HOMILETICS. Vers. 27-84.-The twin 'brothers. I. THE GROWING LADS. 1. .Diverse in daily calling. Esau elected to follow the adventurous and roving life of a hunter; Jacob, the simpler and lees exciting occupation of keeping sheep. The principles that guided their respective choices are not explained ; but, like the selection of trades by other inexperienced youths, these were doubtless due to physical constitution, mental temperament, the influence of example, the effect of parental counsel, and above all the over-ruling providence of God. Cf. Cain and Abel (eh. iv. 2). 2. Unlike in personal character. Esau was a wild man in disposition no less than in action, a youth of strong animal propensities and essentially mundane proclivities. Jacob, without being religious, was quiet, sedate, fond of home life, and studious of peace, though not without a vein of duplicity in his soul's texture. This diversity in character, not due to parentage, birth, or education, which in both were alike, modern ~cience would expl11in by molecular arrangement. Biblical theology goes a step behind, and traces it to God (Rom. ix. 11). 3. .Divided in parental favour. Esau was loved by Isaac, Jacob by Rebekah. Besides being sinful in itself-scarcely anything can justify partiality in parental affection-the conduct of Isaac and Rebe- kah was more than likely hurtful to the lads, leaving on their consciences a sense of injustice, estranging them from each other in fraternal regard, nnd helping them unconsciously to fulfil the untoward destiny of mutual rivalry a.nd jealousy already predicted for them. II. THE TIRED BUNTER. 1. His fa.mishing condition. I£ Esau was really foint, it indicated too great eagerness in following his sports. Even in honourable callings and profitable pursuits moderation is a duty. Rom. xii. 11 will assist traders and merchants to preserve the golden mean between slothfulness and slavishness in business. If E,j(lu was not renlly faint, but only fatigued and hungry, it was an instance of exaggerated talking which with some is common, but by a.II should be avoided. 2. His ravenous request. This indicated an impatient spirit, which the words attempt to reproduce--a spirit characteristic of ill-b11le.nced natures, resulting in most instances from unsubdued selfishness, betraying frequently into sins 11nd foults that might otherwise be avoided, and at all times ill-befitting noble souls a.nd renewed he11rts. It Ill.so discovered II gluttonous appetite. The glutton's god is his belly, the glutton's temple his kitchen, the glutton's high priest his cook, the glut- ton's ritu11l, Let us ee.t and drink. Let saints beware of gluttony (Prov. xxiii. 2). III. THE DESPISED BIRTHRIGHT. 1. The base proposal. " Sell me this day thy birthright." Jo.cob's desire to deprive Esau of his right of primogeniture w11s envious, unbrotherly, and, in the light of the pre-natal oracle, imp11tient and un- believing. The conditions of s11le were mee.n, ex11cting, e.nd selfish. That Jacob's conduct w11s the fruit of grace or faith is difficult to credit, though God, who often works with despicable instruments, over-ruled it for the accomplishment of his own designs. 2. The foolish answer. "Behold, I am at the point to die: and wh11t profit shall this birthright do to me?" An ejaculation discovering both contempt £or spiritual and doubt of future things ; the very essence of epicureanism, whether ancient or modern. 3. The unholy oatli. "Swear to me this day ; 11nd he aware unto him." On the p11rt of both giver 11nd receiver this w11s wrong. Neither nad Esau right to part with his birthright until God in his providence took it from him; nor had Jacob the right to 11ccept th11t t>irthright until God tra.nsferrod it to his h11nds. 4. The unequal ezchange. Jacob got the birthright; Esau got tho pottage. Esau the type of many who accept the devil's bargain of the world (mostly an infini tcsimal fragment of it) for a soul. y 0ENF.SIS. !U2 THE BOOK OF uENESIS. [ell. XXV. 27-34.
HOMILIES BY VARIOUS AUTHORS. Vn. 27.-The "cunning hunter" is set over againat the "plai1i man dwelling in tenf.s." I. THE TWO KINGDOMS, that of mateiialforce and that of moral power are thus represented in contrast and rivalry. · ' II. G?D's WAYS AND MAN'_s WAYS CONTRA_STED. The partialities of the parents foster the special faults of the cluldren. Esau 1s more the man of flesluy impulse because Isaac loved him for l!i~ venison. Jaco~ is 1,wre the crafty supplante,- because Rebekah by her favouritism encouraged him to take advantage of hie brother. III. THE IMPORTANCE OF HOME LIFE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER. The sins of parents are generally in some form transmitted to children. Esau's new name was Edoin, memento of his selfish succumbing to appetite. J(J,C()b's new name was Israel, memento of the victory which by the grace of God he obtained. "Esatt despised his birthright." It was the natural working of a sensual nature. '\Ve beo-in0 by yielding to the lower impulses without thinking how they bind their cords rou nd us. At last we lose the power of distinguishing a mere passing evil from an over- whelming danger, and when we ought to fight, cry, I am at tlie point to die • then in wretched collaps~ ~ll. goes. What is thi~ birthright, what profit? 1. The loss of the s~e of responsibility. ~- The aJ;sorbing hunger after present ftr(ftification. 3. The_ blindness to all proportwn in life. 4. The dulness and stupulity of the ani- malism which does not even care for the very birthright itself, though it is an earthly :i,lvantage. These are the fearful payments which they have to render who, like Esau g·ive themselves up to a mere life of theflesh.-R. '