And Jehovah said to her, Two nations are in thy womb, And two peoples shall be separated from thy bowels; And one people shall be stronger than the other people, And the elder shall serve the younger.
Rebekah's pregnancy was painful, so she asked God what was happening inside her. His answer named two nations, two peoples already dividing, and a reversal of the usual order of birth. It became a key text for one of the Bible's most debated subjects: God's freedom to choose.
Notice first how the answer came. Rebekah did not go to a holy man or a holy place.
The children gave their mother an early sign, as we are told, for her trial, so that she too went to inquire of the Lord... There is no ground to imagine that she consulted Melchizedek or travelled to Moriah. Without either, she knew where to find the Lord and how to inquire of Him. Her faith might be weak, but it was real, and free from any superstitious dependence on a man or a place.
The two boys shared one father, one mother, and one birth. That makes the announcement about them unusually pointed.
God's predestination of their history on earth is clear here. It is all the more striking because the unborn babies had the same mother as well as the same father — twins, in fact... So God's sovereignty was shown to be as free as it is certain to faith. The Jews based their exclusive claim on natural descent, and that claim is disproved... Here flesh is shut out most plainly, and the title rests on the Lord's sovereign pleasure.
Commentators press the timing. A choice made after birth could always be explained away.
The choice of Jacob rather than Esau, even before their birth, asserts the great principle of God's sovereignty... Nothing shows this more fully than the choice of the younger son before either was born. When the younger son is chosen after birth — like Joseph or David — people can say that his actions or natural character earned him the preference, or that the actions and character of the others ruled out their claims. The important principle is that none of them have any claim at all.
Many readers merge this verse with the later line, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." Commentators insist the two must be kept apart.
God did not say "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" before the children were born. He said it hundreds of years later, when the real character and practical ways of each had been fully shown. Before the children were born He said only that "the older shall serve the younger." It is more than a sad mistake to represent God as hating a man before he was born.
The choice announced in the womb did not stay untested.
God's election of Jacob, and the passing over of Esau that followed, brought out something else. The wisdom and rightness of God's choice always shows in the later history. His election always justifies itself in its results.
Esau himself supplied the evidence.
He deliberately sold his birthright for a bowl of stew, and so justified God in His selection.
God's word named nations, not only babies. Their story did not run in a straight line.
By the time of the Gospels the Jews were not only under the rule of Rome; a son of Esau ruled over them in the land. This order was not according to the purpose of God announced from the beginning — that, of Jacob and his brother, the older shall serve the younger. But the chosen people were unfaithful, so God's order was reversed for a time. Esau was on top, though he was an enemy of God and His truth.
Some writers read the two sons as a picture of something every believer knows first-hand.
In these two sons we have a representation of the two seeds, with the contrast between the flesh and the Spirit... The believer finds a strange contradiction in his own heart — a conflict of two natures. Here it is given to us in type, with the promise, thank God, that the flesh will be brought into subjection to the spirit, and that the spirit will triumph in the end.
Jacob's scheming did not cancel the promise, but it cost him.
"The older shall serve the younger" was God's word in favour of Jacob before the children were born. But Jacob did not wait in the patience of faith until the Lord in His own time and way made His promise good. So the promise becomes loaded with reservations, difficulties, and burdens. It will certainly be made good in the end; but because of Jacob's way, his unbelief and scheming, the older will give the younger much trouble.
- Ask. Rebekah's distress drove her straight to God. Her faith was weak but real, and it got an answer no man or place could give.
- Chosen. The twins were unborn and untested, so the choice was God's alone. No one has a claim on Him.
- Not hated. Before their birth God said only that the older would serve the younger. The word about hatred came centuries later, once Esau's character had come out in full.
- Proved. God's choice proves itself in the history that follows. Esau sold his birthright and so justified it.
- Enacted. The promise was certain, but Jacob schemed instead of waiting, and that loaded it with trouble. God secures His purpose; the flesh still has to be brought into subjection.
And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.
Twenty years of childlessness lie behind this short note about the birth of Rebekah's twins. The verse records an answered prayer. It also opens one of the Bible's clearest test cases: one mother, one father, one birth — and two very different futures already announced by God.
The twins were a long time coming. Isaac married at forty, and the waiting went on from there.
God Himself tests faith. The promise is sure, but the believer has to wait for it… Isaac had no wife until he was forty years old. Even then he remained childless some twenty years… It was grace. But grace showed the channel through which the blessing would flow. That drew out his prayers, while patience had its perfect work.
The barrenness itself had a purpose in God's hands.
The barren condition of Rebekah led Isaac to exercise faith and to cast himself upon the Lord for help. And He answered him. God delights to take up what is weak and barren and show His power in answer to prayer.
The detail that they were twins is not decoration. It rules out every natural explanation for God's choice.
Predestination is clear here — God settled their history on earth beforehand. This is all the more striking because the babies not yet born had the same mother as well as the same father — in fact, they were twins… This shows that God's sovereignty is as free as it is certain to faith. It rules out natural descent, on which the Jews founded their exclusive claim.
So where does the reason lie? Not in the boys, but in God Himself.
Both he and Esau had one mother, and they were born at the same time, for they were twins. By nature Esau had first place, by only a few moments. Again, however, God set aside the first and chose the second, saying, "The older shall serve the younger"… This shows us that God chooses because of what HE IS IN HIMSELF, and not because of what men may be, as shown in their works.
Later Scripture speaks of God loving Jacob and hating Esau. Writers are careful to keep that statement in its own place and time.
You must distinguish between Genesis 25:23 and Malachi 1:2-3. God spoke the first before the children were born. He spoke the second hundreds of years later, after each had fully shown his conduct and character… The apostle is establishing the absolute sovereignty of divine mercy: God's right to do as He wills. He proves to Israel that arguing against divine sovereignty means giving up all their privileges. So how did they get in? Was it by birth? No; for on that ground Ishmael and Esau had the precedence. Was it by works? No; for they made the golden calf. How then? Simply by God's sovereign mercy. Well then, if God is sovereign He can have mercy on whom He will; and blessed be His Name, that opens the door for us poor Gentiles.
Writers also mark what the words about hating Esau do not mean.
This clearly does not mean any unconditional and eternal condemnation… In Genesis the Lord speaks only of having chosen Jacob. And what creature of the dust can challenge His right to do so?
The two sons picture a conflict every believer knows from the inside.
In these two sons we have a representation of the two seeds, with the contrast between the flesh and the Spirit. The natural comes first, and "then the spiritual." The believer finds a strange contradiction in his own heart: the conflict of two natures. That conflict is pictured here for us — with the promise, thank God, that the flesh will be brought under the spirit, and that the spirit will win in the end.
The birth gave both boys names that would describe their lives.
Esau came first. He was red in appearance and hairy, with red hair. This reminds us of Adam, which means "red earth," for Esau's history would show what man is in the flesh… The second son, Jacob, followed, his hand holding Esau's heel… His name means "he will take by the heel"… That is what Jacob was in the flesh. But God later changed his name to Israel, "a prince with God." God's counsels would stand, and He did a work in Jacob's soul that made a glorious change in the man.
- Before the prayer — Rebekah was barren, so Isaac prayed. Twenty childless years taught him patience.
- Before the birth — God named the order of blessing while the twins were unborn. No act of theirs could explain it.
- Before the works — one father, one mother, one birth. Descent and merit are both ruled out. The choice rests on God Himself.
- Before the verdict — the word about loving Jacob and hating Esau came centuries later, after both men had shown their true character. Do not merge the two statements.
- After the choice — the two brothers picture the conflict of flesh and Spirit in the believer. Jacob's new name shows that God's purpose ends in a changed man, not just a chosen one.