And Jacob had cooked a dish; and Esau came from the field, and he was faint.
Genesis 25:29 looks like an ordinary household scene: one brother at the cooking pot, the other stumbling home worn out from the hunt. Yet the whole story of Esau and Jacob turns here, on the question of what a man will trade when his body is crying out.
Nothing in the verse warns that anything large is at stake. Yet a passing appetite, met at the wrong moment, set the whole bargain in motion.
Passing hunger led to the most serious results. Jacob boiled a stew of lentils on the day Esau came back faint and starving (v. 29). This gave the occasion. Jacob deeply wanted that title. For his forefathers and his descendants it was tied to blessing, and he knew his brother put no such value on it. He therefore took advantage of Esau's need to strike the bargain.
Esau's choice was no slip. It fit the man he already was.
Esau never lived as a stranger in the land of promise. He was at home there, and he had no heavenly hope. He made the early life of Nimrod his own, even if he never thought of him. From the outset he was as unlike Abraham as one of the family line could be. His love of excitement and reckless adventure made him despise the family circle. It also made him despise the dull duty of caring for the herds and the flocks. Others might look for the city with the foundations, whose builder and maker is God. That had no place at all in Esau's heart. For him the present life was all.
There is a second layer here, and it comes closer to home.
In these two sons we have a picture of the two seeds, with the contrast between the flesh and the Spirit. The natural comes first, and then the spiritual. The strange contradiction the believer finds in his own heart, the conflict of two natures, is set before us here in picture form.
The verse says only that Esau was worn out. Help was closer than he thought.
Was he not brought up just as much as Jacob was, with the familiar sound of God's word and ways, as far as these were known? Yet his test, for a hunter, should have been a light one. He had help at hand that had never failed him, and it would be monstrous to imagine it could fail him now. Even so, he deliberately sold his own birthright "for a single meal" (Hebrews 12:16), and so earned from the Holy Spirit the awful name of a "profane person."
The same writer weighs the hunger against the wait:
The skilled hunter came in from the field without his game, hungry and faint. His appetite was sharpened and then disappointed, and that made him all the more open to the dish of red lentils Jacob had cooked... Why so impatient? Could he not hold out a quarter of an hour? The mother's tent was near. Could he not wait long enough to ask those who had never refused his cry of need?
The buyer in this bargain comes off no better than the seller.
Jacob greatly wanted the blessing carried by the birthright, while to Esau it meant practically nothing. He was willing to barter it for the passing satisfaction a hungry man feels when he has eaten a good meal of pottage. The bargain was struck, and so Esau despised his birthright and lost it. But even on Jacob's side the deal did him no credit. It was a case of seeking a right thing in a wrong way. He did not get the blessing then. Later he did get it from his father, but he only got it from God when he was afterwards brought face to face with Him.
The stew was a small thing. That is the warning.
Esau starts his worldly history by flinging lightly back in the face of God what His goodness had given him... Do not forget this — that every sinner has, in a certain sense, a birthright. You have been born into a world to which the Saviour has come, and that Saviour came to save sinners. Suppose you do not receive that Saviour. Suppose you hold on in the ways of the world, deluded by Satan, and care only for the things of this life. Then you simply follow the footsteps of Esau, and despise your birthright for a bowl of stew — that is, for the things that serve the body.
- Occasion. A pot of lentils and a tired hunter — an ordinary hour led to the most serious results.
- Character. Esau was at home in the present world and had no heavenly hope. His hunger only showed the man he already was.
- Excuse. He was faint, not desperate, with his mother's tent in reach — the test was light, and that is what makes the trade so serious.
- Bargainer. Jacob wanted the right thing and took it the wrong way. He received the blessing from God only when he was brought face to face with Him.
- Warning. Hold on to this life and let go of what God offers, and you walk Esau's road. You sell a birthright for a single meal.
And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with the red -- the red thing there, for I am faint. Therefore was his name called Edom.
A hungry hunter comes in from the field and sees a pot of red stew. One thing he asks of his brother gives him a new name, Edom, and costs him his birthright. What is a man willing to trade for a moment's relief?
Esau does not ask for food in general; he points at the pot. One writer notices how little he was willing to endure, and how much help was within reach:
No doubt his appetite was sharp, and the dish in front of him was tempting to a hungry hunter. But did he have no father who loved him, no mother to pity him and provide for him? Blame Jacob as you like for seizing the chance to get what he valued, even if Esau did not. And this much was now clear: he would not go hungry and thirsty one hour longer. "That red there" he had to have at once, whatever it cost.
The same writer presses the point that Esau's family was near enough to feed him, so the urgency was self-made:
Why so impatient? Could he not hold out a quarter of an hour? His mother's tent was close by; could he not wait long enough to ask those who had never refused his cry of need — never put him off with a stone or a serpent?
Esau says he is at the point of death. The text itself only says he was faint — "exhausted" in the ESV. One commentator flags the gap between the two:
He does not appear to have been in any real danger of starving. Scripture says he was "faint." He himself says he was at the "point to die." But accuracy was hardly a family trait.
The verse pauses to explain a name. Esau asked for "the red," and red became his name:
Esau got this name because he craved the red stew Jacob had made. Edom means "red." But the name usually refers to his tribe and the land they held.
A second writer sees the new name as the moment the man's true character surfaced, and hears in "Edom" an echo of "Adam":
Now the true character shows itself. Esau despises his birthright, and so shows himself profane. Jacob values it, but goes after it in crooked ways. Esau now appears openly as Edom — that is, Adam, only slightly changed on the outside, and not changed in heart at all.
The birthright carried real, listed privileges:
What makes Esau representative is that he "despised his birthright." That birthright carried, among other things, a double share of the inheritance (Deuteronomy 21:17), rule over the family, and the right to pass on the "Blessing." All of this he gives up for a bowl of stew. He trades manhood for animal appetite. He swaps huge spiritual wealth and privilege for a mouthful of pleasure.
One writer turns the trade into a test for today:
Esau despised his birthright (v. 34), the thing God had given him: it became worth no more to him than a mouthful of stew! How many are like him! They treat satisfying an immediate natural appetite as more important than God's long-range blessing.
The commentators do not make this a story of one villain and one hero. Jacob wanted the right thing, but the way he got it stained him:
Sadly, Jacob took advantage of it. He dragged in God — whom he himself was selfishly ignoring — to bind Esau, who had no fear of Him at all: "Swear to me first." … Both men acted in the flesh! It did not secure Jacob in God's sight. It belonged to those evil days that he later looked back on with shame and sorrow, once grace really governed his soul. And it could only widen the gap between the brothers.
Another writer draws the same double conclusion from the bargain itself:
Esau showed himself a "profane person" (Hebrews 12:16). He asked, "What profit shall this birthright do to me?" Jacob showed himself a man who valued the birthright, but treated it as something to haggle over and buy as cheaply as possible. Esau despised the birthright and lost it. But there is no evidence that Jacob gained it by this sharp dealing. He got it despite that.
- Red asked. Esau pointed at a pot and asked for "the red." One hour's appetite set the price of his birthright.
- Red exaggerated. Scripture says he was faint; he said he was dying. Yet a father who loved him and a mother who would provide for him were close at hand.
- Red named him. The craving gave him the name Edom, "red." The name passed to a tribe and a land — nature on open display, unchanged in heart.
- Red cost him. The birthright meant a double share of the inheritance, rule over the family, and the right to pass on the blessing. He traded it all for one meal.
- Red stained both. Esau despised what God gave; Jacob valued it but bargained for it, and later looked back on the day with shame.
And Jacob said, Sell me now thy birthright.
Esau staggers in from the field, faint and craving the red stew, and his brother Jacob names a price instead of feeding him. The verse raises two questions: what was that price worth, and may a man use a sharp deal to get what God has already promised him?
Jacob was not after a mere title. The birthright was a bundle of real advantages, and that is why Esau's willingness to trade it away marks him out.
What makes Esau representative is this: he "despised his birthright." That birthright carried with it, among other things, a double portion of the inheritance (Deut. 21:17), rule over the family, and the privilege of passing on the "Blessing." He gives up all of it for a bowl of stew. He trades manhood for animal appetite. He exchanges immense spiritual wealth and privilege for a mouthful of physical satisfaction.
God had said before their birth that the elder would serve the younger. So the bargain is strange: Jacob haggled for what was already his.
At the beginning Jacob had a claim to the inheritance in the grace and sovereignty of God. "The elder shall serve the younger" was God's decree in his favour. God did not let Esau's natural rights as the elder stand in his way. God's purpose of grace secured everything to Jacob. That was his only claim, but it was enough — just as it is ours. From simple confidence in this he turned aside. He tried to get his brother's signature on this title (Gen. 25:31), and then, by trickery, to get his father's as well. (Gen. 27)
One brother's collapse became the other brother's chance.
Passing hunger led to the most serious results. Jacob had boiled a stew of lentils on the day Esau came back faint and starving (v. 29). This gave him the occasion. Jacob longed for that title. For his forefathers and his descendants it was bound up with blessing. He knew his brother placed no such value on it. So he took advantage of Esau's need to strike the bargain. "Feed me, please, with the red — that red there," said the exhausted hunter. "Sell me your birthright now," the unbelieving believer eagerly replied.
Jacob prized what Esau threw away, but his method was wrong. One writer presses further: the deal did not even deliver the goods.
The birthright became the subject of a business deal. Esau showed himself to be a "profane person" (Heb. 12:16), saying, "What good is this birthright to me?" Jacob showed himself to be a man who valued the birthright, yet treated it as something to haggle over and buy at the lowest price he could. Esau despised the birthright and lost it. But there is no evidence that Jacob got it through this sharp practice. He got it despite that.
Getting a thing by scheming does not settle the heart. That is why the man who bargained for the birthright in chapter 25 still went along with his mother's scheme in chapter 27. Assurance came only later, when God brought him near.
Yet possessing the birthright failed to give Jacob the assurance of the blessing it stood for. If it had, he would not later have gone along so readily with his mother's unworthy scheme to secure it for him. And why? He had grasped the desired mercy in a natural way. So he got none of the satisfaction he would have known if it had come to him in a divine way. A divine way always connects the soul with the Lord. If a mercy is not connected with the Lord, it may often make me more miserable. But if it is, if I know it flows from His love, the heart receives it in quietness and peace. The birthright, his father's blessing, and the vision at Bethel all failed to assure Jacob's soul of the reality of the portion he so prized and needed. Only the wrestling at Mahanaim, where God brought him into personal nearness and subjection, established him in the assurance of it.
Scripture's verdict falls on the seller. One writer turns it on the reader.
To look down on God's promise of blessing is very bad. Now God makes a promise. If you, a sinner, believe on His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, God will forgive your sins and give you peace, joy, and everlasting life. If you despise this, not only do you lose this greatest gift, but later, even if you seek with tears, you may not get it... If you seek God now, you will find Him.
- Promised — Jacob's claim rested on God's word that the elder would serve the younger. That alone was enough. Turning from it started the trouble.
- Priced — The birthright meant a double portion, headship of the family, and the right to pass on the blessing. Esau sold all of it for one meal.
- Purchased — Jacob valued the right thing. But he treated it as a business deal and haggled for it with a starving man.
- Pointless — The deal gave him no peace. Chapter 27 shows him scheming again. Only being brought near to God settled his heart.
- Personal — Esau is the warning. Despise God's promise now, and tears may not win it back later. Seek God now and you will find Him.
And Esau said, Behold, I am going to die, and of what use can the birthright be to me?
Esau comes in from the field worn out and smells his brother's stew. He sells his birthright for one meal, arguing that a dying man has no use for a future. Two questions follow: what was he selling, and was he as close to death as he claimed?
So what was Esau selling? One writer lists three things:
The birthright he sold carried three blessings: 1. The father's blessing and the place of head of the family; 2. The honour of being in the direct line of the promised One — Shem–Abraham–Isaac; 3. Acting as priest for the household. Esau despised all of this for a moment of bodily pleasure. Many follow him today. They could have greater blessings, but they love pleasure more than they love God.
The verse gives us Esau's logic in his own words, and one writer takes that logic apart:
The natural heart places no value on the things of God. To it God's promise seems vague, worthless and powerless, simply because God is not known… Man values anything he can see, because sight rules him, not faith. To him the present is everything; the future carries no weight — it feels like the flimsiest guess. So it was with Esau. Here is his mistaken reasoning: "I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?" What strange reasoning! The present is slipping from beneath my feet, so I will despise and entirely let go of the future? Time is fading from my view, so I will abandon all interest in eternity!
The text says only that Esau was faint. His claim to be at death's door is his own reading of an empty stomach. One commentator presses the point with simple questions:
Why so impatient? Could he not hold out a quarter of an hour? The mother's tent was near; could he not wait long enough to ask of those who had never refused his cry of need — never put him off with a stone or a snake?
Scripture's word for his state is milder than his own:
He exchanges immense spiritual wealth and privilege for a moment of pleasure. He is the standing example of the profane person who recklessly throws away the future while grabbing at the present… He does not seem to have been desperate for food: Scripture says he was "faint." He himself says he was "about to die," but this family was not known for accuracy.
The loss shaped the rest of his life:
Esau sold his birthright for a bowl of stew. He despised it. At that moment, present ease and relief were everything to him… He traded it away, and though he longed for his father's blessing and sought it with tears, he could never regain what he had lost… With a great and bitter cry he said, "Bless me, even me, O my father." But he said no word of confession about what he had done. He showed no penitent spirit.
Jacob is no hero in this scene either:
The birthright became the subject of a business deal. Esau revealed himself as a "profane person" (Heb. 12:16), saying, "Of what use is a birthright to me?" Jacob showed himself to be a man who valued the birthright but still treated it as something to trade for, and to buy as cheaply as he could. Esau despised the birthright and lost it. But there is no evidence that Jacob got it by this sharp dealing. He got it despite that dealing, not because of it.
Christ also gave up what was His by right — but for the opposite reason:
To seek something here would be to despise our heavenly birthright for a worldly life. We must watch carefully, so that no one becomes a profane person like Esau, who sold his birthright for one meal. How wonderfully the blessed Lord contrasts with this! True, He surrenders His prospects, His glory, His kingdom, as Son of Man; but not so that He may live. On the contrary, He gives them up so that He may die. He did not despise His birthright, or say, "Of what use is a birthright to Me?"
- Appetite — Esau was faint, not dying. His own exaggeration turned passing hunger into an excuse, with food and family close at hand.
- Contempt — the natural heart values only what it can see. God's promise looked worthless next to a hot meal.
- Forfeit — he sold the family headship, a place in the line of the promised One, and the priesthood of the home. He never got it back. His later tears begged for the blessing; they confessed nothing.
- Bargain — Jacob wanted the right thing by the wrong method. He received the birthright despite his sharp dealing, not because of it.
- Contrast — Christ gave up His prospects, His glory and His kingdom too, but He did it so that He could die. He never asked what use His birthright was to Him.
And Jacob said, Swear unto me now. And he swore unto him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.
Two brothers strike a bargain over a bowl of stew, and the older seals it with an oath before he eats. The deal is quick. But commentators treat it as the turning point of both lives, and they press one question: what changed hands?
The birthright was not simply a larger share of the family estate. Writers connect it to the promise running through Abraham's family.
The birthright became the great test, and in their attitude to it we can see they were indeed two kinds of people. Jacob coveted it and Esau despised it. What was involved in the birthright? The one who had it was in the direct line, moving on toward that "Seed," in whom all nations were to be blessed. The birthright led to CHRIST.
Esau said a dying man gains nothing from a birthright. Writers read that excuse as proof that his heart had made its choice long before the stew was cooked.
His heart was never really on the birthright, because he had no true appreciation of the inheritance. He looked like the heir of God's promises, but that appearance was false. He had no faith, and only faith makes a promise precious. Then a crisis comes. The birthright now seems unreal to him, and he weighs it against the smallest or poorest scrap of earthly gain. He deliberately prefers the creature to the Creator... Meat was more to him than God.
The same choice shows up elsewhere in Scripture.
Esau was the "profane" one. His hope and his heart were tied to life in this world, and to that only. He himself said, "I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?" Like the Gadarenes, and like Judas, Esau would sell his title to Christ. But Jacob had faith, and was ready to buy what Esau was ready to sell.
Jacob asked for an oath. He used God's name to bind his brother, while slighting God himself.
Jacob took advantage of it. He brought in God — whom he himself was selfishly slighting — to bind Esau, who had no fear of Him at all: "Swear to me now." And he did swear to sell his birthright to Jacob. Both sides acted in the flesh! It did not secure Jacob in the sight of God. Instead it became part of those evil days he later looked back on with shame and sorrow, when grace truly governed his soul.
Esau lost the birthright here. Commentators differ over Jacob: one sees faith in his wanting it, another judges how he got it.
Esau despised the birthright and lost it, but on the other hand there is no evidence that Jacob obtained it as a result of this sharp practice. He got it despite that sharp practice.
One writer explains why a blessing grabbed by scheming brings no rest.
Owning the birthright did not give Jacob the assurance of the blessing it stood for. If it had, he would not later have gone along so readily with his mother's unworthy scheme to get it for him. And why? He had grabbed the mercy he wanted in a natural way. So he got none of the satisfaction he would have known if it had reached him in a divine way. A divine way always connects the soul with the Lord.
Commentators sum up Esau in one term — profane — and explain what it means.
So we learn what a profane person is. He is someone who wants to hold both worlds. He wants to enjoy the present without giving up his claim on the future. This is by no means an uncommon case. It describes the worldly person who merely claims to be religious. His conscience has never felt the action of divine truth, and his heart has never felt the influence of divine grace.
The warning comes straight to the reader.
Esau starts his worldly history by flinging lightly back in the face of God what His goodness had given him... every sinner has, in a certain sense, a birthright. You have been born into a world the Saviour has come to, and that Saviour came to save sinners. Suppose you do not receive Him. Suppose you hold on in the ways of the world, deluded by Satan, caring only for the things of this life. Then you simply follow in the footsteps of Esau.
- The birthright — it placed its holder in the line moving toward the promised Seed; it "led to CHRIST."
- The bargain — Esau weighed an unseen inheritance against one meal and chose the meal. He had no faith, and only faith makes a promise precious.
- The oath — Jacob brought God's name in to bind a brother who feared God not at all, while slighting God himself.
- The gain — Esau lost the birthright; Jacob got it despite his scheming, not because of it, and found no rest in what he grabbed.
- The label — a profane person wants both worlds — the present enjoyed, the future still claimed.
And Jacob gave Esau bread and the dish of lentils; and he ate and drank, and rose up and went away. Thus Esau despised the birthright.
Genesis 25 ends with a meal that costs a man everything. Esau eats, gets up and walks off, and the story closes with one line of verdict. The question is not why Jacob bargained. It is how a man could value God's gift so little that a bowl of food outbid it.
The birthright was not a sentimental family honour. Writers who trace its content find several real privileges bound up in it.
The blessings of the birthright he sold consisted in three things: 1. The father's blessing and the place of head of the family; 2. The honour of being in the direct line of the promised One — Shem-Abraham-Isaac; 3. The exercise of the domestic priesthood. Esau despised all this for a moment of bodily pleasure. Many follow him today. They could have greater blessings, but they love pleasure more than they love God.
The verse turns on one word: despised. What makes it so serious is who gave the birthright.
Scripture calls Esau a profane person for selling his birthright. It was a privilege God had given him, and he should have valued it as such.
Esau was not truly about to die. He would not wait.
No; he had to have the tempting food that instant. In his hasty self-will it seemed like death to wait a few moments longer. Sadly, Jacob took advantage of it. He brought in God to bind Esau, who had no fear of Him at all: "Swear to me first." Yet Jacob himself was slighting that same God for his own ends. … Both sides acted in the flesh!
Kelly presses further, asking what was waiting for Esau at home.
But did he have no father who loved him, no mother to pity him and provide? Blame Jacob as you like for seizing the chance to get what he valued and Esau did not. And this was now clear: Esau would not stay hungry and thirsty one hour longer. "That red there" he had to have at once, whatever it cost.
The verse ends not with the deal but with how Esau walked away. That detail gives him away.
"He ate and drank and rose and went his way," refers, I think, to his profane indifference.
Behind the indifference lies a way of reasoning that many share.
The natural heart places no value on the things of God. To it God's promise is vague, worthless and powerless, for the simple reason that God is not known. So present things carry great weight in how people judge. A man values anything he can see, because sight rules him, not faith… What strange reasoning! The present is slipping from under my feet, so I will despise the future and let it go completely? Time is fading from my view, so I will drop all interest in eternity!
Esau's contempt did not begin at the cooking pot.
His heart was never on the birthright, because he never valued the inheritance. He looked like the heir of God's promises, but his position was completely false. He had no faith, and only faith makes a promise precious… The one value of his title was that it looked forward to God's favour. Yet Esau never enjoyed God Himself, so God was no strength to him in his day of trial. Food meant more to him than God.
The word profane describes a whole way of living, and the warning reaches past Esau.
The profane person is one who lives wholly for this world, and shuts God and His world out of his thoughts. Esau had not only done this but also had despised what was of God. When people go so far as to despise God and His blessing, they perish… In our own day and land, crowds are slipping into that same great sin over the gospel, and they stand on the brink of destruction.
The chapter shows two failures, not one. Commentators are careful to say that Jacob's desire was right and his method was not.
Esau despised the birthright and lost it. But there is no evidence that Jacob got it because of this sharp dealing. He got it despite it.
Though Jacob used wrong methods to get the birthright, one thing is clear: Jacob valued what God had to give.
- Given — the birthright was God's own gift to Esau. That is why the verse says he despised it, and not simply that he traded badly.
- Craved — nothing forced his hand. He would not hold out another hour, and both brothers acted in the flesh: one grasping, one giving away.
- Despised — sight ruled him. What he could see weighed more than what God had promised, so eternity looked like nothing beside a meal.
- Indifferent — he ate, rose and walked off without a backward look. That is the mark of a profane man: God shut out of his thoughts.
- Warned — Jacob schemed, yet he valued what God had to give. Esau's sin is still open today: anyone who hears the gospel can despise the blessing.