Some translations of Philippians 2 say Jesus “emptied Himself,” while the NKJV says He “made Himself of no reputation.” Does that mean He gave up His deity or switched off divine attributes to become man? Paul’s sentence gives us a different explanation: the eternal Son took the form of a servant and became truly human. I want to follow that explanation carefully, because what we believe about His humility must agree with who He is.
Philippians 2 Begins with the Life of the Church
Paul wrote from prison to believers who were facing opposition. At the end of Philippians 1, he urged them to stand together for the gospel without being frightened by their enemies. He then appealed to the comfort and love they had in Christ and the fellowship they shared in the Spirit. Those gifts should affect how they treated each other.
Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.
Philippians 2:3
A congregation can defend sound doctrine and still allow rivalry to spoil its service. I might do something useful while quietly resenting the recognition someone else receives. Paul confronts that ambition by telling believers to consider other people’s concerns, then says, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” His teaching about the incarnation, the Son’s becoming man, belongs to that appeal.
Paul also points to people the Philippians knew. Timothy genuinely cared about their welfare, and Epaphroditus nearly died in the work of Christ. Later, Paul urges Euodia and Syntyche, women who had labored with him in the gospel, to agree in the Lord. Knowing the truth and having served faithfully do not make strained relationships impossible.
We need to understand the doctrine Paul teaches without overlooking the selfishness he is addressing. If I can explain Christ’s two natures but refuse necessary work unless it comes with a title, I have not taken Paul’s instruction seriously. The Son’s willingness to serve challenges the way we protect our own importance.
The Eternal Son Took the Servant’s Form
Paul begins with Christ already existing “in the form of God.” He does not introduce a creature who eventually earns divine status. The One who became a servant possessed divine glory before that descent began.
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Philippians 2:5-6
The Greek word morphe, translated “form,” appears in both descriptions. Christ was in God’s form, and He took the form of a bondservant. Paul presents the servant’s condition as a real humbling, rather than a role Jesus only pretended to take. We should not read the earlier description of God’s form as a mere appearance either. The Son truly possessed the divine glory from which He came to serve.
The wording about “robbery” has been translated in different ways. Some readings emphasize that equality with God was not something Christ was trying to seize; others emphasize that He did not use the equality He possessed for His own advantage. These differ in how they explain the expression, but Paul begins with Christ in God’s form and proceeds to His willing service. Equality with God was not a prize He had to earn by becoming obedient.
I understand Paul to be saying that the Son chose to serve the Father’s saving purpose rather than insist on the treatment His divine glory deserved. He could accept humiliation without denying His identity. He knew who He was when He entered a world where people would misunderstand, reject, and finally crucify Him.
Emptying Means Addition, Not Loss
The Greek verb ekenosen gives us the language of emptying in verse 7. If we stop at that word, we can start imagining a container and deciding which divine qualities Jesus must have poured out. Paul immediately explains his meaning by telling us what Christ took upon Himself.
but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
Philippians 2:7
Taking a servant’s form and coming in human likeness explain the emptying. Paul does not list divine attributes Christ discarded. He describes the eternal Son accepting a complete human nature and the low position of a servant. That is why I understand this as addition rather than a reduction of His deity.
Omniscience means knowing all things, and omnipotence means having unlimited power. The Son’s divine nature did not cease to possess those attributes when He became man. He accepted a human life and did not demand an outward display of His divine glory at every moment. Concealing that glory from ordinary sight is different from losing it.
Some kenotic theories, named from the language of emptying, claim that becoming human required the Son to surrender deity or divine attributes. That goes beyond saying He accepted a lowly life. Paul explains His emptying through taking the servant’s form and human likeness. Giving up what makes Him God is not the action Paul describes.
This also requires us to be precise about who became man. Jesus Christ is one Person with two natures, divine and human. The divine nature did not turn into flesh, and the Son did not move into an already existing human person. The eternal Son Himself took a complete human nature. His humanity remains genuinely human and His deity remains genuinely divine; they do not blend into a third kind of being.
The term hypostatic union names this union of two natures in one Person. Everything Jesus does and experiences belongs to the one Lord Jesus Christ, though we distinguish what belongs to His divine nature from what belongs to His humanity. The study on the hypostatic union of Christ explains that further.
True Humanity Never Meant Less Deity
Neither “likeness” nor His appearance as a man means He was only pretending to be human. Jesus ate, slept, grew weary, and experienced hunger and sorrow. His body was real, and so were the blood He shed and the pain He endured.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:14
The Word became flesh without ceasing to be the eternal Son. The view called docetism treats His humanity as only an appearance. If He only seemed to have a human body, the blood He shed and the death He suffered would not be real either. Scripture describes a Savior who actually shared our humanity and died to redeem us, while remaining without sin.
In Hebrews 2, Paul explains that the Son shared our flesh and blood to save us. He became like His brethren and serves as the merciful and faithful High Priest who makes propitiation for their sins. Propitiation is the sacrifice that deals with sin and satisfies what God’s holiness requires. The Savior genuinely came near to those He would redeem, without becoming guilty of their wrongdoing.
His real humanity enabled Him to die a human death and be buried. His bodily resurrection is the firstfruits of His people’s resurrection, the beginning that assures us they will rise too. We cannot protect His divine glory by making that humanity less real. Neither can we reduce Him to a merely human savior who lacks the divine authority to reveal the Father fully and accomplish our salvation. The same Person is fully God and fully man.
John 5 helps explain why His obedience to the Father does not make Him a powerless creature. After Jesus healed a man on the Sabbath, His opponents accused Him of making Himself equal with God. His answer describes the Son acting in complete unity with the Father.
Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.
John 5:19
If we stop after the words that the Son can do nothing of Himself, we miss the rest of His statement. He does whatever the Father does, and does it in the same way. He speaks of giving life and exercising judgment, and in John 5:23 He requires people to honor the Son as they honor the Father. An ordinary servant has no right to demand the honor owed to God.
Paul describes the fullness of Christ’s deity in Colossians 2:9.
For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;
Colossians 2:9
His body does not make Him less divine, and deity did not merely visit Him for a season. The study on the deity of Jesus brings together the wider biblical testimony. We need to keep that testimony alongside the reality of His hunger, weariness, and suffering, without explaining either away.
Jesus performed His miracles in agreement with the Father’s will, exercising authority over disease, demons, nature, sin, and death. He did not use that authority to put on a spectacle or evade His saving mission. In Matthew 4, the devil offered Him the kingdoms of the world if He would worship him. Jesus refused that demand. He would obey the Father rather than accept a kingdom through rebellion.
The Servant Path Reaches the Cross and Exaltation
Paul follows the Son’s willing service to the death He endured. The One who existed in God’s form accepted not only human life but the public shame and agony of crucifixion.
And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
Philippians 2:8
Jesus obeyed the Father even though He had the power to prevent what His enemies did to Him. In John 10, He says He lays down His life willingly and has authority to take it again. Wicked rulers authorized His condemnation, soldiers carried out the violence, and other lawless people joined in rejecting Him. Their cruelty remained their own sin, even though He chose to endure what they inflicted.
He willingly gave Himself to be slain as the sinless, perfect sacrifice for our sins. He completed His saving work through His shed blood and death before His burial and bodily resurrection. The Father did not punish, curse, abandon, strike, bruise, or pour wrath on Jesus. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit remained united in the saving purpose while guilty people killed the One they should have worshiped.
When I speak about His humility, I need to remember that real suffering. He did more than offer a sympathetic example to hurting people. The sinless Son bore our sins as the spotless Lamb and gave His own life to redeem us.
In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace
Ephesians 1:7
Forgiveness is received by grace through faith in the crucified and risen Christ. Becoming modest enough or serving enough people cannot earn it. As 1 Peter 1 explains, our redemption cost Christ His precious blood, not silver or gold. Humble service and other good works follow salvation as its fruit; they do not keep us saved. The study on the blood of Christ for salvation considers that cost more fully.
In Philippians 2:9, Paul follows Christ’s obedience to death with His exaltation.
Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name,
Philippians 2:9
This does not mean Jesus became God as a reward for obeying. He was already in God’s form before taking the servant’s place. The crucified and risen Lord is publicly honored, and His exaltation does not end His humanity or change His identity.
The following verses say that every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Paul recalls Isaiah 45, where the LORD declares that every knee will bow to Him. By applying those words to Jesus, Paul affirms His deity without setting Him against the Father.
Believers gladly confess Him now. Those who reject Him will finally have to acknowledge the Lord they opposed, but defeated recognition is not the same as saving faith.
The Mind of Christ Changes His People
Paul calls us to imitate Christ’s humility without pretending that we can repeat His saving work. No Christian can atone for another person’s sin, because only the sinless God-man can redeem through His blood. His grace brings us new life, and His example teaches us how to serve as people He has saved.
Jesus did not pretend to be worthless or deny what was true about Himself. We do not have to do that either. But having a legitimate claim to honor does not mean every decision should be governed by protecting our comfort or demanding recognition.
Am I willing to help with necessary work even when another person is chosen to lead it? If I have done wrong, will I admit it plainly rather than spend the conversation defending myself? These are situations in which the desire for recognition or self-protection can become more important to me than the people I claim to serve.
In a disagreement, humility may mean listening long enough to understand the other person’s concern before insisting on my preference. It may require patience while a strained relationship is repaired, or willingness to make room for another believer’s gifts. Jesus did not obey the Father only when it was convenient, and I should not call myself willing to serve while resenting every demand on my time.
None of this requires us to deny truth or excuse harmful conduct. Jesus’ humility never required Him to approve a lie. We can address wrongdoing firmly without humiliating someone to establish our own importance. Nor should we turn every difference of opinion into a contest for influence.
I also need to be honest about the pride that can hide behind humble-sounding words. If my aim is for people to admire how little credit I claim, I am still trying to make them admire me. Paul directs us to the Son who willingly obeyed the Father’s saving will, not to a more discreet method of self-promotion.
Jesus truly became man and understands human weakness without excusing sin. He remains fully God and mighty to save. Someone who has genuinely been born again is secure in Him; we do not have to defend our status in every conversation as though another person’s opinion could take away that life. Our acceptance rests on Christ, and we are free to consider someone else’s good.
My Final Thoughts
Jesus emptied Himself by taking the servant’s place and becoming truly man, while remaining fully God. His humility brought Him to a real cross, where He willingly shed His blood and died for our sins before rising bodily. The Lord whom all will acknowledge is the Savior on whom we depend, not merely an example of admirable behavior. As someone who needs His grace, I cannot reasonably treat my own reputation as too precious to risk in serving others. Paul’s teaching calls me to know Christ truthfully and let that knowledge change how I behave toward the people around me.
By the time Naomi returns to Bethlehem, she has lost her husband and both sons. Ruth comes with her as a widowed foreigner, without any promise that life there will be comfortable. I do not want to hurry past that grief and uncertainty to get to Ruth’s marriage to Boaz. The kindness he shows her begins with a woman who needs food, and his eventual decision to redeem the family involves far more than a private romance. Through their faithfulness, the Lord provides for this bereaved household and prepares the family line that leads to David and Jesus Christ.
Ruth Begins in the Days of the Judges
The opening words place this family “in the days when the judges ruled.” Israel would turn from God, suffer oppression, and cry out for help. After He raised up a judge to deliver them, the people eventually returned to the same disobedience. Judges ends with people doing what was right in their own eyes. Ruth takes us into that period without centering on a national leader or a military victory.
Now it came to pass, in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehem, Judah, went to dwell in the country of Moab, he and his wife and his two sons.
Ruth 1:1
We are not told which judge was serving or given an exact year. The book follows people whose daily faithfulness could easily be overlooked amid Israel’s public troubles. A widow, her daughter-in-law, and a landowner would make decisions in keeping with God’s Word while much of the nation disregarded it. Since their family line leads to David, reading the book only for advice about finding a spouse would miss much of what the Lord was doing.
Bethlehem means “house of bread,” yet famine had left this family looking elsewhere for food. The Law warned that covenant rebellion could bring famine upon Israel, but Ruth does not identify the cause of this particular famine. Nor does it say the deaths in Moab were punishment for Elimelech’s decision to leave. We know what the family suffered without being told that God was judging them for that move.
Elimelech’s name means “my God is King,” a fitting reminder of whom Israel should have obeyed during those years. He took Naomi and their two sons into Moab to live. That country had a difficult relationship with Israel. Its people descended from Lot, its king had hired Balaam to curse Israel, and Moabite women had helped draw Israelites into idolatry. The family was leaving Bethlehem for a land associated with serious hostility to their people and their God.
Elimelech died there, and his sons married the Moabite women Orpah and Ruth. They lived in Moab about ten years, and both sons died as well. Naomi had buried the men who might have provided for her household, while her daughters-in-law had become widows themselves.
Then both Mahlon and Chilion also died; so the woman survived her two sons and her husband.
Ruth 1:5
Along with their grief came the precarious position of women without husbands or sons to support them. Then Naomi heard that the Lord had visited His people by giving them bread. She set out for Judah, and both daughters-in-law began the journey with her.
Ruth Chooses Naomi’s People and God
On the road, Naomi urged the women to return to their own families and seek husbands. She asked whether she could provide more sons for them to marry, and whether they could possibly wait for those sons to grow up. Her question draws on a brother’s duty to preserve the line of his deceased brother. But she had no more sons, and she saw no realistic way to provide husbands from within the family.
Naomi was speaking out of sorrow rather than treating them as a nuisance. Orpah kissed her and turned back as she had urged. The account gives no separate rebuke of Orpah for following that advice, but it draws our attention to Ruth, who clung to Naomi and refused to go.
But Ruth said: “Entreat me not to leave you, Or to turn back from following after you; For wherever you go, I will go; And wherever you lodge, I will lodge; Your people shall be my people, And your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, And there will I be buried. The LORD do so to me, and more also, If anything but death parts you and me.”
Ruth 1:16-17
The Hebrew verb dabaq, used for Ruth’s clinging to Naomi, means to hold fast or remain closely attached. Ruth explains what that attachment will mean: she will share Naomi’s home, people, and future, even to the place of burial. She is not offering sympathy until a more attractive opportunity comes along.
Her commitment also goes beyond affection for her mother-in-law. She declares that Naomi’s God will be her God and invokes the LORD in her oath. A Moabite woman is leaving her former allegiance to place her faith in the God of Israel. She does so without an agreement promising marriage, children, or a comfortable reception in Bethlehem. I find that a much fuller expression of faith than a religious feeling that depends on the next few days going well.
When they reached Bethlehem, the women recognized Naomi, but she asked to be called Mara, meaning bitter. She said she had gone away full and returned empty. These are the words of a woman who has endured devastating loss. We should hear her grief without mocking it or assuming that sorrow has canceled her faith.
Ruth had returned with Naomi, yet Naomi spoke of coming back empty. From the end of the book, we can see what Naomi could not yet recognize: the Lord would use this daughter-in-law to restore her household. That does not undo her losses or make them less painful. It does keep us from treating Naomi’s sense of emptiness as the whole of what God was doing.
The women arrived at the beginning of barley harvest. They still needed food, and Ruth now had access to a provision God had already made in His Law.
Providence and Mercy Meet in Boaz’s Field
Israelite farmers were not to gather every last portion of a harvest for themselves. The edges of their fields and the gleanings were to be left for people in need. Other instructions also protected widows, orphans, and strangers, including the command not to retrieve every forgotten bundle. Ruth could go behind the harvesters and gather food because God had required landowners to leave something for her.
When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not wholly reap the corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. And you shall not glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather every grape of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:9-10
She “happens” to come to the part of the field belonging to Boaz. He was a relative of Elimelech, though Ruth did not set out knowing where that meeting would lead. The book lets us follow what happened afterward and recognize God’s providence and provision at work. Through the decisions Ruth and Boaz made, He was caring for this family and directing events toward a purpose they could not yet see. Ruth went to work for food and entered the field of a man who could do much more for the family.
Gleaning still required hard work. Ruth asked permission and began gathering what the harvesters left behind. God’s provision did not make her labor unnecessary; it gave her an opportunity to obtain what they needed. Trusting Him did not require her to remain at home waiting for food to appear when there was an honest way to gather it.
Boaz greeted his workers in the LORD’s name and then asked about the young woman gleaning there. He heard what Ruth had done for Naomi and told her to remain with his workers. He commanded the young men not to touch her and allowed her to drink from the water they had drawn. For a foreign widow working among strangers, permission to glean and assurance of protection were practical kindnesses.
When Ruth asked why he had shown favor to a foreigner, Boaz spoke of her loyalty to Naomi and her willingness to leave her own people. He then asked the Lord to reward her.
The LORD repay your work, and a full reward be given you by the LORD God of Israel, under whose wings you have come for refuge.
Ruth 2:12
Boaz also instructed his workers to pull out extra grain for Ruth and leave it where she could gather it. He went beyond the minimum required, and he told them not to rebuke her. She would be able to work without being harassed or treated as though she were stealing from his harvest.
I appreciate how specific his concern was. Someone with less power can be made to feel that help comes with obligations the giver has no right to demand. Boaz used his authority to protect Ruth and provide generously, without exploiting her need. His reverence for God was visible in the instructions he gave his employees.
When Ruth returned with a generous supply of grain, Naomi asked where she had worked. Hearing Boaz’s name gave her a reason for hope beyond another day’s meal: he was a close relative who could act as a redeemer. The woman who had described herself as empty was beginning to recognize kindness toward her family.
The Hebrew word chesed describes kindness, often with the sense of enduring loyalty. Ruth had remained with Naomi at considerable cost, and Boaz was now providing care beyond what he had to give. Through their conduct, we can also see the Lord’s faithful kindness toward people who could not yet understand the full purpose of His provision.
A Redeemer Acts with Honor
A family redeemer, a goel in Hebrew, could act for relatives in danger of losing their property or freedom. Leviticus 25 provides for a close relative to buy back family land. Deuteronomy 25 addresses a different responsibility: a brother preserving the name of a deceased brother through marriage to his childless widow. Both the inheritance and the family line are at stake in Ruth, but Boaz was not the brother of Ruth’s deceased husband, Mahlon. The arrangement recognized at Bethlehem connected redemption of the land with marriage to Ruth; it did not simply repeat the brother-in-law procedure described in Deuteronomy.
Naomi sent Ruth to appeal to Boaz at the threshing floor, where he was winnowing barley to separate the grain from the chaff. After he lay down beside the grain, Ruth followed Naomi’s instructions by uncovering his feet and lying down there. When he awoke, startled to find a woman at his feet, he asked who she was.
And he said, “Who are you?” So she answered, “I am Ruth, your maidservant. Take your maidservant under your wing, for you are a close relative.”
Ruth 3:9
The word translated “wing” can also refer to the edge of a garment. Earlier, Boaz had spoken of Ruth taking refuge under the Lord’s wings; now she asked him to spread his wing over her as a family redeemer. She was asking him to take responsibility for her through marriage. Boaz could now help provide the protection he had asked the Lord to give her.
The nighttime approach involved risk and could have been misunderstood. Yet the passage does not describe a sexual encounter or portray Ruth trapping Boaz. He called her a virtuous woman and agreed to act for her. He also immediately told her about a nearer relative whose right had to be respected. His willingness to marry her did not entitle him to conceal that obstacle.
Boaz handled the situation discreetly and promised to settle the matter in the morning. At the city gate, where public agreements were witnessed, he called the nearer relative aside.
Now Boaz went up to the gate and sat down there; and behold, the close relative of whom Boaz had spoken came by. So Boaz said, “Come aside, friend, sit down here.” So he came aside and sat down.
Ruth 4:1
He gathered ten elders and offered the nearer relative the first opportunity to redeem Elimelech’s property. The other man initially agreed. When Boaz explained that the arrangement also involved Ruth and preserving the deceased man’s name through the inheritance, the relative declined.
And the close relative said, “I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I ruin my own inheritance. You redeem my right of redemption for yourself, for I cannot redeem it.”
Ruth 4:6
The man objected because he believed the arrangement would damage his own inheritance. The book gives his reason without spelling out every financial consequence. Boaz accepted the obligation knowing that it involved more than acquiring land: he would take Ruth as his wife and preserve the name of her deceased husband through that inheritance.
The relative removed his sandal to confirm the transfer of his right to Boaz. Ruth explains that this was an established custom for redemption and exchange in Israel. Boaz publicly confirmed the purchase of the family property and his commitment to marry Ruth, preserving the deceased man’s name. The people of Bethlehem had heard his commitment and could testify to it; Ruth and Naomi would not have to depend on an unwitnessed promise.
The elders witnessed the agreement and blessed the marriage. Boaz had the family relationship, the means, and the willingness to act. The household that had seemed to have no future now had a lawful way to preserve its inheritance and continue its line.
The Family Line Leads to David and Christ
Boaz married Ruth, and the Lord gave her conception. She bore Obed, and the women of Bethlehem rejoiced with Naomi. When they said that “a son has been born to Naomi,” they were celebrating the restoration of her household. Ruth was his mother and Boaz his father; Naomi had not given birth, but she received the child into her care after losing her own sons.
The genealogy then shows why this family’s future reaches beyond Bethlehem. Obed would become Jesse’s father, and Jesse would become David’s father.
Also Obed begot Jesse, and Jesse begot David.
Ruth 4:22
During the disorder of the judges, God was preparing the family of the future king David. Ruth had gone out to find food, and Boaz had acted on a responsibility to relatives in need. Neither needed to understand that future in order to do what was right in front of them. The Lord’s purpose extended beyond what either could have known from one day in a field or one meeting at the gate.
Matthew takes that family line further by naming Ruth in Jesus’ genealogy.
Boaz begot Obed by Ruth, Obed begot Jesse, and Jesse begot David the king.
Matthew 1:5-6
Ruth’s inclusion also requires us to think carefully about Deuteronomy 23, which excludes Ammonites and Moabites from the assembly of the LORD because of those nations’ hostility to Israel and their hiring of Balaam. The question is how that restriction applies to a Moabite woman who has abandoned her former allegiance and taken refuge in Israel’s God. Ruth does not give a detailed legal explanation, but it does record the elders blessing her marriage, the Lord giving her a son, and her place in David’s ancestry. We cannot erase the restriction or Moab’s conduct, but neither can we conclude that a repentant Moabite was beyond God’s mercy.
Israel’s covenant privileges were real, yet ancestry did not save a person apart from faith in the Lord. Ruth came to Him as an outsider and was received. I find it encouraging that God brought this widow from a hostile nation into the family of His promised King, without pretending that her former nation’s idolatry was harmless.
Boaz was a qualified relative willing to bear a real cost to restore this household. In that way he points toward Christ, although he remained a man who needed redemption from his own sin. We can follow that pattern without making every object or gesture a hidden code. Jesus is the eternal Son, fully God, who became truly man to act on our behalf. He lived without sin and willingly gave Himself to redeem sinners.
Wicked people tortured Him and put Him to death, but He willingly gave Himself to be slain as the sinless, perfect sacrifice for our sins. He completed that saving work through His shed blood and death before His burial and bodily resurrection. The Father did not punish, curse, abandon, strike, bruise, or pour wrath on Jesus. Father and Son acted in unity to redeem us.
In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace
Ephesians 1:7
Our redemption cost Christ His precious blood, rather than silver or gold. We receive salvation by grace through faith; good works follow as the fruit of His work, without earning salvation or keeping us saved. Ruth’s labor and loyalty likewise expressed her faith without earning her acceptance before God. Boaz could restore the family’s position in Israel, but he could not make Christ’s redemption from sin unnecessary for any of them. The study on the blood of Christ for salvation considers that saving work more fully.
My Final Thoughts
I am grateful that the book of Ruth shows us the Lord’s care and lets us hear Naomi speak honestly about her grief. His kindness was reaching her through Ruth before she could recognize where it would lead. We know the outcome because Scripture gives it to us; I cannot claim the same knowledge about every difficult circumstance in my own life. I can, however, obey what God has made clear and show practical kindness to the people before me. Ruth and Boaz did that without knowing how their family would lead to David and then to Christ, the Redeemer who willingly gave His blood to save us.
At the third trumpet in Revelation 8, John sees a blazing star strike rivers and springs, making the water so bitter that many people die from drinking it. He calls the star Wormwood. I understand this as a real future judgment, and the name takes us back to warnings God had already given about the consequences of rejecting Him.
Wormwood in the Trumpet Sequence
Wormwood belongs within a sequence of judgments that begins with the Lamb opening the scroll. In Revelation 5, Jesus Christ is the only One worthy to open it. He opens its seals in chapters 6 through 8, and the opening of the seventh seal introduces seven angels who receive trumpets before God’s throne. These judgments unfold under His authority. I understand them to take place during the future seven-year Tribulation.
The first trumpet burns a third of the trees and all the green grass. At the second, a third of the sea becomes blood, a third of its creatures die, and a third of its ships are destroyed. After Wormwood strikes freshwater at the third trumpet, the fourth strikes a third of the sun, moon, and stars, leaving a third of the day and night without light. Each judgment damages something people depend on for ordinary life. The repeated references to a third also show that these judgments have not yet brought the whole creation to its end.
We should not mistake that limit for mildness. Many people die, and the survivors face devastation on an enormous scale. God has acted decisively against a rebellious world while still leaving people alive who can hear His warning and repent. The announcement of further woes at the end of Revelation 8 makes clear that judgment is not yet finished.
John describes what happens to the rivers and springs when the third angel sounds.
Then the third angel sounded: And a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many men died from the water, because it was made bitter.
Revelation 8:10-11
When the NKJV says that “many men died,” men means human beings, not only adult males. These people die from drinking the water. The word bitter therefore describes more than an objectionable taste; the changed water is lethal. I take that physical consequence seriously when interpreting the passage, rather than making Wormwood only an image of spiritual confusion or distress.
John describes the star as burning like a torch, but that comparison does not identify it as a particular kind of object in modern astronomy. A meteor or some other physical mechanism could be involved. We are told what John sees and what happens to the water, without being given the information needed to classify the star confidently as an asteroid or comet.
Some readers understand the star as an angelic being because Revelation uses stars that way elsewhere. In Revelation 9:1-2, for example, a fallen star receives a key and opens the bottomless pit. That description involves someone acting, whereas Revelation 8 describes the blazing star falling on waters and making them deadly. I understand the third trumpet as a judgment on actual freshwater, while leaving the precise means God uses unresolved.
John also leaves the affected rivers unnamed and does not identify a modern country. The judgment reaches rivers and springs, with a third of the waters made bitter; it is not described as contamination confined to one named lake.
Wormwood translates the Greek word apsinthos, the name of a bitter plant. The Old Testament Hebrew word commonly translated wormwood is la’anah. Scripture had already used this plant’s bitterness to describe the consequences of rebellion and the sorrow of judgment. That background explains why the star bears this name without supplying a chemical explanation for the event.
Wormwood’s Old Testament Background
In Deuteronomy 29, Moses warned Israel about people turning from the Lord to serve the gods of surrounding nations. He described that departure through the image of a root producing bitterness.
so that there may not be among you man or woman or family or tribe, whose heart turns away today from the LORD our God, to go and serve the gods of these nations, and that there may not be among you a root bearing bitterness or wormwood;
Deuteronomy 29:18
The warning begins with a heart turning away from God. Moses goes on to describe someone who hears the covenant warning yet assures himself that he will have peace while following his own desires. He wants to disregard the Lord’s command without facing its consequences. A place among God’s covenant people did not make that presumption safe.
The image of a root also describes rebellion developing before its harm is fully apparent. A father may excuse idolatry as his own private choice, but his children see the worship he practices and hear him defend his conduct. If he teaches them to disregard God’s command, the harm has spread beyond his own disobedience. Moses was warning the whole community because turning from the Lord could influence a family or tribe, not just the person who first made that choice.
Centuries later, Jeremiah addressed Judah’s refusal to obey the Lord. The people had abandoned His instruction and followed the Baals, including the idolatry their fathers had taught them. God explained why judgment was coming.
And the LORD said, “Because they have forsaken My law which I set before them, and have not obeyed My voice, nor walked according to it, but they have walked according to the dictates of their own hearts and after the Baals, which their fathers taught them,” therefore thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: “Behold, I will feed them, this people, with wormwood, and give them water of gall to drink.”
Jeremiah 9:13-15
They were following desires and customs they preferred to God’s Word. Having inherited those customs did not make them right. The Lord who had sustained His people would make them taste the bitterness of the rebellion they had chosen. Jeremiah’s reference to wormwood and poisonous water belongs to that announced judgment, rather than an unexplained misfortune.
Lamentations speaks from within the grief of Jerusalem’s devastation after judgment had fallen. The speaker describes affliction through the same bitter image.
He has filled me with bitterness, He has made me drink wormwood.
Lamentations 3:15
These passages do not treat sin’s consequences as a minor disappointment. The sorrow is devastating, and wormwood gives a name to its bitterness. By the time we reach Revelation 8, the word has already appeared in warnings about idolatry and in the grief that followed judgment. Its use for the star fits the world’s continued rejection of the Lord.
I need to be careful about applying that connection to an individual who is suffering now. A person’s illness or bereavement does not give me grounds to announce that God is punishing him for rebellion. Scripture records faithful people enduring terrible affliction too. The Old Testament passages identify the covenant unfaithfulness God was judging, and Revelation describes a particular judgment still to come.
In Revelation 8, people are dying because water they need has been made bitter. The rivers and springs have not simply dried up; water is still there, yet drinking it brings death instead of sustaining life.
Elsewhere in Scripture, God supplies water as an act of mercy. He opened Hagar’s eyes to a well in the wilderness and gave Israel water from the rock. The prophets also described restoration through flowing water, and Jesus offers living water to those who come to Him. Revelation itself ends with the river of the water of life. The third trumpet shows the severity of rejecting the Giver: He has authority to make the water on which people depend a means of judgment.
Exodus 7 records a judgment on water after Pharaoh refused God’s command to release Israel. The Lord told Moses to instruct Aaron to take his rod and stretch out his hand over Egypt’s waters, which would become blood.
And Moses and Aaron did so, just as the LORD commanded. So he lifted up the rod and struck the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh and in the sight of his servants. And all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood. The fish that were in the river died, the river stank, and the Egyptians could not drink the water of the river. So there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt.
Exodus 7:20-21
The Nile had sustained Egypt, but its water became blood, the fish died, and the river stank. God had commanded that judgment while delivering Israel from slavery. Revelation describes future judgments during the Tribulation, so the two events belong to different settings. Yet both show the Lord confronting defiance by striking the water people need, with false gods unable to protect those who worship them.
Our ability to study water and build systems to supply it does not make us independent of Him either. Testing water and constructing treatment plants are worthwhile uses of human knowledge, but we still depend on a supply we did not create. A wealthy, technologically capable nation depends on water just as surely as a poor one. Understanding a physical process does not place creation beyond its Maker’s authority.
Warning, Repentance, and Careful Interpretation
A disaster involving water is not enough to establish that the third trumpet has sounded. Earlier events can remind us of biblical patterns without fulfilling this prophecy. Revelation places Wormwood within an ordered sequence, and a resemblance to one detail does not establish that it has occurred. Jesus warned about deception and called His disciples to watch faithfully; He did not authorize us to set dates for His return.
I hold a pre-Tribulation and premillennial view: the Lord will gather His church before the coming Tribulation and later return publicly to establish His earthly thousand-year reign. Paul describes believers being caught up to meet Him in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 and says in 1 Thessalonians 5:9 that God has not appointed us to wrath. Jesus also promised the church in Philadelphia that He would keep them from the coming worldwide hour of trial in Revelation 3:10. I read these promises together as grounds for expecting the church to be gathered before the trumpet judgments.
That does not mean no one will turn to Christ during the Tribulation; Revelation describes saints in that period. Nor does our hope excuse indifference toward those who still need salvation. Knowing that judgment is coming should make us eager to bring people the gospel now, while there is an opportunity to respond. Every warning remains under Christ’s authority, and no rebellion will prevent His promised return and reign.
I might expect people who survive such judgments to be eager to turn from their idols. Revelation 9 records a different response after further trumpet plagues.
But the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and idols of gold, silver, brass, stone, and wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk. And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.
Revelation 9:20-21
These survivors continue worshiping idols that cannot see, hear, or walk, even after the world around them has been devastated. They also refuse to turn from the sins John names, including murder and theft. Suffering has not compelled them to repent, and witnessing judgment has not made them willing to obey God. They remain responsible for what they choose to defend.
That should correct the assumption that someone can safely put off repentance until the warnings become impossible to ignore. Repeatedly dismissing the truth can make a person more stubborn about the sin he has been excusing. Being frightened by a catastrophe is not the same as turning to Christ. The survivors are still alive to respond to the Lord, yet they persist in idolatry and the conduct He condemns.
God offers mercy through Jesus Christ, His eternal Son, who became fully man without ceasing to be fully God and lived without sin. He willingly gave Himself to be slain as the perfect sacrifice for our sins. Wicked men tortured and crucified Him, but the Father did not punish or abandon Him. Father and Son remained united in this saving work. His shed blood and death accomplished our redemption before His burial and bodily resurrection. Forgiveness is genuinely offered to every person, although people can resist His grace and reject Him. Everyone who repents and believes in Christ is forgiven and receives everlasting life.
From Bitter Water to Living Water
The Savior who will judge the world is also the One who offers living water. In John 4, Jesus spoke with a Samaritan woman who had come to draw from Jacob’s well.
Jesus answered and said to her, “Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.”
John 4:13-14
She needed ordinary water, but Jesus offered life that the well could never supply. A better bucket might have made her work easier; it could not reconcile her to God. Nor could a more respectable reputation or less complicated circumstances give her everlasting life. She needed what Jesus was offering as a gift.
In John 7, Jesus made a public invitation for thirsty people to come to Him and drink. John explains that Jesus was speaking about the Holy Spirit.
On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
John 7:37-39
The living water is connected with the Holy Spirit whom believers would receive after Jesus was glorified. The Spirit was already at work before then, but Christ’s promise looked ahead to His New Covenant ministry following Jesus’ death, bodily resurrection, and ascension. The life He gives is received through faith, with the Spirit Himself coming to dwell in the believer.
When someone is genuinely born again, he becomes a new creation and is indwelt and sealed by the Spirit for the day of redemption. That salvation is eternally secure, but a Christian label with no evidence of new life should not be confused with regeneration. Obedience does not earn or keep salvation, and being born again does not mean the believer never sins. His conduct should provide evidence that the Spirit has changed him, and assurance in Christ gives him no permission to continue in lawlessness.
John’s visions reach as far as God’s final victory over evil and the revelation of the holy city. At the close of the book, the invitation is addressed to those who hear its words now.
And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.
Revelation 22:17
The word freely tells me that I cannot buy what Christ gives. He bore the cost of redemption, and the thirsty person comes to receive His mercy. Wormwood warns us about the bitterness of persisting in rebellion, while this invitation calls us to the living Savior in repentance and faith. We should bring that invitation to people rather than leave them with fearful curiosity about the disaster.
My Final Thoughts
I believe Wormwood describes a real future judgment in which people will die from water made bitter. Its name also recalls the bitter consequences of turning from the Lord, so I need to take the warning seriously instead of treating it as a puzzle about a star. Knowing more about the prediction cannot make me right with God. Christ offers the mercy we need, and we should respond in repentance and faith while we still have the opportunity.
Jacob could be calculating and deceitful, and Genesis makes no attempt to conceal it. He took advantage of his brother and lied to his father, then spent years living with the repercussions. Yet God kept His promise and patiently corrected him. When I read his life, I want to be honest about the damage he caused while recognizing how much he changed as he learned to depend on the Lord.
God’s Choice and Human Responsibility
Jacob’s place in the covenant was announced before he could do anything to obtain it. When Rebekah sought the Lord about her difficult pregnancy, He explained that the children struggling within her would become two nations:
And the LORD said to her: “Two nations are in your womb, Two peoples shall be separated from your body; One people shall be stronger than the other, And the older shall serve the younger.”
Genesis 25:23
Ordinarily, the firstborn held the primary inheritance rights and leadership in the family. God chose to continue His covenant through Jacob, the younger son, before either brother had done good or evil. Jacob did not earn that place through superior character, and his later conduct gives us plenty of reason to avoid suggesting that he did.
Earlier in Genesis, God accepted Abel and his offering rather than Cain and his offering, and carried the covenant through Isaac rather than Ishmael. At the end of Jacob’s own life, he would give the younger Ephraim the greater blessing instead of Manasseh. God made these choices without being bound by the family’s usual expectations about the firstborn.
Paul discussed the twins in Romans 9 as part of his explanation of God’s promises to Israel. Genesis speaks of two nations and peoples. The words “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated” come from Malachi’s message about Israel and Edom, centuries after the brothers lived. I understand Paul’s argument in light of that setting: God had the right to choose the family line and role through which His promise would advance.
I do not understand these passages to mean that Esau was created for unavoidable personal damnation or that a sinner cannot respond to God’s genuine offer. Nor did God’s choice give Jacob permission to get what he wanted by deceiving people. The Lord could keep His word without requiring either brother to sin, and both men remained responsible for their decisions.
The Birthright and the Blessing
As the brothers grew, Esau became a skillful hunter, while Jacob was a mild man who dwelt in tents. Their parents took sides. Isaac favored Esau because he enjoyed the game he brought home, and Rebekah favored Jacob. The boys were already different, but their parents’ favoritism made the division within the household worse.
One day Esau came in from the field weary and asked for some of Jacob’s stew. Jacob demanded the birthright in exchange. Instead of refusing such an outrageous bargain, Esau agreed to it:
And Esau said, “Look, I am about to die; so what is this birthright to me?” Then Jacob said, “Swear to me as of this day.” So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.
Genesis 25:32-33
Esau spoke as though satisfying his hunger was more urgent than anything the birthright could offer. Hebrews describes him as profane, meaning that he treated something holy as though it were common:
lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright.
Hebrews 12:16
I need to consider how easily an immediate desire can distort my judgment. If I am willing to be dishonest to secure a better income, I am treating obedience as something I can afford to surrender when the price is attractive enough. The same can happen when I compromise because I cannot bear someone’s disapproval. Esau’s appetite does not seem so foreign when we consider what we might be willing to exchange for relief.
Jacob’s part in this was hardly admirable. He saw his brother’s exhaustion and used the meal to obtain an advantage. Esau was responsible for despising the birthright, but that does not make exploiting him an act of faith. God had already spoken about Jacob’s future; He had not instructed him to take advantage of his brother.
Jacob’s name is associated with grasping Esau’s heel at birth and with supplanting, or taking another person’s place. In Genesis 27, he went further than driving a hard bargain. The issue was now his father’s blessing. The birthright concerned firstborn status and inheritance rights, while the patriarchal blessing pronounced the family’s future, including its leadership and covenant direction. The two were related, but selling the birthright was not the same event as receiving that blessing.
Isaac asked Esau to hunt and prepare a meal before he blessed him. Rebekah overheard and devised a way for Jacob to impersonate his brother. She prepared the food and covered Jacob’s hands and neck with goatskins so Isaac, whose sight had failed, would mistake him for Esau. Jacob went along with the plan and told his father, “I am Esau your firstborn.” When Isaac questioned how quickly he had found the game, Jacob claimed the Lord had brought it to him.
So Jacob went near to Isaac his father, and he felt him and said, “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” And he did not recognize him, because his hands were hairy like his brother Esau’s hands; so he blessed him.
Genesis 27:22-23
I think using God’s name to support the lie was especially brazen. Jacob was willing to make his father’s trust in the Lord part of the deception. He received the blessing, but Esau discovered the deception and planned to kill Jacob after their father’s death. Getting the blessing had not made it safe for Jacob to remain at home.
Rebekah urged Jacob to flee to her brother Laban until Esau’s anger subsided. Isaac also sent him to that family to seek a wife and knowingly gave him Abraham’s blessing. Rebekah expected Jacob’s stay to last only until his brother’s anger passed, but the separation continued for years. Scripture never records her seeing him again.
Bethel, Haran, and God’s Patient Discipline
On his way toward Haran, Jacob stopped for the night and lay down with a stone at his head. He had left a divided household and a brother who wanted him dead. There, away from home, God met him in a dream:
Then he dreamed, and behold, a ladder was set up on the earth, and its top reached to heaven; and there the angels of God were ascending and descending on it.
Genesis 28:12
The NKJV calls it a ladder; the NIV renders it a stairway. We are not given its exact shape, but Jacob saw angels going between heaven and earth. He had not built the means of access, and the assurance he received came from God.
The Lord identified Himself as the God of Abraham and Isaac, then promised Jacob land and descendants through whom blessing would reach all the families of the earth. Jacob was leaving the land where that promise would be fulfilled, but God told him he would return:
Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have spoken to you.
Genesis 28:15
The Lord committed Himself to the covenant while Jacob still needed considerable correction. Its fulfillment did not depend on Jacob first becoming a mature man of faith. God would keep His promise and continue dealing with the sin in Jacob’s life.
When he awoke, Jacob was afraid and recognized that the Lord was present. He set up the stone as a pillar and named the place Bethel, meaning “house of God.” In his vow, he spoke of God’s protection, food and clothing, and a peaceful return home, then promised that the Lord would be his God and he would give a tenth. His response is worded conditionally. I see emerging faith, but also a man who had much to learn about trusting what God had already promised.
Jesus later recalled the imagery of this dream when speaking to Nathanael:
And He said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”
John 1:51
Jesus speaks of angels ascending and descending upon Himself, drawing on the scene Jacob saw. He is fully God and fully man, the Mediator who brings us to God. I cannot gain that access through religious achievement; I need Christ to bring me to the Father.
In Genesis 29, Jacob reached Haran, where he met Rachel and agreed to work for her father Laban for seven years in order to marry her. At the wedding, however, Laban gave him Leah instead. The next morning Jacob discovered what had happened:
So it came to pass in the morning, that behold, it was Leah. And he said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Was it not for Rachel that I served you? Why then have you deceived me?”
Genesis 29:25
The man who had deceived his nearly blind father now knew what it was to have someone conceal the truth from him. Laban appealed to the local custom of marrying the older daughter first, but if that custom prevented the marriage they had agreed upon, he should have said so before Jacob spent seven years working for Rachel.
After completing Leah’s wedding week, Jacob married Rachel and served another seven years. The arrangement produced a troubled home. He loved Rachel more than Leah, while Rachel remained barren for a time. Their rivalry and sorrow affected the children born into the household. God was building the family that would become Israel, but its growth did not excuse the favoritism or make polygamy right. God’s design for marriage is one man and one woman.
Laban also took advantage of Jacob’s labor, repeatedly changing his wages as the flocks increased. Jacob could not make his employer deal honestly with him, but God protected him and provided livestock.
Returning to the Land
Jacob’s departure was more than an attempt to get away from an unfair employer. God told him to return to the land of his fathers:
Then the LORD said to Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your family, and I will be with you.”
Genesis 31:3
When Jacob spoke with Rachel and Leah about leaving, he reminded them of their father’s dishonesty and explained where their livestock had come from:
So God has taken away the livestock of your father and given them to me.
Genesis 31:9
By then Jacob was responsible for a large family and had spent years working under a man who kept changing the terms. I understand those years as part of God’s patient correction. Jacob was learning how much harm manipulation could cause while seeing the Lord provide what Laban tried to withhold. God’s use of those circumstances did not excuse Laban’s dishonesty.
The journey home also brought Jacob closer to Esau. When he learned that his brother was approaching with four hundred men, he became greatly afraid and divided his camp so that some might escape if the others were attacked. He could take precautions, but he could not decide how Esau would receive him or undo the lies that had caused their separation.
Jacob brought that fear to God. He appealed to the command to return and the promise of blessing, then acknowledged how little he deserved the kindness already shown to him:
I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies and of all the truth which You have shown Your servant; for I crossed over this Jordan with my staff, and now I have become two companies.
Genesis 32:10
He had crossed the Jordan with his staff and was returning with enough people and possessions to form two companies. He knew the Lord had been merciful, but he was still afraid that Esau would attack his family. His prayer asked for deliverance on the strength of God’s word. After praying, he sent gifts ahead to Esau. He continued preparing for the meeting, but his prayer shows that he knew he needed God’s protection.
This growing dependence is part of sanctification, the process of becoming holy. Jacob was changing without becoming fearless or losing every old habit at once. I need to remember that when correction seems slower than I would like. Admitting that I still struggle should lead me to seek God’s help, rather than defend the behavior He is correcting.
The God Who Changes Jacob
Before meeting Esau, Jacob sent his household across the Jabbok. He was left alone that night, and a Man wrestled with him until daybreak:
Then Jacob was left alone; and a Man wrestled with him until the breaking of day. Now when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the socket of his hip; and the socket of Jacob’s hip was out of joint as He wrestled with him.
Genesis 32:24-25
The prolonged struggle can leave us wondering why the Man did not simply overpower Jacob. Yet a touch was enough to put his hip out of joint. I do not understand this as Jacob becoming stronger than God; the encounter continued because God allowed it. Jacob now asked the One who had injured him for a blessing:
And He said, “Let Me go, for the day breaks.” But he said, “I will not let You go unless You bless me!” So He said to him, “What is your name?” He said, “Jacob.” And He said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed.”
Genesis 32:26-28
Earlier, Jacob had claimed to be Esau when seeking his father’s blessing. Here he gave his own name, associated with the heel-grasping and supplanting that had characterized his life. God gave him the name Israel, tied to his struggle with God.
Hosea describes what accompanied that struggle:
He took his brother by the heel in the womb, And in his strength he struggled with God. Yes, he struggled with the Angel and prevailed; He wept, and sought favor from Him.
Hosea 12:3-4
Jacob wept and sought favor. His persistence was the plea of a man who needed mercy, not proof that he could compel God through physical strength. He named the place Peniel because he had seen God face to face and lived. Hosea speaks of both God and the Angel in this encounter, then identifies the LORD God of hosts.
I understand this Man to be the eternal Son appearing before He became man, a Christophany. The divine identification is why I distinguish Him from a created angel here; the word angel, meaning messenger, does not make every messenger in Scripture Christ. The Son already existed before this appearance and before His birth at Bethlehem.
Jacob left the encounter limping. The man preparing to face Esau could not even walk as he had before. His weakness showed that the blessing had not come through his natural strength. Genesis continues to use both Jacob and Israel, so the new name should not make us imagine that every old weakness disappeared that night. God had laid claim to him and was changing him.
Jacob’s Legacy and Israel’s Future
When Esau came into view, Jacob did not meet the attack he had feared:
But Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept.
Genesis 33:4
After years apart, the brothers wept in each other’s arms. I am grateful for the mercy in that meeting, but I cannot promise someone that every person they have wronged will welcome them this way. Jacob could not force this response from Esau. Obeying the Lord had required him to return before he knew how the meeting would go.
The reunion did not bring an end to the family’s troubles. At Shechem, Dinah was violated, and Simeon and Levi responded with deceit and slaughtered the city’s males. Jacob’s immediate protest focused on the danger they had brought upon his household. Jabbok had not made Jacob’s household free of serious sin.
In Genesis 35, God directed Jacob to return to Bethel and build an altar where He had appeared during his flight from Esau. Jacob told his household to put away their foreign gods, purify themselves, and change their garments. They could not honor the God who had preserved them while continuing to accommodate idols. Returning to Bethel required a correction in their worship.
Jacob later lost Rachel and endured years of grief when his sons led him to believe Joseph had been killed. They had actually sold him, and Jacob knew nothing of the position Joseph would eventually hold in Egypt. Faith did not spare him that sorrow. He was mourning a son he believed was dead while the Lord was preparing provision for the family through that very son.
Famine eventually drove Jacob to send his sons to Egypt for food. On a later journey, Joseph revealed himself to his brothers. They returned home with the news that he was alive and serving under Pharaoh. As Jacob prepared to join Joseph, God told him not to fear going to Egypt, promised to make Israel a great nation there, and assured him that his descendants would be brought up again.
Jacob entered Egypt needing food and a place for his family, yet he blessed Pharaoh. Near the end of his life, he adopted Joseph’s sons Ephraim and Manasseh and gave the younger Ephraim the greater blessing. Joseph objected because Manasseh was the firstborn, but Jacob deliberately kept the greater blessing on Ephraim. He was speaking prophetically about their future, with full knowledge of which grandson was which.
His words over his sons also concerned the future tribes. These prophetic pronouncements included a condemnation of Simeon and Levi’s violence and fierce anger, recalling the wrong they had done at Shechem. Judah received the promise of a ruler whose authority would extend beyond his immediate household:
The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes; And to Him shall be the obedience of the people.
Genesis 49:10
The covenant had continued through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the kingly line would come through Judah and ultimately lead to Christ. By the close of his life, Jacob was speaking about a future far beyond anything he could manage through his own ingenuity.
Jacob’s name also became a name for the nation descended from him. Jeremiah uses it when describing an extraordinary period of distress followed by deliverance:
Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it; And it is the time of Jacob’s trouble, But he shall be saved out of it.
Jeremiah 30:7
I understand the time of Jacob’s trouble as actual distress for Israel during the literal Tribulation before Christ returns bodily and reigns in His kingdom. Jeremiah is promising the nation’s deliverance, not simply providing a description for anyone’s difficult season. Israel will not be erased or replaced. God will bring the nation descended from Jacob through judgment in faithfulness to His covenant.
We can recognize a correspondence between Jacob and Israel without treating every event in his life as a prediction. God chose Jacob for His covenant purpose and dealt seriously with his sin while preserving His promise. The nation also faces discipline without ceasing to be the subject of promises God will keep. Its failures give us no more reason to dismiss those promises than Jacob’s failures did.
My Final Thoughts
I find hope in the patience God showed Jacob, but I also need to accept the correction that came with it. If I obtain an advantage through dishonesty, I cannot point to a favorable result as proof that the Lord approved my methods. Jacob received the blessing and still had to face what his lies had done to his family. God needed none of those lies to keep His word. He taught Jacob to ask for mercy and depend on Him, and I want to be willing to learn that dependence without defending the habits He is exposing.
