Subscribe to RSS
Women of the Bible: Elisabeth
Elisabeth
The Woman Who Bore a Son in Her Old Age
Scripture Reference—Luke 1:5-80
Name Meaning—Elisabeth means “God is my oath” that is, “a worshiper of God.” In his hymn of praise, uttered soon after the birth of his son John, Zacharias alludes to the significance of his wife’s name when he said, “the oath which God swore to Abraham.” The son was called John by divine command, and means “the mercy or favor of God.”
Family Connections —Luke describes Elisabeth as “one of the daughters of Aaron” which means she came of an honored priestly line (Exodus 6:23). She was the wife of a priest, Zacharias, of the course of Abia, that is one of the sets of priests who ministered in the Temple from Sabbath to Sabbath (1 Chronicles 24:10). There was thus a priestly descent on both sides. Priests were allowed to marry pious women ( Leviticus 21:7). Elisabeth became the mother of John the Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus Christ. Assessing the life and character of Elisabeth we know that she was prominent as—
A Godly Woman
It is said of both Elisabeth and Zacharias that they were “righteous before God, walking in all the commandments of the Lord blameless.” What a coveted commendation! The priestly wife was a woman of unusual piety, strong faith and spiritual gifts. All through her life she preserved the blessed traditions of Aaron and his descendants.
A Childless Woman
Righteous toward God and most faithful to her husband we yet have five words containing a world of heartbreak and disappointment, “And they had no child.” For years they had both prayed and longed for a child; now they were both well-stricken in years and the prospect of natural childbearing was past. A childless state, more so for the daughter of a priest and the wife of a priest, was humiliating, for in Israel it was the dream of every woman that it might be her privilege to be the mother of the Messiah, promised to Eve, earth’s first mother.
A Privileged Woman
For this beloved wife with a pious heart and cultivated intellect, God performed a miracle, as He did for Mary her cousin. “She conceived a son in her old age.” It was while Zacharias was exercising his holy office in the sanctuary that the angelic messenger appeared and said, “Thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.” Although beyond the age when the birth of a child was possible, did Zacharias and his wife believe that God was able to do the impossible, and even at their advanced age remove their “reproach among men”? Well, the miracle happened. God gave Elisabeth conception, and after six months of her pregnancy, another miracle happened when without cohabitation Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit.
Zacharias, who had been struck dumb as a sign that God would fulfill His word and grant him a son, had his speech restored when John was born. He hailed John’s birth with a God-glorifying song in which he said of the God-given child, “Thou shalt be called the prophet of the highest.” This famous son, who came to prepare the way of the Lord, was privileged to have such godly parents to teach him ineffaceable lessons. But John was also directly nurtured by God in the deserts where he lived “till the day of his shewing unto Israel.” Thus, as Donald Davidson reminds us in Mothers of the Bible—
It was not at his mother’s knee that John learned the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but out on the lonely desert where in the silence and the solitude he found close fellowship with God, and came to know the secrets of His will.
Because of their old age when their son was born, we can assume that Zacharias and Elisabeth both died years before their godly son was cruelly murdered by Herod.
But Elisabeth was a privileged woman in another way in that she was the first woman to confess Jesus in the flesh. When she was six months with child she was visited by her cousin Mary and as soon as the Virgin entered the home, the babe leaped in Elisabeth’s womb, as if to welcome the One whom Mary was to bear. Both mother and child were affected by the Holy Spirit, and Elisabeth gave Mary the most honorable of names, “The mother of my Lord.” Elisabeth knew the Messiah was come and she prayed to Him and confessed Him. All Messianic hopes were about to be fulfilled for, “There, beneath that woman’s clothes, my Saviour is concealed.” It was her Spirit-filled greeting which prompted Mary to reply in a song called, The Magnificat (Luke 1:46-56; compare 1 Samuel 2:1-10).
For queens and females of all walks of life Elisabeth has been a favorite name, evidenced by the fact that in America alone there are almost two million females bearing such an honored name. If only all who bear this name would be “righteous before God” and blameless in character, what a mighty spiritual force they would be in the life of the nation of which they are a part. The present sovereign of Great Britain is Queen Elizabeth II, who seeks to live a life beyond reproach, and who manifests deep interest in Dr. Billy Graham’s work.
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Jezebel
|
Women of the Bible: Lois
Lois
Scripture Reference—2 Timothy 1:5
Name Meaning—Agreeable or desirable
While there are numerous grandmothers mentioned in the Bible, as these cameos show, the term “grandmother” itself is only used once in the Bible, and that is in connection with Lois, the mother of Eunice, and grandmother of Timothy (see Eunice ). Lois preserves in her name an old Greek word and corresponds to Naamah and Naomi, both of which carry a similar significance. We can imagine how the nature of Lois corresponded to the implication of her name.
Lois was a devout Jewess who had instructed her beloved daughter and grandson in Old Testament Scriptures. The family lived at Lystra, and it is possible that Paul, during his visit there, had the joy of leading Lois, Eunice, and Timothy to Christ ( Acts 14:6, 7; 16:1), and then wrote of the “unfeigned faith” that dwelt in all three. We have no record of Timothy’s father apart from the fact that he was a Gentile. Fausset observes, “One godly parent may counteract the bad influence of the ungodly, and win the child to Christ” ( 1 Corinthians 7:14; 2 Timothy 3:15). Paul dwells upon the faith of the mother and grandmother alone in the spiritual instruction of Timothy who became his son in the faith.
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Tamar
Tamar
A few of the proper names in the Bible are associated with trees and flowers (Susanna—“white lily”), and it would prove a profitable exercise to group these names together. Tamar, used of three females, which means, “a palm tree,” is one such name. Abiathar, a compound of Tamar, signifies “a palm-island” or “like a palm.” As the palm tree is the most valuable of Eastern trees, the ideas of beauty and wealth are combined in such names. It is very rare, however, to come across a modern female with the name of Tamar, in spite of its rich significance.
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Mary
Mary
The Woman Honored Above All Women
Scripture References—Matthew 1; 2; 12:46; Luke 1; 2; John 2:1-11; 19:25; Acts 1:14
Name Meaning —No female has been honored as has Mary by millions of peoples in all the world who have named their daughters Mary. This Hebrew name has ever been popular in all countries of the Western world, and has altogether some twenty variations, the most conspicuous being Maria, Marie, Miriam and Miriamme. Mary is about the only feminine name that has pronounced masculine forms such as Mario, Marion and Maria. Elsden C. Smith says that Mary heads the list of female names in America, the estimated number some ten years ago being 3,720,000—Marie, 645,000—Marion, 440,000—Marian, 226,000. “The name of Mary has been given at least 70 different interpretations in a frantic effort to get away from the Biblical significance of bitterness.” Today the most common name for girls is the Biblical Mary, just as the Biblical John is for boys. In Christian lands the name of Mary is first.
The name Mary occurs 51 times in the New Testament, and its prevalence there has been attributed to the popularity of Miriamne, the last representative of the Hasmonean family, who was the second wife of Herod I. As a name Mary is related to the Old Testament Miriam, to Mara, the name Naomi used to describe her affliction (see Naomi ), and to Marah, the name of the bitter water reached by the Israelites in their wilderness journeys. The original and pervading sense of these root-forms is that of “bitterness,” derived from the notion of “trouble, sorrow, disobedience, rebellion.” Cruden gives “their rebellion” as the name-meaning of Miriam. Mary the virgin, whom we are now considering, certainly had many “bitter” experiences, as we shall see.
Family Connections—According to the sacred record, Mary was a humble village woman who lived in a small town, a place so insignificant as to lead Nathanael to say, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” ( John 1:46), but out of it, and from the womb of the peasant woman came the greatest Man the world has ever known. Mary was of the tribe of Judah, and the line of David. In the royal genealogy of Matthew and the human genealogy of Luke, Mary is only mentioned in the former, but her immediate forebears are not mentioned. She became the wife of Joseph, the son of Heli (Luke 3:23 ). Apart from Jesus, called her “first-born,” a term implying that other children followed after the order of natural generation (Luke 2:7). As a virgin, Mary bore Christ in a miraculous way, and Elisabeth most spontaneously and unaffectedly gave her the most honorable of titles, “Mother of the Lord” and praised her unstintedly as one, “Blessed among women.” Later Mary was married to Joseph the carpenter and she bore him four sons and several daughters, the former being named—James, Joses, Judas and Simon, and the daughters unnamed ( Matthew 13:55, 56; Mark 6:3). During His ministry, none of His brothers believed in Him. In fact, they sneered at Him, and once concluded that He was mad, and wished to arrest Him and take Him away from Capernaum ( Mark 3:21, 31; John 7:3-5 ). But as the result of His death and Resurrection, His brothers became believers, and were among the number gathered in the Upper Room before Pentecost. None of His brothers was an apostle during His lifetime (Acts 1:13, 14).
The Roman Catholic Church, in its effort to support its erroneous dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity, produces two theories as to “the brethren of the Lord.” First, they were sons of Joseph by a former marriage, having thus no blood relationship with Mary or Jesus. Second, they were Christ’s cousins, sons of Mary, the wife of Alphaeus (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40). The term “brother” only implies mere kinship, just as Laban called Jacob, his sister’s son, his “brother” (Genesis 29:15 ). We reject, however, all theories of Rome, preferring to take the Scriptures at its face value. Mark says, “His brothers and sisters,” and we believe these to have been the natural children of Joseph and Mary, after the birth of Jesus by the Spirit’s power. Coming to the events of Mary’s life, as well as the excellencies of her character, perhaps we can group them around the following key heads—
Her Super-eminence
Mary, as the mother of Jesus, is better known than any other female character in the Bible, and has been the best-known woman in the world since those days of the manger in Bethlehem. After the centuries, the statement still stands, “Blessed art thou among women” (Luke 1:28 ). While we have no word as to her beauty or pedigree, we know that she was poor. Yet in the Bible and outside of it she came to occupy the highest place among women. Madonnas abound in which eminent artists have vied in trying to imagine what she looked like. What she did possess was beauty of character. In spite of the fact that he was a Roman Cardinal, Gibbons rightly says—
The word is governed more by ideals than by ideas ; it is influenced more by living, concrete models than by abstract principles of virtue. The model held up to Christian women is not the Amazon, glorying in her martial deeds and prowess; it is not the Spartan women who made female perfection consist in the development of physical strength at the expense of feminine decorum and modesty; it is not the goddess of impure love, like Venus, whose votaries regards beauty of form and personal charms as the highest type of female excellence; nor is it the goddess of imperial will like Juno. No; the model held up to women from the very dawn of Christianity is the peerless Mother of our Blessed Redeemer. She is the pattern of virtue alike to maiden, wife and mother. She exhibits virginal modesty becoming the maid, the conjugal fidelity and loyalty of the spouse, and the untiring devotedness of the mother…. The influence of Mary, therefore, in the moral elevation of women can hardly be over estimated.
Although the Roman Catholic dogmatic and sentimental exaggeration of Mary’s eminence has removed her from the clear and vivid picture we have of her in the gospels, we cannot fail to be impressed with her character even though we are not told more than we have in sacred history. “Highly favoured of the Lord” and having “found favour with him” ( Luke 1:28, 30) surely gives her a pedestal all her own. Mary belongs to those grand majestic females inspired with the spirit of prophecy, who is capable of influencing those who become rulers of men and also the destiny of nations.
Her Selection
Among all the godly Jewish maidens of that time in Palestine why did God select such a humble peasant young woman as Mary? Her choice by God to be the mother of the Incarnate Son is as mysterious as her conception of Him within her virgin womb. When the fullness of time had come for Jesus to be manifested He did not go to a city, but to a remote and inconsiderate town—not to a palace but a poor dwelling &–;not to the great and learned but to lowly partisans—for a woman to bring the Saviour into a lost world. The gentle and lowly Mary of Nazareth was the Father’s choice as the mother of His beloved Son, and that she herself was overwhelmed at God’s condescending grace in choosing her is evident from her song of praise in which she magnified Him for regarding her lowly estate, and in exalting her.
Mary, then, was selected by divine wisdom from among the humblest and it was in such an environment that the Father prepared His Son to labor among the common people who heard Him gladly. The one of whom He was born, the place where he was born were arranged beforehand by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. Centuries before Mary became the mother of the Saviour of mankind, it was prophesied that it would be so ( Isaiah 7:14-16; 9:6, 7; Micah 5:2, 3 ). Born of a peasant maiden, and having a foster-father who eeked out a frugal living as a carpenter, Jesus was best able to sympathize with man as man, and be regarded by all men as the common property of all.
Her Sanctity
Because Mary’s divine Child was to be “holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners,” she herself had to be holy unto the Lord. When Gabriel announced to the virgin whose name was Mary that she was to bring forth a Son to be called Jesus, he recognized her spiritual fitness for such an honor when he said, “The Lord is with thee” ( Luke 1:28 ). The woman who was to give Him birth, whose breast would be His pillow and who would nurse and care for Him in infancy, who would guide His steps through boyhood years, and surround Him with true motherly attention until His manhood, had to be a sanctified vessel and meet for the Master’s use. That Mary excelled in the necessary, spiritual qualities for her sacred task is evident from the record we have of her character. Augustine says that, “Mary first conceived Christ in her heart by faith, before she conceived in the womb,” and the testimony of Elisabeth expresses and stamps the whole character of the Virgin, “Blessed is she that believeth,” implying that she wore the crown of faith above all others.
Mary exhibited a true and genuine piety, as well as a profound humility—the accompaniment of holiness. As we read the narrative given by Luke, to whom, as a physician, Mary could speak intimately of her profound experience, we are impressed with her quietness of spirit, meditative inwardness of disposition, admirable self-control, devout and gracious gift of sacred silence, and a mind saturated with the spirit and promises of the Old Testament. All who reverence Mary for her true and womanly character are pained by the way in which some of the early Church fathers treated her. Origen, for instance, wrote that “the sword which should pierce through her heart was unbelief.” Chrysostom did not control his “golden mouth” when he accused Mary of “excessive ambition, foolish arrogance, and vainglory,” during her Son’s public ministry.
Advanced as she was to the highest honor that could be granted to a woman, Mary yet retained a deep sense of personal unworthiness. She would have been the last to claim perfection for herself. Born like the rest of women in sin and shaped in iniquity, she had her human faults and needed a Saviour as others did—“My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour”—but the witness of Scripture is that in circumstances of unparalleled responsibility she was a true and godly character, and in spite of any female weaknesses she may have had, she was “the most pure and tender and faithful, the most humble and patient and loving, of all who have ever borne the honored name of Mary.”
Her Submission
What amazes one about the Annunciation is the way Mary received it. She was in no way credulous or skeptical. Certainly she asked intelligent questions of Gabriel as to how she could become the mother of Jesus, seeing she was a pure virgin. Following a full explanation of how the miracle would happen, she, with a tremendous feat of faith, replied, “Be it unto me according to thy word.” In these days when reason is seeking to dethrone revelation, and the Virgin Birth of Christ is rejected as a fundamental fact and treated in a mythical way, we affirm our faith in this initial miracle of Christianity. We accept by faith the Biblical statement that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit as He overshadowed the virgin. Thus, as Fausset states it—
Christ was made of the substance of the Virgin, not of the substance of the Holy Spirit, whose substance cannot be made. No more is attributed to the Spirit than what was necessary to cause the Virgin to perform the actions of a mother.
When Mary willingly yielded her body to the Lord saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to thy word,” the Holy Spirit, by His gentle operation, took Deity and humanity and fused them together and formed the love-knot between our Lord’s two natures within Mary’s being. Therefore, when Jesus came forth it was as the God-Man, “God manifest in flesh,” or “that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Son of Mary—humanity! Son of God —Deity. We may not understand the mystery of what happened when Mary yielded up her body that Christ should be formed within it, but believing that with God nothing is impossible we accept what Scripture says as to the birth of Christ. Further, there is the unanswerable argument Donald Davidson reminds us of, namely, “that Jesus Christ Himself is such a miracle that it is no straining of faith to believe that His birth was also a miracle.” We cannot account for His perfect holiness apart from His Virgin Birth. Born of a woman, He was yet clean.
Her Salutation
Taking the Lord at His word, Mary praised Him as if what He had declared had been fully accomplished. What a marvelous song of rejoicing the Magnificat is! It reveals poetic and prophetic genius of the highest order, and takes its place among the finest productions of the world. This extemporaneous ode expressing Mary’s joy is indeed one of the choicest gems of Hebrew poetry. As given by Luke (Luke 1:46-55 ) this lyric expresses Mary’s inward and deeply personal sacred and unselfish joy, and likewise her faith in Messianic fulfillment. It is also eloquent with her reverential spirit. Her worship was for her Son, for her spirit rejoiced in Him as her own Saviour.
Her “hymn” also spoke of her humility, for she was mindful of the fact that she was but a humble village maiden whose “low estate” the Lord regarded. Mary’s “firstborn” Child was to say of Himself, “I am meek and lowly in heart,” and such poverty of spirit is the first beatitude and the very threshold of the kingdom of heaven. By her “low estate” Mary not only had in mind the material poverty she was accustomed to, but also the sharpest of all poverty, the low estate of one of Royal birth. Mary never claimed anything for herself, but Christendom wrongly selected her as the object of worship and one entitled to a consideration above her Son.
Her Service
What must not be forgotten is the fact that Mary not only bore Jesus, but also mothered Him for the thirty years He tarried in the poor Nazareth home. Thus from childhood to manhood she did everything a devoted mother could do for the Son whom she knew was no ordinary Man. “Hers was the face that unto Christ had most resemblance.” While Mary did not neglect her motherly duties to the sons and daughters she bore Joseph, because of all she knew Jesus to be she surrounded His early years with character-forming influences. From the divine side we know that as Jesus grew “he waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him,” and that He “increased in stature and in favour with God and man.” But from the human side Jesus was subject to the home control of Joseph and Mary.
There were some things Mary was not able to give her Son. She could not surround Him with wealth. When she presented the divine Infant in the Temple all she could offer as a gift was a pair of pigeons—the offering of the very poor. But little is much if God is in it! Then she could not introduce Jesus to the culture of the age. Being poor, and enduring an enforced exile in Egypt, she had little of the acquired education of one like Luke who recorded her story. But she gave her Saviour-Son gifts of infinitely more value than secular and material advantages. What did she give Him?
First of all, from the human angle, she gave Him life, and He became bone of her bone, flesh of her flesh, and, until He was weaned, her warm milk nourished Him.
Then, along with Joseph, she gave Jesus a home, which although it was most unpretentious, was yet the only home He knew in the days of His flesh. Because of the character of Mary, we feel that her home was permeated with mutual trust and love and sympatheic understanding.
Purity of heart was among the flowers of character Mary cultivated in the home in which Jesus—and the other children—grew up. Can it be that when Jesus left home to become a preacher, He had His pious mother in mind when He said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”? Christ’s holiness was a part of His divine nature, but it was also a part of His humanity received from His mother who thought of herself as “the handmaid of the Lord.”
Another quality Jesus grew to appreciate in His mother was the sense of the presence of God. Gabriel said to Mary, “The Lord is with thee” and this divine awareness surrounded the holy Child Jesus. To Mary, God was not a being afar off, uninterested in her life or in the world. He had created but One who was so near and real. Why, because her Son was “very God of very God,” Mary was ever in the divine presence, and must have realized it.
Obedience, a trait prominent in Mary’s own life, was another quality in which she trained her Son. There is an old saying to the effect that a child who is not taught to obey his parents will not obey God. Mary submitted to the Father’s will as the channel of the Incarnation, and her holy Child grew up not only obedient to Mary and Joseph but also to His heavenly Father whose will was His delight.
Further, the one book in that Nazareth home was the Old Testament. That Mary’s mind was saturated with its promises and prophecies is evident from her song of praise. Like Timothy, Jesus, from a child, was familiar with the Holy Scriptures ( 2 Timothy 3:15). As His mother read to Him the records of the saints and prophets, how interested He must have been. Then there came the time when He knew that the Scripture testified of Him; that He came to be the Living Word.
Her Sorrow
When Mary brought her infant Son to be dedicated in the Temple, the aged, godly Simeon, taking the Babe in his arms and blessing Him, said to His mother, “A sword shall pierce through thy own soul also.” Mary was to experience darkness, as well as delight, as her “first-born” went out to fulfill His mission in the world. She would see Him as the “sign spoken against.” Manifold sword piercings were to be hers as the mother of the Lord. We cannot imagine the bitter trials of the years of her Son’s sojourn on the earth, particularly His last three and a half years ending in His death. Mary had listened to those angel voices rending the air as they hailed her new-born Baby as the Saviour of mankind, and heard the shepherds as they recounted the vision they had seen. She had witnessed the worship and homage of the wise men when, guided by a star, they came to the feet of her Child; and “she kept all these in her heart.” Whether she recounted these things to her growing Child we are not told. Personally, we believe that born the Son of God, Jesus had an inner awareness of who He was, from whence He came, and what His mission in the world was to be, from His earliest conscious years. During the years that Jesus was at home, Mary must have had many an inner pang, but by divine grace both then and after, she remained silently submissive, patient and trustful, knowing that the sword, piercing her heart from time to time, was in her heavenly Father’s hand.
Following the records of the gospels concerning the conversations between and about Jesus and Mary, the first event we notice took place in Jerusalem where Mary and her husband, Joseph, and Jesus had gone for the annual Feast of Passover. When the ceremonies were over Joseph and Mary, with their relatives, left for home, lost in animated gossip about each other’s affairs. Mary suddenly realized that Jesus, now twelve years of age, was not near her, and searching for Him among her kinsfolk and acquaintances could not find Him. Retracing her steps to the Temple she found Jesus where He had been left, and came upon Him in conversation with the fathers of the sanctuary. Remonstrating with her Son, Mary said, “Thy father and I have sought thee.”
Christ’s reply was like a sword piercing her heart: “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” He had no earthly father for He came as the only babe to enter the world without any earthly father. He was born of a woman, but not of a woman and a man. Young though He was, He knew of His divine parentage that separated Him from others, and He expected His mother to realize what such a gulf meant. Perhaps now, for the first time, Mary understood that her Son knew God to be, in a special sense, His only Father. There in the Temple, Nazareth faded from the mind of Jesus and earthy ties receded into the distance. He felt only one presence—the Father above in whose bosom He had dwelt from the dateless past. Mary had left her Son behind—behind with God. Her divine, “lost” Boy was to be God’s only hope for a “lost” world.
The mixed feelings in the mother’s heart, and her almost reproachful language as she sought to charge Jesus with having disregarded His mother’s natural feelings, must have been checked by a sort of awe as she looked at Him in the Temple with rapt countenance and then heard Him say that His place was in His Father’s house. Thus the narrative develops so naturally, tenderly, and in a most human way.
Being only twelve years of age, Jesus knew that every Jewish son must be subject to his parents. He indicated this in His reply to Mary, for He “went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them.” For the next eighteen years He yielded to His home authority. It is felt that during this period Mary lost the protection of her husband, for if he had been alive he would have been certainly mentioned in succeeding events (Mark 3:31; John 2:1; 19:25). Joseph had been a carpenter, and on his death Jesus took over the village business. In that carpenter’s shop we have “the toil of divinity revealing the divinity of toil.” “Is not this the Carpenter?” Then Joseph’s place in the home would be filled in measure by Jesus the first-born, who would care for His mother and give her years of peace.
We now come to recorded incidents causing Mary to realize that Jesus had severed Himself once and for all from her control. There were to be further sword-thrusts as she understood that her illustrious Son was absolutely independent of her authority and of human relationships. For thirty years Mary had carried in her heart the secret of His birth and the prophecy of His Messianic mission. Now the moment of parting comes when Jesus leaves the home that has sheltered Him for so long. And the striking thing is that we do not read of Jesus ever returning to it. In the home Mary had made for her Son, God had been preparing Him (for thirty years) for a brief but dynamic ministry lasting just over three years. As Jesus began His public life, His first miracle gave Him the occasion for impressing His mother with the fact that she must no longer impose her will and wishes upon Him (John 2). There must have been a pang in Mary’s heart the day Jesus left her home for good, and another heart-wound as she encountered the lack of official recognition as His mother. Whenever He met her it seemed as if He repelled her.
At the marriage feast in Cana of Galilee, at which Jesus and Mary were guests, a predicament arose when the stock of wine failed, and Mary, who failed to see that the youth had become a man, sought to order her Son to meet the crisis. His mother, conscious of the supernatural power Jesus was to manifest, approached Jesus and said suggestively, “They have no wine.”
Jesus replied abruptly: “Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.” He was not disrespectful when He used the term “woman,” for such was the common mode of respectful address among the Hebrews. Thus, in the original the words addressed by Jesus to His mother are free from any element of disrespect or of hardness. Mary said to the servants: “Whatsoever he saith unto you do it,” and a short time later Jesus performed His first miracle. His purpose in speaking to His mother as He did was to check any undue interference on her part of His mediatorial work. As Augustine put it—
He does not acknowledge a human womb when about to work Divine works.
Although blessed among women, Mary was to learn that she must not be permitted to control the operations of the One sent of the Father. As the Son of Mary, Jesus was willingly subject to her, but now as the Son of God, Mary must endeavor to be subject to Him. The very fact that He addressed her as woman and not as mother must have had but one meaning for her, namely, that from now on the direction of His course had entered into His Father’s hands. Fausset’s comment is—
The Christian’s allegiance is solely to Him, not to her also: a prescient forewarning of the Holy Ghost against mediaeval and modern mariolatry.
After a double circuit of Galilee during which crowds gathered around Jesus for teaching and healing, so much so that He had little time, “to eat bread,” His mother and brothers came to remonstrate with Him to take care. Had not the men of Nazareth sought to throw Him over the brow of the hill (Luke 4:29 )? Now, anxious for His safety and fearing He would destroy Himself by His constant work and lack of food and rest, Mary and her sons “sought to speak with him, and to lay hold on him, for they said, He is beside himself” (Mark 3:21, 31-35 ). It was natural for a mother to be concerned about her Son wearing Himself out. He might fall exhausted under His load of work and perhaps sink into an untimely grave.
Thinking, perhaps, that she might save Jesus from the effects of an imprudent enthusiasm, Mary receives another mild rebuke in which He hinted that the blessedness of Mary consisted not in being His mother, but in believing in Him and in His God-given mission, and in obedience to His words. Jesus again denies any authority of earthly relatives, or any privilege from human relationships. “My mother! Who is My mother and My brothers?” Then pointing to those sitting around Him who had believed His word and followed Him, He said, “Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother” ( Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 11:28 ). In effect Jesus said, “I, in working out the world’s redemption, can acknowledge only spiritual relationships.” So the distance between Mary and her Son widens, and the piercings of the sword, which old Simeon had prophesied, were keenly felt. Although all generations were to call Mary blessed, yet privileged and highly favored beyond all members of the human family, here was a bitter cup of sorrow she was compelled to drink.
Mary’s deepest sword piercing came when in agony she stood beneath that old rugged cross and witnessed the degradation, desolation and death of the One whom she had brought into the world and intensely loved. She heard the blasphemies and revilings of the priests and the people, and saw the lights go out—but her faith did not die. If Calvary was our Lord’s crown of sorrow, it was likewise Mary’s, yet how courageous she was. Others might sit and watch the suffering Christ, or smite their breasts and cry, but “Mary stood by the cross.” Should she not have been spared the agony of seeing the Son of her womb die such a despicable death? No! It was in the divine order of things that she should be found beneath that cross to receive the parting benediction of her Son and Saviour, and His committal of her to the affectionate care of the disciple whom He loved.
At the cross her station keeping
Stood the mournful mother weeping,
Close to Jesus to the last.
Through her heart His sorrow sharing,
All His bitter anguish bearing,
Now at length the sword has passed.
At previous meetings with Christ, Mary expressed her feelings. Now, as He dies, she stands in silence. Those around her had no conception of her inner grief as she stood where her Son could see her. No Spartan mother ever displayed such fortitude as Mary manifested at the cross. How impressed we are with the valor of Mary, as the sword pierces her heart again “now that which she brought forth was dying”! Before He died Jesus recognized His human relationship to Mary, which He had during His ministry put in the background, that His higher relationship must stand out more prominently. Commending Mary to John, Jesus did not address her by name, or as His mother, but as “Woman.” To John He said, “Thy mother” (John 19:26, 27). But even then she did not desert her Son. Some of His disciples forsook Him and fled, but her love never surrendered, even though her Son was dying as a criminal between two thieves.
To John, His much-loved disciple, Jesus left His mother as a legacy. In the last moments of His life, and in the crisis of His deepest sorrow, His thought was of the future of His brokenhearted mother whom John took to his own home. Thus, as Augustine expresses it, “He needed no helper in redeeming all; He gave human affection to His mother, but sought no help of man.” The transference of the bond of motherhood from Himself to John raises the question, “Why did He not entrust Mary to one of her older sons or daughters?” Evidently she was a widow, otherwise Jesus would not have called upon His beloved disciple to perform the duties of an elder brother. But why not commit Mary to His own brother who would become the elder in that Nazareth home? Perhaps in John’s home Jesus knew that Mary would find the spiritual atmosphere more suited to her thirst for God, and that in John Mary would find a soul on fire similar to His own zeal for God.
We may feel, that because of the steadfast tie of tender love and mutual understanding between Jesus and Mary, Jesus should have used a softer word and said, “Behold My mother!” and not “thy mother.” Was this the final sword thrust Simeon had predicted some thirty-three years before? No! He knew that Mary would be a true mother in Israel to John, and that he, in turn, would care for the blessed among women in her declining years. Further, as Donald Davidson reminds us, “In that moment the tremendous truth must at last have dawned upon Mary, that He who hung upon the cross was not her son; that before the world was He was; that so far from being His mother, she was herself His child.” On the morning of His Resurrection Jesus did not appear first to Mary His mother, but to Mary Magdalene—surely an evidence of His matchless grace.
The last glimpse we have of Mary is a heartwarming one. We find her among the group of believers gathered together in the upper chamber. She is mentioned, not first in the list, before the apostles, where the Roman Catholic Church places her, but last, as if she were of less significance than they (Acts 1:12-14 ). Her Son is alive forevermore, and life has changed for her. So she takes her place among those awaiting the coming of the Spirit to equip them for the beginning of the Christian community. Mary was present in that upper room not as an object of worship, not as the directress of the infant church, but as a humble suppliant along with the rest, including her sons, who, by this time, were believers. So the last mention of Mary is a happy one. We see her praying, along with her sons whom she had possibly led into a full-orbed faith, as well as the other disciples who had met to pray and await the gift of Pentecost.
This is the last glimpse we have of Mary. Her name is not mentioned again in the rest of the New Testament after the upper room appearance, which plainly teaches that she did not have the superhuman powers the Roman Catholic Church has assigned to her. With the gradual development of Roman Catholicism from the third or fourth century, there emerged the Mariolatry so foreign to the Scriptural presentation of Mary as the most tender and lovable of women, yet a woman still. If Rome had only observed the reticence of the New Testament concerning Mary, it would not have been guilty of blinding the eyes of multitudes to the ineffable glory of the One who, though the Son of Mary, came as the express image of the Father and the only Mediator between God and men.
Mary does not stand apart from the rest of the sinful human race, born immaculate and remaining sinless throughout her life. As a member of a fallen race she recognized her need of deliverance from sin and guilt when she sang, “My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” The “culture” of Mary does not have its origin in the Bible for “there is not a word there from which it could be inferred; not in the Creeds, nor in the fathers of the first five centuries.” Titles such as The Tower of David; The Arch of Holy Alliance; The Door of Heaven; The Queen of the Apostles, Confessors and Martyrs; The Co-adjustrix with God in the work of salvation , as applied to Mary, are the invention of Rome. Mary never magnified herself—only her Lord. Her glorification as the object of worship, her function as an intercessor through whom prayers must be addressed to Christ, her perpetual care of Christ and her present influence over Him, are the false creations of Rome. Therefore, “Mariolatry belongs, historically, to unauthorized speculation; and psychologically, to the natural history of asceticism and clerical celibacy.” The elevation and worship of Mary is most unscriptural and idolatrous. The Bible portrays her as a woman “blessed among women,” but only as a mere faithful, humble, godly woman. Rome’s exaltation of Mary consists largely of fictitious and unreliable legends and dogmas. The true Christian portrayal of the mother of Jesus is that to be found only in the gospels in which the Master taught that man has access to God only through His all-sufficient mediatorial work (John 14:6).
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Chloe
|
Women of the Bible: Zipporah
Zipporah
The Woman Who Wrongly Opposed Her Husband
Scripture References—Exodus 2:21, 22; 4:24, 25; 18:1-6
Name Meaning—A Midian name, Zipporah means “a little bird,” “a sparrow.” Wilkinson observes that “the feminine termination ah added to the common word Zippor, which is also the father of Balak, king of Moab.” Such a name like “dove” or “lamb” would originally be a term of endearment, and thus the word passer &–;“a sparrow”—is used by the Roman poets. Passer is also being found as a Roman family name. The root of this word is an Arabic verb, signifying “to chirp.”
Family Connections—Zipporah was one of the seven daughters of Jethro who is also called Reuel and Raguel (Exodus 2:18; 4:24 , 25; 18:1-6; Numbers 10:29 ). It was to the home of this shepherd-priest in Midian that Moses came when at forty years of age he fled from Egypt, and meeting the seven girls drawing water Moses assisted them. Arriving home earlier than usual they told how the Egyptian had helped them. Brought up as a son of Pharaoh, Moses must have looked every inch a cultured Egyptian. Invited home, Moses was content to live with Jethro’s family, and married Zipporah, eldest of the seven daughters. Two sons were born of the union, Gershom and Eliezer. Some writers affirm, without adequate support, that the dark-skinned Ethiopian, “the Cushite woman” whom Miriam and Aaron were jealous over, is merely a description of Zipporah, and that therefore Moses was only married once. But the statement “He had married an Ethiopian woman” implies a recent occurrence, and that Zipporah, whom Moses had married 40 years previously, was dead. It is most unlikely that Miriam and Aaron would have waited all those years to murmur against Moses if Zipporah and the Ethiopian had been one and the same woman.
Zipporah, as a woman of Midian, did not share the spiritual values of her notable husband who found himself acting against the sacred tradition of Israel. This may be one reason why he named his second son Eliezer, meaning “The Lord of my father was my help.” To keep the peace, Moses compromised with his unbelieving wife and withheld circumcision, the sign of God’s covenant, from Eliezer. The Lord intervened, and as a sign of divine displeasure, Moses is stricken with a mortal disease. Both Zipporah and Moses became conscience-stricken over the profanation of God’s covenant, and Zipporah yields. Moses is too prostrate to take a knife and circumcize the child, so his wife severed the boy’s foreskin and, throwing it down before Moses said, “Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.”
When Moses was restored to health relations in the home were not congenial, for he went on alone to Egypt, and Zipporah and the two sons went back to her home in Midian. Of this unhappy incident Alexander Whyte says, “There are three most obscure and most mysterious verses in Moses’ history that mean, if they mean anything at all to us, just such an explosion of ill-temper as must have left its mark till death on the heart of Moses and Zipporah. The best of wives; his help meet given him of God; the most self-effacing of women; the wife who holds her husband in her heart as the wisest and best of men &–;under sufficient trial and provocation and exasperation, even she will turn and will strike with just one word; just once in her whole married lifetime.”
When Moses became the mighty leader and law-giver of Israel, there was the episode when Jethro, his father-in-law came out to the wilderness to see Moses and brought with him Zipporah and the two sons. The union was devoid of any restraint for Moses graciously received them and neither disowned nor ignored his wife and sons. But after this visit during which Jethro gave his over-burdened son-in-law some very practical advice, nothing more is said of Zipporah. She disappears without comment from the history of the Jewish people in which her husband figured so prominently. “Neither as the wife of her husband nor as the mother of her children did she leave behind her a legacy of spiritual riches.” How different it would have been if only she had fully shared her husband’s unusual meekness and godliness and, like him, left behind footprints in the sands of time!
Zipporah is far from being an inspiring character with which to end our alphabetical coverage of all the named women of the Bible. One could have wished for a nobler and more godly example of female biography as a fitting conclusion to this section of our study. Looking back over the large number of women whose names are recorded in Holy Writ we realize that taken together they represent all aspects of human nature—good, bad and indifferent. For the majority, they lived their lives as they passed through this short scene of trial into eternity, leaving little trace behind them. But as we have seen, others, by their character and history, have left their names engraved in the impregnable Rock of Holy Scripture, with their records serving as either warning signals where they were conspicuous for evil, or as shining examples of high endeavor, where their lives were lived as unto Him who created both male and female for His glory.
Whatever was thus written in former days was written for our instruction, that by [our steadfast and patient] endurance and the encouragement [drawn] from the Scriptures we might hold fast and cherish hope (Romans 15:4, Amplified Bible).
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Bernice
Bernice
The Woman Guilty of Incestuous Conduct
Scripture References—Acts 25:13, 23; 26:30
Name Meaning —Bernice (Greek—Bernicke), or Berenice, is a Macedonian corruption of Pherenice, and means, “victorious,” or “carrying off victory.” Wilkinson informs us that the name occurs in previous history, being given “to the wife of Ptolemy, one of Alexander’s generals, who became King of Egypt, and founder of an illustrious dynasty.” Another compound with nike, implying “victory,” is found in Eunice (Greek—Eunicke) the name of Timothy’s mother. “… The word is expressive of a good or happy victory, and in its origin doubtless commemorated some such event. It is noticeable that nike was a favorite termination of females in the Macedonian age, as for example, Thessalonice, the daughter of Philip, King of Macedon, and Stratonice, the name of the wife of Antigonus, one of Alexander’s generals and successors.”
Family Connections—Bernice was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I who ruled, a.d. 38-45, and is described as the one “who vexed the church” (Acts 12:1 ). Josephus says that she was first married to Marcus. After a while she married her Uncle Herod, king of Chalcis. When he died, she was suspected of evil relations with her own brother Agrippa, with whom she always appeared as his consort. In company with Agrippa, Bernice visited Festus when he became procurator of Judea. Leaving Agrippa, she married Polemon, or Ptolemy, king of Cilicia who for her sake embraced Judaism by the rite of circumcision. She soon left Ptolemy, however, for a future period of intimacy with her brother. Subsequently she became the mistress of Vespasian, then of Titus, son of Vespasian, but when Titus became emperor, he cast her aside.
“If heredity stands for anything, its lessons are forcibly taught in the history of the Herodian family.” For instance, Bernice and her sister Drusilla (Acts 24:24, see Drusilla ), were two of the most corrupt and shameless women of their time in Roman history. As Bernice, a wicked woman who lived an incestuous life, listened to Paul’s impassioned appeal as he repeated what God had done for his soul, one wonders what impression it made upon her evil heart. As her brother listened, he said to Paul, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” What a different record would have been written if Agrippa and Bernice had repented of their sordid sin, and yielded their lives to Him whose blood can make the foulest clean!
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Rebekah, Rebecca
Rebekah, Rebecca
The Woman Whose Favoritism Brought Sorrow
Scripture References—Genesis 22:23; 24; 25:20-28; 26:6-35; 27; 28:5; 29:12; 35:8; 49:31; Romans 9:6-16
Name Meaning —Rebekah is another name with an animal connection. Although not belonging to any animal in particular, it has reference to animals of a limited class and in a peculiar condition. The name means a “tie rope for animals” or “a noose” in such a rope. Its root is found in a noun meaning a “hitching place” or “stall” and is connected with a “tied-up calf or lamb,” a young animal peculiarly choice and fat. Applied to a female, the figure suggests her beauty by means of which men are snared or bound. Thus another meaning of Rebekah is that of “captivating.” If, then, Rebekah means “a noosed cord,” the loop was firmly around Isaac’s neck. When Isaac took her as his bride he forgot his grief for his dead mother, and lived happily with his wife for twenty years during which time they had no children.
Family Connections—Rebekah is first mentioned in the genealogy of the descendants of Nahor, Abraham’s brother (Genesis 22:20-24 ). When the pilgrims set out from the Ur of the Chaldees, Nahor was one of the party, and settled down at Charran where Terah, his father, died. Among Nahor’s sons was Bethuel who, by an unknown wife, became the father of Rebekah, the sister of Laban. Rebekah married Isaac the son of Abraham, by whom she had two sons, Esau and Jacob.
The story of Isaac and Rebekah as a love lyric full of romance and tender beauty has been retold times without number, and is a charming record that never loses its appeal. Such an idyllic narrative is almost too familiar to need rehearsal, and too simple to require comment, yet because it constitutes one of the most romantic scenes in the Bible, its “moving scenes, so fresh and artless in their old world simplicity” have a pertinent appeal for present-day society. Ancient Bible histories with their arrestive characters and remarkable sequence of events and fortunes never fail to leave an indelible imprint on our hearts. The chapter recording how a wife was found for Isaac ( Genesis 24) presents a link in the chain of events leading up to—
That far-off Divine event
To which the whole creation moves.
Through the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah, Abraham saw that day of Christ in which the church should become the Bride of Christ.
Almost two millenniums after the days of the patriarch whom God spoke of as His “friend,” there were those who considered it a privilege to belong to the race having Abraham as its fountainhead. To be “a son of Abraham” or a lineal descendant of such a grand, great old divine was an honor, but Isaac enjoyed a still greater advantage for Abraham was his own natural father. What a rich dowry of blessing must have been Isaac’s because of such a close relationship. He had the inspiration of his father’s godliness, and the benefit of his prayers and wise counsels—even in the matter of securing the right kind of wife.
Abraham’s opposition to idolatry is seen in his request that the partner for his son, Isaac, must not be “of the daughters of the Canaanites” (24:3). As he had refused a grave for his wife, Sarah, amongst the sepulchers of the Hittites (Genesis 23 ), so a wife for their son must not be sought among their daughters. Thus it came about that Abraham’s trusted, godly servant, Eliezer, was divinely guided to Haran where Nahor, Abraham’s brother settled. Too feeble to make the journey himself, Abraham gave his servant the most careful instructions, and impressed upon him the solemn significance of his mission. Confident as to the result of the search for a suitable wife for Isaac, Abraham assured the earthly seeker that he would be guided by God’s angel. Eliezer, the intelligent, prudent, obedient and praying servant went forth. Seeking a sign of divine guidance, not to prove God’s faithfulness, but for his own direction in the choice of a woman of character as a wife for his master’s son, the servant came to Nahor’s well at Nahor, and saw in Rebekah who had come to draw water the answer to his prayer and quest.
Eliezer lost no time in telling Rebekah who he was, and from whom he had come, and the purpose of his search. He revealed his tact in the way he wooed and won the heart of Rebekah. The gifts he bestowed upon her and the good things he said of his master, secured the favor of Rebekah’s family who gave its consent to the proposed marriage. Faced with instant departure from her dear ones, Rebekah is given her choice—“Wilt thou go with this man?” Without hesitation, feeling that she, too, was following the leading of God, as Eliezer had, Rebekah replied in a firm voice, “I will go.”
The caravan set out for Abraham’s home, and now we come to a superb touch in the romantic story. Isaac was out in the fields at eventide for his usual period of meditation. He saw the approaching camels and sensed the success of Eliezer in the choice of a wife. Reaching Isaac, Rebekah, according to custom, veiled her face, and the end of this exquisite poem of the meeting of bride and bridegroom is stated in most expressive terms—“Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her.”
Marrying “sight unseen” is a most dangerous venture, but in this case it was successful because “the angel of the Lord” had directed the events leading up to the union. When Rebekah saw the handsome, mild-mannered and meditative Isaac, her heart went out to him. As for Isaac, a man of forty, and some twenty years older than Rebekah, he instantly loved the most beautiful woman he beheld, and she remained his only love. Some matrimonial matches have been described as “Lucifer Matches,” because of clash of temperament and temper, but the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah was certainly one “made in heaven.” There would be fewer broken homes if only young people looking for partners would seek the guidance of God as the servant of Abraham did. We agree with Alexander Whyte when he says of the ancient record of the circumstances leading to the securing of a wife for Isaac—
A sweeter chapter was never written than the twenty-fourth of Genesis…. The picture of aged Abraham swearing his most trusty servant about a bride for his son Isaac; that servant’s journey to Padan-aram in the far east; Rebekah, first at the well, and then in her mother’s house; and then her first sight of her future husband—that long chapter is a perfect gem of ancient authorship.
As with other pairs in the Bible, it is hardly possible to separate Isaac from Rebekah whose lives were so closely knit together. Yet let us see if we can sketch a portrait of Rebekah herself.
Her Character
As a damsel, that is, a maiden around twenty years of age, Rebekah was “fair to look upon,” meaning that she had an unaffected Oriental beauty. She was a virgin, and had a childlike simplicity. There was no trace of wantonness in her. As with her mother-in-law, Sarah, beauty carried its dangers. During his sojourn in Gerar, Isaac feared lest the physical charms of his wife might excite the desire of the king of Gerar and so he lied. Thus Isaac passed Rebekah off as his sister—a course of action which might have had dire consequences (Genesis 26:6-16 ). He fell into the same error as his father before him (see Sarah). Andrew Fuller says, “The falls of those that have gone before us are like so many rocks on which others have been split; and the recording of them is like placing buoys over them for the security of future mariners.” But in the story of Isaac the buoy served no beneficial purpose.
Beautiful Rebekah had been taken by Abimelech, but one day as he looked out of the window he saw Isaac caressing Rebekah, and he knew that he had been deceived. Isaac’s untruthfulness was discovered, and the heir of God’s promises was rebuked by a heathen king for his lying and deception. In the providence of God, Abimelech, an idolater, was made the protector of the child of promise (see Psalm 17:13 ). As “an amiable and lovely girl,” as her name suggests, she was industrious, for although she was a member of a family of standing she was not afraid to soil her hands. The hard work of drawing and carrying water, the provision she made for Eliezer’s camels, and the meal she prepared, speak of Rebekah as one who did not shun domestic duties. That she was a woman of faith is evident from what Paul says of her as being the recipient of a direct revelation from the Lord regarding universal blessing through her favorite Jacob (Romans 9:12).
Rebekah’s best qualities come out in the simple yet heartwarming narrative describing her response to Eliezer’s approach, in her service to him, and in her willingness to believe and act upon all he had told her. In his remarkable cameo of Rebekah, George Matheson uses the following terms or expressions—“a fine manner” &–;“remarkable tact”—“a sunbeam to her household”—“a very beautiful young woman, with the gift of physical charm which was apt to produce self-consciousness”—“the gift of intellectual sympathy”—“Rebekah’s morning ray is a ray of sympathetic insight.”
Modest and meek, frank and open, ready kindness, great energy and faith, graciousness matching her physical charm, describe Rebekah. When she became a mother she revealed how masterful and clever she could be—a direct contrast to Isaac who was probably more simple, slow of wit, and mild of manner than his wife. The lines of Wordsworth can express Isaac’s feelings when for the first time he gazed upon the lovely Rebekah and came to experience her comforting love as she filled the empty place in his heart because of his mother’s death.
She was a phantom of delight
When first she gleamed upon my sight;
A lovely apparition, sent
To be a moment’s ornament;
Her eyes as stars of twilight fair,
Like twilight’s, too, her dusky hair.
But all things else about her drawn
From May-time and the cheerful dawn.
A dancing shape, an image gay,
To haunt, to startle, and waylay.
I saw her upon nearer view,
A spirit, yet a woman too!
Her Children
Motherhood came to Rebekah somewhat late in life when Isaac was an aging man. For twenty years she had been childless, and conscious of God’s promise that the Abrahamic Covenant could not be broken, Isaac entreated God that his long barren wife might conceive. He graciously answered his earnest intercession (Genesis 25:19-34). As his prayer was in the line of God’s purpose, it was sure of an answer (1 John 5:14 ). The years of waiting on the part of Isaac and Rebekah show that God has His own time for the fulfillment of His purpose.
Like coral strands beneath the sea,
So strongly built and chaste,
The plans of God, unfolding, show
No signs of human haste.
In an age of almost universal polygamy, Isaac took no handmaid, concubine, or second wife. Rebekah and he were bound together by the bonds of a mutual affection, and although childless, yet became the parents of two sons who were destined to be the progenitors of different nations. But when Rebekah became the mother of twins—the first of two Bible women mentioned as giving birth to twins—the other was Tamar (Genesis 38:27)—somehow she changed and was a different character from the young bride who rode south so gaily to meet her lover in Canaan, as our next glimpse of her will show.
The opposite characters of Rebekah’s twins, Esau and Jacob, brought into sharp focus the dark side of their mother. As Esau was the first to emerge from her womb he had the precedence and was thus the heir of two things, namely “the sovereignty and the priesthood, of the clan—the birthright and the blessing. The birthright was the right of succession…. The blessing was something to be given during the lifetime of the father.” We learn that as the boys grew, “Esau was a cunning (skillful) hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents.” At the time of their birth, Jacob seized his brother’s heel—an incident prophetic of the day when he would supplant Esau. Often in children there are characteristics predictive of the manner of adults they will be.
The divergence of Rebekah’s twins in temperament, inclination, occupation, and religious aspirations is most apparent. Esau was wrapped in a raiment of hair, a rough man of the wilderness, a clever hunter with something of the wild daring spirit of the modern Bedouin. Jacob was the opposite of his brother. He preferred a fixed abode, to dwell in his tent rather than roam the desert. Esau was probably more brilliant, attractive, forceful, daring than his twin brother. Jacob, in spite of his weaknesses and mistakes was the finer character, and on the whole truer to the Lord and more fitted to possess the blessing of the birthright. Further, there was the difference of regard on the part of Isaac and Rebekah toward their two sons that resulted in sorrow and separation.
Isaac loved Esau, but the love was somewhat sensual. He loved his son “because he did eat of his venison.” Such love is of a carnal nature, for love in its highest sense has regard not so much to what the loved one gives as to what he or she is.
Rebekah loved Jacob, not because he was more of a “homebody” than his brother, or possessed a more loving nature than he, but because Jacob was the Lord’s preference (Romans 9:13 ). Esau thought so lightly of the birthright that he was willing to sell it for a mess of pottage, and be guilty, thereby, of the sin of profanity (Hebrews 12:16). Jacob, however, recognized the solemnity of the birthright and wished to possess it. Esau thought of it as of no more value than a mouthful of food, but Jacob knew something of the sacred significance of the birthright and was therefore a more fit channel through which the blessing of God could flow to the seed of Abraham.
As Rebekah is often blamed for the partiality or favoritism she manifested for Jacob, it may be profitable to consider the matter of preference in family life. When parents single out one of their children as a favorite and shower more love and attention upon that one than the rest, such an unwise and unnatural course inevitably results in jealousy and strife. Although Isaac found “in Esau that strong practical nature, and energetic character which distinguished the woman he so dearly loved; and Rebekah saw in the gentle Jacob a replica of the father who had so strangely attracted her that first day when she met him meditating in the fields at evening,” the partiality was absolutely indefensible and led to lying and deception on Rebekah’s part.
What else can be expected but confusion and trouble when there is a crossing of purposes between parents concerning their children? Was the root-cause of Rebekah’s unnatural and unmotherly preference of Jacob over Esau and her treatment of Esau as though he was not, the lack of deep love for her husband, and that union of moral and spiritual ideas and ideals characteristic of every true marriage? We are certainly told that Isaac loved Rebekah, but not that she loved Isaac. Somehow we feel that if husband and wife had been one in all things in that ancient home, Rebekah would have been more concerned about Jacob’s character than his prosperity. But Isaac was partial to Esau and Rebekah partial to Jacob—which favoritism resulted in Esau leaving home, and Jacob fleeing from it. Rebekah’s record therefore shows that while Isaac was faithful to her, she was unfaithful to Isaac in a twofold way. First, she cheated Esau, her oldest son, and Isaac’s pet out of his birthright. Then she cheated Esau out of his father’s blessing, which prerogative had the effect of a testamentary bequest.
Comparing the chapter of the romantic meeting of Isaac and Rebekah ( Genesis 24) with its perfection of writing, and the dark chapter of Rebekah’s deception (Genesis 28), Alexander Whyte says, “That the ship was launched on such a golden morning only the more darkens the surrounding gloom when she goes to the bottom.” Then dealing with the secret alienation that developed between Isaac and Rebekah, the same renowned expositor adds—
When the two twin-brothers were brought up day after day and hour after hour in an atmosphere of favouritism, and partiality, and indulgence, and injustice, no father, no mother, can surely need to have it pointed out to them what present misery, and what future wages of such sin, is all to be seen and to be expected in that evil house.
One result of Rebekah’s preference for Jacob was the spite and the sight of Esau going out and grieving his parents by marrying two ungodly women. Esau was forty years old when he did this &–;the same age at which Isaac married Rebekah. His parents must have seen in the foreign wives he brought home the firstfruits of the devil’s garden they had sowed for themselves. “Their great grief would seem to have been almost the only thing the two old people were at one about by that time.” Esau had seen little in his mother to admire and respect; therefore he was never in any mood to please her. What a different story would have been written if Esau’s home had been “without partiality”!
Her Chicanery
Chicanery is described as the act of one who deliberately deceives, and this was Rebekah’s sin. The destiny of her favorite son, Jacob, was strongly influenced by his mother’s strong-mindedness, and thus she became the authoress of the treacherous plan to deprive Esau of his father’s blessing. Isaac is old, feeble and blind, and informs the members of his household that the time has come to give Esau, officially, what was left to him after selling his birthright, namely, the blessing which carried with it the recognition of his headship, the ratification of the birthright. So Isaac told his favorite son to take his bow and arrow and go into the fields, hunt for his much-liked venison, and make a savory meal. At that time, and for centuries in the Orient, a meal taken together was a common symbol of a saved pledge when father and son partook together. In such an hour of sacred fellowship the father bestowed upon the elder son his rank and place.
Rebekah overheard, and her deceitful heart was stirred to action. She set about to thwart her husband’s purpose. Her favorite son must not be displaced, and her hopes for him dashed to the ground, by the impetuous hunter whom Isaac loved. Cunningly she devised the plan of impersonation. While Esau was out in the fields hunting, Rebekah told Jacob to go to a flock nearby and bring two kids for her to dress and cook and pass off as venison. While cautious about his mother’s duplicity, he had no conscience against it. What made Jacob hesitant was the fact that his brother was a hairy man, while his own skin was smooth, and that if his father felt him and sensed the deception, he would not bless him, but curse him.
Rebekah, however, was equal to this fear of Jacob, and he followed the counsels of his treacherous mother. He put the skin of the kids upon his hands and upon his neck, thus making himself feel and smell like Esau, and so deceived his aged, blind father. Doubtless Rebekah stood nearby in convenient concealment to see how her ill-conceived ruse would succeed. Smelling Esau’s clothes, and feeling the false hairy hands, Isaac was a little doubtful and said, “The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” But reassured by the repeated lies of Jacob, the deceived father bestowed the unalterable blessing upon his son, and Jacob, by fraud, became the father of Israel’s race. To his discredit, he played the role successfully which his mother had drilled into him with masterly skill. Covetous of the sacred, patriarchal blessing for her favorite son, Rebekah felt she had to resort to duplicity to gain her ends, and in doing so she prostituted parental authority. “My son obey my voice” (Genesis 27:8), and Jacob the misguided son obeyed, and in his subsequent career bore the bitter fruit of his conduct when Laban deceived him regarding Rachel.
A deceiver Jacob was
Full of craft and guile;
Thro’ long years he bore his guilt,
Unrepentant all the while.
Samuel Morely once said, “I am much what my mother has made me.” It was so in a wrong sense in the life of Jacob, for as in the case of Athaliah, “his mother was his counsellor to do wickedly” (2 Chronicles 22:3 ). The thoroughness with which Jacob carried out his mother’s plan of deception is surely one of the worse features of the narrative. Fearful of the failure of his mother’s plot, Jacob said, “I will bring a curse upon me and not a blessing.” But Rebekah replied, “Upon me be thy curse, my son, only obey my voice.” The future scheming life of Jacob, however, was but the extension of the deceitful qualities of his mother, and both suffered as the result of adopting false methods to accomplish right ends.
When Esau found that he had been robbed of his blessing through the cunning scheme of his mother, he became a remorseless avenger and swore the death of his brother who was forced to flee for his life to Haran, some 500 miles away. Rebekah never saw the face of her much-loved son again. To add to her reproach she had to endure the grief of seeing her other son marry heathen women. Esau’s heathen wives caused Rebekah to be weary of her life (Genesis 27:46 ). Esau received a promise from his father that he would be the progenitor of a great nation—the Edomites—and much misery accrued to Israel because of Edom. The wrath of Esau’s enraged blood boiled in the blood of Herod the Idumean on the day he reviled the Man of Sorrows.
There are some writers who try to justify the actions of Rebekah by saying that she was prompted to take the course she did concerning Jacob because of the prediction that, “the elder shall serve the younger,” but God had no need of trickery and deceit to fulfill His promise. Ambitious for her son, Rebekah sacrificed the love of her husband, the loss of the esteem of her elder son, and the peace of her soul, for the idolized son whose face she never saw again. Without doubt, Jacob was the divinely-appointed heir of Abraham (Genesis 25:23 ), and Rebekah seeking to overrule the purpose of Isaac in his blessing of Esau, resorted to deceit to accomplish the will of God. Her guiding principle was, “Let us do evil that good may come” (Romans 3:8), but wrong is never right (James 1:20). Esau had sold his birthright for a mess of pottage, and Rebekah catered to Isaac’s carnal appetite in order to accomplish a divine purpose. Had she laid aside “all guile, and hypocrisies” ( 1 Peter 2:1), and reasoned with her husband about the solemn issue at stake she would have been saved from the disgrace which her worldly policy brought upon her own head and from the sorrow others had to endure.
Almost the last picture we have of Rebekah is when she tearfully witnessed the hasty departure of her favorite son. “A strong-minded, decisive girl had grown into an autocratic matriarch,” and ends her days a brokenhearted woman. When she died we are not told. Isaac, although much older than Rebekah, was still living when Jacob returned to Canaan over 20 years later. It is assumed that she died during Jacob’s long absence, and was buried in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (Genesis 49:31 ). A fitting epitaph for her grave would have been, “Died of a broken heart.” The only monument Rebekah has is to be found in the Anglican marriage service of The Book of Common Prayer where we read—
That as Isaac and Rebekah lived faithfully together, so these persons may surely perform and keep the vow and covenant betwixt them.
While she may have been faithful during the first 20 years of marriage while she was childless, Rebekah, by her unjustifiable treacherous and wholly inexplicable intervention for her favorite son, stained her solemn marriage.
Reviewing Rebekah’s life and character what are some of the warnings to heed? Are we not forcibly reminded that love which seeks success at the cost of truth and righteousness is of the earth, earthy? The devil’s maxim is, “Nothing succeeds like success.” But from God’s standpoint nothing succeeds which does not follow the way of truth and honesty. Then, while she had physical beauty, her domination of Jacob and her scheme to deceive her husband revealed the lack of the beauty of a godly character. Further, Rebekah is a warning to all parents that there should be no favorites in the family; that all alike should be dear to them. If there is partiality for any in a family, it should only be for those who are weak and helpless.
Another warning bell is that when a wife conspires against her husband, or vice versa, they are guilty of a baseness which language cannot describe. When one partner finds that he has been betrayed by the other, the world becomes a blank.
The mind has a thousand eyes
The heart but one,
But the light of a whole life dies
When love is done.
There is one beneficial application we can make of Rebekah’s prompt decision to follow Eliezer to meet her future bridegroom, Isaac &–;I will go! In connection with the higher betrothal of the soul to the heavenly Bridegroom, He comes to the sinner saying as Eliezer did to Rebekah, “Will you go with Me? Will you follow Me into that country where saints immortal reign?” When hearts respond to such an appeal, “Yea, Lord I will go. I will follow Thee, whithersoever Thou goest!” they are twice blessed.
- Bible Gateway.Com
Women of the Bible: Eunice
Eunice
The Woman Whose Son Became a Famous Evangelist
Scripture References—Acts 16:1-3; 2 Timothy 1:5; 3:14, 15; 4:5
Name meaning—Eunice implies “conquering well,” and was a name expressive of a good or happy victory, and in its origin doubtless commemorated some such event. Nice or “nike” was a favorite ending of female names in the Macedonian age. Eunice lived up to her name for she conquered in the effort to bring up her son in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
Family Connections—Eunice was the daughter of Lois whose name is of Greek origin. Scripture is silent as to the identity of her father. A Jewess, Eunice married a Gentile, and as nothing is said of him it can be assumed that he was dead by the time Paul contacted the family.
The commanding feature of the Scriptural record of Eunice and her mother is their religious influence upon Timothy who, from childhood days had known the Scriptures ( 2 Timothy 3:14, 15). These two godly women had trained him up in the way he should go (Proverbs 22:6). How gratified they must have been when Timothy set out to do the work of an evangelist! ( 2 Timothy 4:5). His name, Timothy, means “one who fears God,” and must have been chosen by his Jewish mother, and not by his Gentile father who probably had little leaning Godward. Evidence seems to point to the contention that Lois, Eunice and Timothy were won to Christ by Paul on an earlier visit to Lystra where the family lived (Acts 14:6, 7 ). Although Lois and her daughter were Jewesses and well-versed in Old Testament Scriptures, and taught the child Timothy the same, it was Paul who brought them to see that the One who died upon the cross to save sinners was the long-promised Messiah. That the Apostle led Timothy to Christ is proven by the way Paul speaks of him as his “beloved son” and his “son in the faith.” How grateful to God Eunice must have been when Paul chose her much-loved son to be his companion in his evangelistic work! How she would appreciate the word of Solomon, “She that bare thee shall rejoice” ( Proverbs 23:25).
Hereditary piety and personal faith are implied in Paul’s reference to the unfeigned faith which first dwelt in Timothy’s grandmother, Lois, then in his mother, Eunice, and then in himself also. While one parent’s faith can sanctify a child (1 Corinthians 7:14 ), it is a personal faith in Christ that saves the soul. Notice is taken of the faith of Timothy’s mother, but not of his father. After Paul’s reference to Lois and Eunice in his second epistle to Timothy, they are not mentioned again. There may be a veiled reference to them, however, in what Paul had to say about widows and the children of widows (1 Timothy 5:4, 5).
The important feature we glean from the record of Timothy is that of the value of a positive Christian training in the home. Paul seems to be saying to Timothy in effect, “That you have always been schooled in the Scriptures represents an inestimable grace, for which you ought always to thank your God.” We can be sure that Timothy constantly praised God for a home wherein His honor dwelt. Augustine always confessed the debt he owed to his saintly mother, Monica. Not all children have godly parents and the safeguard of a Christian home, but those born into a home where Christ is its Head are privileged and grow up to bless God for their spiritual heritage. Alas, the heartache of godly parents is to have a child or children who, as they come to the age of accountability, spurn the Christian influences of the home created for them!
- Bible Gateway.Com
