- and yet an abiding
basic faith in God. And that is what makes them our pattern. The
following narrative about conflict over water sources could have been
avoided- if Isaac had followed the spirit of what he was asked to do, and
actually left the area. Instead of just leaving the town of Gerar and
taking his huge flocks to the valley nearby.
Gen 26:18 Isaac dug again the wells of water, which they had dug in
the days of Abraham his father. For the Philistines had stopped them after
the death of Abraham- And yet immediately after Abraham's death, the
Lord had richly blessed Isaac (Gen. 25:11). Blessing would have been
understood in terms of fertility; growth in flocks or good harvests. Yet
this was achieved without the water sources which were seen as so
important to achieve wealth. All the time, Isaac was being shown that
blessing was by grace alone. But like us, the Abraham family struggled so
hard to accept this. See on :22.
He called their names after the names by which his father had called them- As noted on :15, this could reflect an obsession with his father, and a living out of parental expectation.
Gen 26:19 Isaac’s servants dug in the valley, and found there a well
of springing water- As noted on :18, the whole business of the wells
was to try to teach Isaac about God's grace. They dug, but God responded
by giving them a spring of water, welling up from Him, rather than the
stagnant water usually found when a well hits the water table. The
implication could even be that they dug in search of water, but found a
natural well of springing water which for some reason had as yet been
undiscovered. Again, this was grace. This would explain the argument in
:20.
Gen 26:20 The herdsmen of Gerar argued with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying,
The water is ours! He called the name of the well Esek, because they
contended with him- I suggested on :19 that Esek was a natural well
of springing water which for some reason had as yet been undiscovered. It
was not as it were dug down to by Isaac's workers. And so the local people
claimed it was theirs, because it was in their territory.
Gen 26:21 They dug another well, and they argued over that, also. He
called its name Sitnah- "Sitnah" is a form of satan, to be
an adversary or make an accusation. That is all 'satan' means as a word.
The Hebrew translated "argued" can as well mean that they fought together
(s.w. Ex. 21:18).
Gen 26:22 He left that place, and dug another well. They didn’t argue
over that one. He called it Rehoboth. He said, For now Yahweh has made
room for us, and we will be fruitful in the land- The response
to contention should be to walk away, rather than "argue", bearing in mind
as noted on :21 that the Hebrew can mean that they actually fought over
it. Isaac had already been blessed with amazing fruitfulness by God's
grace (see on :12). But here Isaac reasons that having his own personal
water supply would make him more fruitful. He had failed to realize that
fruitfulness was given not by water supply but God's grace; see on :18.
The immediate relevance to the wilderness generation of Yahweh making room
for Isaac in Canaan was that He had promised to also make room for
them in the same land; the same word is translated "enlarge" (Ex.
34:24; Dt. 12:20; 19:8). Perhaps Isaac was thinking that now he finally
had his own territory within the land, with his own secured water supply.
But he failed to fully believe that the entire eretz was promised
to him.
Gen 26:23 He went up from there to Beersheba- As noted on :22,
Isaac was thinking that now he finally had his own territory within the
land, with his own secured water supply. But he failed to fully believe
that the entire eretz was promised to him. And so as soon
as he considered himself settled in permanently, he has to move to
Beersheba. The reasons aren't given; but the lesson is that the true seed
of Abraham never really settle down. We are kept on the move, especially
if we are tempted to think that we have a settled place now.
Gen 26:24 Yahweh appeared to him the same night, and said, I am the
God of Abraham your father. Don’t be afraid, for I am with you, and will
bless you, and multiply your seed for My servant Abraham’s sake- The
encouragement not to fear was perhaps because Isaac had had to flee
Rehoboth, where he thought he had settled permanently (see on :23),
because of some aggressors; perhaps his comment to Abimelech that "you
hate me" (:27) has something to do with it. God would be the
source of blessing for Isaac, through His grace; and not because Isaac had
his own secured private water source and apparently secure, permanent
territory. And instead of focusing so much upon the literal land aspect of
the promises, he was bidden refocus upon the seed. Likewise the idea of
inheriting a literal Kingdom on earth can become so focused upon that the
things of the Lord Jesus are obscured or distorted; and thus the New
Testament without doubt focuses more upon Jesus than upon the literal
aspect of His future Kingdom.
Gen 26:25 He built an altar there, and called on the name of Yahweh,
and pitched his tent there. There Isaac’s servants dug a well- As
explained on :23 and :24, Isaac had thought that Rehoboth was to be his
permanent home, especially as he had his own private, secure water supply.
But the hand of providence moved him on from any sense of permanence in
this life; for that is not the spirit of the seed of Abraham, who are
merely passing through this world, which they shall eternally inherit in
future. Isaac seems to have learnt the lesson this time; for he pitches
his tent, calls on Yahweh, and digs a new well in tacit recognition that
Rehoboth was not the final well after all (see on :23).
Gen 26:26 Then Abimelech went to him from Gerar, and Ahuzzath his
friend, and Phicol the captain of his army- This was similar to how
they had come and made a treaty with Abraham in Gen. 21:22,32. The names
may well be titles rather than personal names. The language used is
identical to that in Gen. 21; Isaac was being led through some of
Abraham's experiences, so that he would be the true seed of Abraham not
just ethnically, but spiritually. And the same is true of us; Abraham is
father of all the faithful (Rom. 4:16) in that his life and path is in
essence that of us all. We are therefore led through similar experiences
to him.
Gen 26:27 Isaac said to them, Why have you come to me, since you hate
me, and have sent me away from you?-
Isaac's criticism of them seems unreasonably aggressive and paranoiac.
Abimelech is consistently presented in Genesis as being of great integrity
and far higher morality than the Abraham family. Isaac thinks that they
"hate" him; but Abimelech can truly say in :29 that he has done
nothing but good to Isaac. He had sent Isaac away "in peace" and not with
any personal animosity (:29). I suggest that Isaac was a fearful man, and
he had an irrational fear about Abimelech. It was this which led him to
leave Rehoboth, after he had imagined that there he finally had found some
permanence, and a secure private water source- see on :23,24. The "fear"
he had, which God comforted him about in :24, was therefore an irrational
fear. But God worked through it, as He works through our irrational fears,
in order to keep Isaac on the move, and to save him from losing his
pilgrim status and mentality, by settling down in Rehoboth. Even if
Abimelech did indeed "hate" Isaac, he had the Abrahamic promise that he
would possess the gate of his enemies, those who "hate" him (Gen. 24:60
s.w.). Perhaps Abimelech realized this more than Isaac did, and therefore
wanted to make peace rather than experience God's judgment. We recall his
fear of Divine judgment if any of his people had slept with Rebekah.
Gen 26:28 They said, We saw plainly that Yahweh was with you. We said,
‘Let there now be an oath between us, even between us and you, and let us
make a covenant with you- Despite Abimelech's poor experiences with
Isaac and Rebekah due to their lack of integrity about their marriage,
Abimelech could not but accept that Yahweh was with Isaac. And he didn't
want to be the enemy of God's people. He had a definite fear of Isaac and
his God. The oath between Abimelech and Abraham had been for three
generations, including Isaac (Gen. 21:21,22). But Abimelech felt the need
to confirm it with Isaac personally; reminding Isaac that God's oath to
Abraham and his seed likewise had to be personally reaffirmed by those in
subsequent generations. Maybe Isaac's lack of integrity led Abimelech to
question whether Isaac still felt bound to Abraham's oaths. The incident
was therefore used in Divine providence to help Isaac see that he must
personally reaffirm Abraham's covenants- including, supremely, that with
Yahweh.
Gen 26:29 That you will do us no harm, as we have not touched you, and
as we have done to you nothing but good, and have sent you away in peace’.
You are now the blessed of Yahweh- Abimelech makes free use of the
Yahweh name. He knew something of the promises about "blessing", and
considered that Isaac had received blessing from Yahweh. Those material
blessings, however, were but attention grabbers, to signpost that
generation to understand that there were far greater spiritual blessings
yet to come. But as in our lives, the Kingdom life is also now as well as
not yet.
Gen 26:30 He made them a feast, and they ate and drank- Eating
and drinking at such a feast was a sign of the confirming of a covenant;
in this case, the reconfirming of a covenant already made in Gen.
21:21,22. The memorial feast, the breaking of bread, is our equivalent of
this; it is an opportunity to personally reconfirm our part in the new
covenant.
Gen 26:31 They rose up some time in the morning, and swore one to
another. Isaac sent them away, and they departed from him in peace-
Abimelech had insisted that he had sent Isaac away in
peace (:29); but now Isaac does that to Abimelech. We are left with the
impression that Isaac was unreasonably paranoid about Abimelech, although
God worked through his irrational fears; see on :27.
Gen 26:32 It happened the same day, that Isaac’s servants came, and
told him concerning the well which they had dug, and said to him, We have
found water- Isaac had moved away from Rehoboth, the dream home, as
it were, where he imagined he had 'found room', and had a secure, private
source of water. However, as noted on :23,24, he was moved on from there
because it was God's purpose that Isaac should not settle down, but ever
live the life of a pilgrim. His sacrifice of the well there was
compensated for; he was taught that God can provide wells anywhere, at
will.
Gen 26:33 He called it Shibah. Therefore the name of the city is
Beersheba to this day- All the drama about the wells was unnecessary.
Isaac thought he needed them in order to preserve the wealth, in terms of
flocks, which Yahweh had given him. But now he realized that God can give
wells, water and blessing without his needing to strive and argue and even
fight for the wells. And he learnt this at Beersheba, where he had grown
up as young man (Gen. 22:19). He came full circle, back to his roots with
his faithful father Abraham. And so many lives have done the same.
Gen 26:34 When Esau was forty years old, he took as wife Judith, the
daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath, the daughter of Elon the
Hittite- Isaac his father had also married at 40. This again has the
ring of psychological credibility; that he thought of marriage at the same
age as his father. But at 40, Isaac had taken special care to marry within
the faith, whereas Esau did the opposite. Abraham had bought property from
the Hittites (Gen. 23:10,16,18,20)- this is emphasized multiple times. And
that is understood in the New Testament as an act which reflected the
great paradox- that he bought land which was his as an eternal possession.
But Esau married into them, instead of recognizing that he merely lived
amongst them on his spiritual pilgrimage to a far greater destination. We
learn from Gen. 27:46 that Rebekah was 'weary of her life' because of her
Hittite daughters in law. Rebekah had sacrificed all she knew and once
held dear for the sake of marrying within the faith, as explained in Gen.
24. She found her son marrying outside of the faith to be a source of huge
mental agony. The names of the girls and their fathers are all suggestive
of idol worship.
Gen 26:35 They grieved Isaac’s and Rebekah’s spirits- Gen. 24
explained the great lengths and sacrifices they both went to in order to
honour the principle of marrying within the faith, in order to raise the
Godly seed. They of all believers would have been so heartbroken to see
their son marrying unbelievers; but often we are tested in family life on
the very issues over which we ourselves have taken a strong stand. The
grief of spirit was intense; Gen. 27:46 records that Rebekah was 'weary of
her life' because of these daughters in law.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter 
