Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
Genesis 26:2-5
‘And Yahweh appeared to him and said, “Do not go down into Egypt. Dwell in the land which I will tell you of. Sojourn in this land and I will be with you and will bless you. For to you and to your seed I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore to Abraham your father. And I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and will give to your seed all these lands. And in your seed will all the nations of the world be blessed, because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes and my laws.”.'
“Yahweh appeared to him”. This is the first theophany experienced by Isaac. We do not know what form these theophanies took, nor how Yahweh spoke, but the experience must have been awe-inspiring, unlike the usual run of their experiences in worship. It is this theophany, with its ensuing promises, that results in the recording in writing of this episode.
“Do not go down into Egypt.” A warning is given of the dangers of that arrogant land. We are already aware of what happened when Abraham went there in a similar situation. Once was forgivable, but not a second time.
“Dwell in the place which I will tell you of.” This compares with Genesis 12:1. Yahweh wants Isaac to feel that he too is a part of these promises.
“Sojourn in this land and I will be with you and will bless you.” The patriarchs owned no land (except for Machpelah). They were sojourners. They lived on land owned or controlled by others, seeking water, trading, offering services in return for the use of land for grazing and the sowing of grain, usually living near cities but not actually in them. Thus were they a self-contained community separated from the evils around them. Yahweh says they are to remain so, and thus they will experience His presence and His blessing, being ‘in the world but not of the world'.
The promises are then renewed. The land will one day be theirs. Their seed will be multiplied as the stars. The whole world will be blessed through them. The oath Yahweh made to Abraham stands firm, because Abraham was worthy.
“Because Abraham kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes and my laws.” Yahweh puts his seal on Abraham's obedience and on their tribal customs forged in association with Him. The description signifies overall obedience to cultic requirements and moral demands. Abraham had been true to his understanding of Yahweh, acting in justice and in mercy, therefore would Yahweh be true to him. He who had been chosen by Yahweh had revealed his worthiness in his obedience to Yahweh.
This renewal of the covenant after so long a time must have been a great blessing to Isaac. He had been used to learning of his father's experiences, but now he had experienced Yahweh for himself. Perhaps it took his mind back to his experience in the land of Moriah (Genesis 22).
‘And Isaac dwelt in Gerar.'
He was obedient to Yahweh's instruction, which is placed firmly within history.
‘And the men of the place asked him about his wife, and he said, “She is my sister”. For he feared to say ‘my wife' lest (thought he) the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah, because she was fair to look on.'
As in so much Isaac imitates his father. He remembers how his father constantly used this subterfuge and it seemed such a good idea. But to the reader there comes a feeling of trepidation and a sense that we have been here before.
“She is my sister.” There is a half truth in the statement for they are cousins, and she is therefore a close blood relation and relationships were not then so cut and dried. But it shows lack of faith in Yahweh and is inexcusable. But when men are afraid they will do strange things, and Rebekah was very beautiful with a beauty not common among townsfolk (and perhaps they did not even appreciate it).
‘And it happened, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech, king of the Philistines, looked out at a window and saw, and lo, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife. And Abimelech called Isaac and said, “See, of a certainty she is your wife. And how did you say ‘she is my sister?' And Isaac said to him, “Because I said, ‘lest I die for her'.”
The whole truth now comes out, but only ‘after a long time'. Isaac was possibly living for a time in a building which was by the king's house, and was not aware that it was possible for someone to see into his rooms from one of the windows. Alternately it may be that the king's house looked out over an open space where the tents of Isaac were pitched. In that case the king may have seen the silhouette of what was happening in a lighted tent. Either way the king spots Isaac making love to his wife and immediately realises the truth. Subsequently he calls for Isaac and rightly rebukes him.
‘And Abimelech said, “What is this you have done to us? One of my people might lightly have lain with your wife and you would have brought guilt on us”.'
Unconsciously Abimelech's words support Isaac's worst fears. He recognises the propensity of his menfolk to treat a visiting woman casually. And he also confirms the danger Isaac might have been in. To take a man's wife is to incur guilt, but how different it is if that man is dead. Who then will care about the guilt? Yet his rebuke is justified for Isaac had unthinkingly put temptation in men's way.
‘And Abimelech charged all the people saying, “He who touches this man or his wife will surely be put to death.” '
So Isaac's fears are allayed, for now they enjoy the protection of the king's command, a proof that Yahweh is keeping His word and protecting them. As He had said, “I will be with you”, and He was.
Is This Story a Duplicate?
Those who delight in seeing duplicate narratives everywhere where there is a coincidence, and have a bias against anything that seems like a coincidence when it comes to ancient records, try to tell us that this story is simply a duplicate of Genesis 12:10 and Genesis 20:1, but on careful examination there is no essential where the stories are similar, apart from those which are totally explicable and likely.
It is true that each depicts men as licentious, but then that has ever been the case. In those days a woman's virtue was ever at risk, especially a ‘foreign' woman, if she was not closely watched and guarded. And they all depict the profession that a wife is a sister. But as this is in fact stated to be Abraham's regular policy it would clearly happen again and again. The only other ‘coincidence' is explained by the fact that Abimelech is a throne name (or a family name) and therefore passes from one generation to another. Thus the similarities are easily explained and happened often.
What is striking is the differences. In Genesis 12:10 we have a situation well known in those days of servants of Pharaohs ever seeking beautiful women to satisfy him, something they did regularly, and the account is accurate in the way it presents how Sarah is brought into one of his households. But she escapes because of Yahweh sending a plague. In Genesis 20:1 we have a petty king misusing his authority to take possession of a beautiful ‘foreign' woman for his pleasure. He probably did it regularly, but this time it did not work because he was dealing with Yahweh, who gave him a vivid and unpleasant dream. In this third episode with Isaac no attempt at all is made on the woman and no supernatural activity is recorded, although we can see Yahweh's hand behind events. The one common factor of any importance is thus the activity of Yahweh.
With regard to duplicate names, history is littered with them, for names tended to be passed on in families within a generation. And as we have suggested throne names were automatically passed on.
We can consider how in Egyptian inscriptions Khnumhotep, the governor of Menat-Khufu has certain privileges under Amenemhet, and how in the next generation another Khnumhotep, governor of Menat-Khufu has the same privileges under another Amenehmhet, and it is clear that these cannot be duplicates. Or how Tuthmosis campaigned into Northern Syria, left a victory stela by the Euphrates and hunted elephants at Niy, and so did Tuthmosis his grandson.
So once we have discounted man's constant propensity to evil where women are concerned (especially if they are vulnerable foreigners), and their being ever on the watch for such opportunities, and the patriarchal practise of continually representing wives as sisters because of this propensity, what should surprise us is how totally different the stories are. The only really common feature is the protecting power of Yahweh and even this is exercised in different ways. Thus we have every grounds for accepting that the events happened each time as described. (The fact is that the patriarchal policy appeared to work most of the time for we only know of three occasions over a period of more than a hundred years when it did not).