The Family God Uses — Conclusions and Applications
Over the past several weeks I have written about different families (both from Scripture and from church history). Today I want to wrap things, and I want to make sure that we avoid drawing two conclusions that one might draw from this analysis of God’s work in history, and I also want to propose two applications.
First, I want to be clear that my purpose in these blogs has not been to tear down the men that God has used in the history of the church to advance his Kingdom. I am not trying to discourage us from having heroes in the faith. As the writer of Hebrews refers to the biblical heroes of the faith, many of the historical figures that I have written about here should probably be spoken as men “of whom world was not worthy.”[1]
My second clarification is more important than the first one: I am not trying to excuse or downplay the seriousness of their sins. Sin is a grievous offense to a holy God, and it should not be taken lightly. Only the propitiatory sacrifice of the perfectly righteous God-Man Jesus on the cross was able to make payment for our sins, reconcile us to the Father, and redeem us from slavery to sin. Sin is serious and should never be excused nor downplayed. To conclude that we should be complacent about our sin or deny obligation for responsible Christian living would be to make the same mistake that Paul told us to avoid in the sixth chapter of Romans. In responding to the hypothetical critic of his message that might conclude that “we should sin so grace can abound,” Paul responds by saying that as Christians we “have died to sin.”[2] Having died to sin we should consider ourselves dead to sin but alive “to God in Christ Jesus.”[3]
Paul’s discussion of sin in Romans 6 is foundational to our understanding of the relationship between justification and sanctification. All of the calls in the New Testament to avoid sin and pursue holiness (i.e. the call to sanctification) are based on the reality of having been made right before God through the sacrificial death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ of Nazareth (i.e. justification). Concerning how these two Scriptural realities are related to one another commentator Robert Mounce wrote, “Any justification that does not lead to sanctification is a sham. Any sanctification not founded upon justification is an exercise in legalistic futility and does not deserve the name.”[4] Mounce went on to write that “the very idea of responding positively to sin’s invitation should strike the believer as morbid. For the Christian to choose to sin is the spiritual equivalent of digging up a corpse for fellowship. A genuine death to sin means that the entire perspective of the believer has been radically altered.”[5] In order to see just how serious God takes sin we merely need to look to the cross of Calvary on which the Prince of Glory died. It is there that we see that God never winks at sin or allows it to go unaccounted for. Despite the seriousness of sin when we see that God uses sinful humans and depraved family situations to advance His Kingdom and get His glory. As has been demonstrated, however, we should NOT conclude that sin does not matter to God.
Having recognized these two conclusions that we want to avoid, there are two major applications that I want us to see from this survey of families that God has used. First, God can and wants to use your family – though there might be some consequences for your actions that prevent you from entering specific ministry posts. Moses did not go into the Promised Land. David did not build the Temple. Peter was not at the foot of the cross when Jesus spoke his final words. Actions do have consequences.
Not only does God want to use your family, God wants to use EVERY family in your church – no matter what their past sins. Again, this does not mean that they will be able to fulfill any role or position, but it does mean that God wants to use them. A polygamous man who comes to Christ should be allowed to become a member of his church, but he may not become a pastor, deacon, or elder in your church. The fact that he cannot become an official leader does not mean that he cannot become an unofficial leader who ministers to young men in the church encouraging them to avoid making the same mistakes that he made. Additionally, this polygamous man’s sons (no matter which wife they are born to) should not be held accountable for the sins of their father. If they fulfill all of the Scriptural requirements for church office, they might become church leaders – pastors or deacons.
Similarly, a man who has been convicted of fraud and misappropriation of funds at his job should not be allowed to be the church treasurer or serve as a bookkeeper in your church. He can, however, serve the church in other ways.
As another example a woman who has abused her children (or other people’s children) should not be allowed to work unsupervised with children, but she should be allowed and even encouraged to find another way that she can serve the church.
Despite the inherent fallen nature and willful sinful behavior of human beings, God chooses to use us. God looks down from heaven and sees not the worth or potential of human instruments but their frailty and fallen nature. When God uses us, it does not magnify the human agent but the glory of God and the power of the Spirit who enables these weak and wicked humans.
Despite the great sins of the patriarchs, God orchestrated the safe arrival of Abraham’s descendants into the land of Egypt and then guided them out when the time was right – using a stuttering coward who is well past his prime. God picked an unlikely candidate to be king and vault the Israelite kingdom to its zenith. During a time of turmoil for the people of God in which they need to hear from Him, He used, as one of his mouthpieces the husband of a prostitute. He called an unschooled and unlearned fisherman to be the first among equals. He reached down and turned the church’s greatest persecutor into the greatest missionary and theologian that the world has ever seen.
The astounding truth of Genesis 50:20 and Romans 8:28 echoes off the walls of history. Let us strive to be the type of family that God will use to advance his Kingdom, but let us also remember that God can use even the most dysfunctional families for His glory among the nations!
[1]Hebrews 11:38 (ESV)
[2]Romans 6:2 (NIV)
[3]Romans 6:11 (NIV)
[4]Robert H. Mounce, Romans New American Commentary -– Volume 27, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman, 1995; WORDsearch version, 2003), 14.
[5]Robert H. Mounce, Romans New American Commentary -– Volume 27, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman, 1995; WORDsearch version, 2003), 30.
William Wadé Harris and His Many Wives
William Wadé Harris was a Liberian-born evangelist who ministered along the western coast of Africa in what is today Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana during the early twentieth century. An analysis of Harris’ methodology is beyond the scope of this post, but one thing is unmistakable – Harris was very effective in calling pagans out of bondage to the ritualism and magic associated with African Traditional Religion (ATR). During his eighteen month preaching ministry Harris saw as many as 200,000 converts forsake a life of animism. After Harris baptized his converts and encouraged them to burn their fetishes, these converts were either gathered into churches or encouraged to join existing churches – depending on the given circumstances.
For the purposes of this post, I want to consider both Harris’ writings/teachings about marriage as well as investigate his personal history in regard to marriage. In his preaching ministry and theologizing, Harris addressed the topic of polygamy, and he did not denounce it. Harris’ refusal to denounce polygamy (though he did denounce adultery) put him at odds with Methodist groups and others with whom he probably would have otherwise ministered.[1] Elizabeth Isichei wrote that while Harris did not condemn polygamy, he did believe that monogamy was ideal.[2]
In addition to Harris’ stance on polygamy, Harris’ personal life is also troubling. It is well-documented that Harris did not condemn polygamy, but Shank also indicates that Harris himself was a polygamist.[3] We do not know a lot about Harris’ first wife and children, but he apparently met Rose Barick Farr during his time serving as a crewman on a British ship and as a brick mason.[4] Harris married her, and they had six children.[5] Very little is known about Farr or their six children. We do know, however that she died when she heard about Harris’ call and entry into ministry.[6] He abandoned their six children who were left behind after his wife died, and he began his preaching ministry.[7]
After the death of his first wife Harris took several wives in what appears to have been an attempt to deliver them from fetish practice. Harris’ co-workers at the beginning of his ministry were two women — Helen Valentine and Mary Pioka. These two women sang and played calabashes while Harris preached. David Shank, one of Harris’ biographers, reports that these two women were two of what became six wives for Harris (and he reportedly desired as many as fourteen). [8]
It was reported in 1998 that there were as many as 200,000 “Harrist” Christians in “Harrist” churches in Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, and Benin.[9] According to Mark Noll Harris’ influence is not limited to these 200,000 West African Christians:
Africanist practices and ideals still color much of Christianity in contemporary West Africa. The emphasis on material objects of power, legalistic moral standards, the ruling name of Jesus and a gospel of prosperity – along with a lack of concern about polygamy and strict attention to the Bible – add up to a form of Christianity that Western Christians can find both attractive and disturbing.[10]
So, while William Harris’ personal life and stance on polygamy is outside the bounds of orthodoxy and orthopraxy, he was still used by God. His heretical stance on marriage and his detestable personal conduct are not excused nor overlooked, but God used this sinful man for His glory and the advancement of the gospel in West Africa. God can and still does work in and through sinful people.
[1]David A. Shank, “The Legacy of William Wadé Harris” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 10.4 (October 1986): 172.
[2]Elizabeth Isichei, “A Soul of Fire” in Christian History 79 (2003), 25.
[3]Shank, Prophet Harris, The ‘Black Elijah’ of West Africa., 4-22.
[4]Watson A.O.Omulokoli, “William Wade Harris: Premier African Evangelist” Africa Journal of Evangelical Theology 21.1 (2002), 5.
[5] Omulokoli, “William Wade Harris: Premier African Evangelist,” 5-6.
[6] Isichei, “A Soul of Fire,” 22.
[7] Shank, Prophet Harris, 3. Shank reports that the oldest child was eleven at the time that Harris started his preaching ministry, but this is hard to confirm.
[8]David Shank, Prophet Harris, The ‘Black Elijah’ of West Africa (Leiden, The Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1994), 162-6.
[9]David A. Shank, “Ahui, John (or Jonas),” in Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions, ed. Gerald H. Anderson (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998), 8.
[10]Mark A. Noll and Carolyn Nystrom, Clouds of Witnesses: Christian Voices From Africa and Asia (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2011), 77-8.
David Livingstone and His Absent Wife
“Dr. Livingstone, I presume?”
Sir Henry Stanley’s iconic greeting of Dr. David Livingstone is widely quoted and indicates that perhaps no missionary is more well known than the British missionary explorer David Livingstone. Livingstone served as a London Missionary Society missionary in southern Africa during the nineteenth century. While the “success” of his personal ministry was limited, Livingstone’s impact on Africa and on missions is massive. He championed the cause of African missions among British and European Christians and also worked tirelessly to end the slave trade.[1] A common thread that runs through the many different versions of Livingstone’s story is how he brought Africa to the attention of the West — and even the whole world. In fact, Ruth Tucker writes that Livingstone is largely responsible for focusing “the world’s attention on the needs of Africa.”[2]
Yet despite Livingstone’s legendary status, his family life was less than exemplary. Tucker reports that the Livingstones lived a “semi-nomadic lifestyle.”[3] At times his wife Mary (whose father Robert Moffat was a pioneer missionary and linguist in southern Africa[4]) and their children “accompanied her wandering husband,” and at other times they remained home alone where Mary was unhappy and often lived in fear of lion attacks on their home.[5] Mary determined that neither going with her husband nor staying at their home in Africa was satisfactory. Livingstone’s solution to this quandary was to send his family back to England while he continued to explore Africa.[6] Life in England Mary was “depressing for Mary.”[7] Some have suggested that Mary even turned to alcohol; Ruth Tucker reports that she and her children were “homeless and friendless.”[8] All the while Livingstone continued to explore southern Africa as he opened the interior of Africa for future generation of missionaries.
Despite his obvious flaws as a husband and father Livingstone is buried at Westminster Abbey in London alongside other famous Britons. The stories of his adventures in Africa have become legendary, and it is hard to overstate just how influential he has been. In fact, missions historian Ruth Tucker wrote that Livingstone “had unparalleled influence in the realm of African missions.”[9] God used this imperfect and flawed man for His glory, and He can use you, too.
[1]Andrew C. Ross, “Livingstone, David,” in Biographical Dictionary of Christmas Missions (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 405.
[2]Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, Location 3294 in Kindle edition.
[3]Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, 149.
[4]Andrew C. Ross, “Moffat, Robert,” in Biographical Dictionary of Christmas Missions (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 464-5.
[5]Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, 149. From Tucker’s account it is not clear whether or not Mary feared literal lion attacks or whether the phrase was used to encompass all of fears associated with a European woman living alone with her children in Africa.
[6]Ibid., 150.
[7]Ibid., 151.
[8]Ibid.
[9]Ibid., 147.
William Carey and His Insane Wife
William Carey’s influence on missions is indisputable. He has rightly been called the father of the modern day missions movement. Carey’s personal example of going to the nations, his pamphlet An Enquiry, his partnership with Joshua Marshman and William Ward, and his correspondence with supporters in his home base in England all helped launch what Kenneth Scott Latourette dubbed “The Great Century of Protestant Missions.” Though he had a worldwide impact Carey’s influence was especially significant in India where he has been referred to as the central figure in modern India.
While Carey was clearly a central figure in the spread of the gospel throughout the world, his family life was less than ideal. Specifically, Carey’s relationship with his first wife Dorothy was much less than perfect. Mission historian Ruth Tucker wrote that Dorothy was not a central figure in the advancement of the gospel to the nations: “If there is a ‘Mother of Modern Missions,’ it is certainly not she [Dorothy].” Initially Dorothy refused to go with her husband, and once aboard the ship Dorothy still longed for her home in England – one of their fellow passengers referred to Dorothy as “Lot’s wife.” Within two months after their arrival in India seemingly everything that Dorothy feared would happen came to pass. They ran out of money, their children became sick with tropical diseases, and, “the sheer weight of Hinduism seemed to crush hopes that a Christian church would arise quickly.” When their five year-old Peter died in 1794, Dorothy was “pushed over the brink,” and “never did fully regain her mental faculties.” In his biography of Carey Timothy George reports that Carey’s letters home referred to his wife as “poor Mrs. Carey,” and reveal that he had no hope that she would ever recover from her condition which he referred to “as wretched as insanity can make her.” She died 13 years later on December 8, 1807. In the midst (and indeed at least partially because of) Dorothy’s condition Carey did not “give his children the fathering they so desperately needed.”
Carey’s motto was, “Expect great things from God, attempt great things for God,” and Carey certainly saw God do great things and was used by God to do many great things. Carey showed courage in the face of Hyper-Calvinists who thought him a fool for desiring to take the gospel to the heathen. He demonstrated longsuffering when years of labor produced a very limited number of converts and when many of those converts abandoned the faith. He also had a multi-faceted career as translator, botanist, industrialist, economist, and educator – just to name a few. All of the remarkable feats clearly make Carey an example to follow. However, let us be careful to endorse all of Carey’s actions. At first he was willing to physically abandon his wife in England to pursue his call to India. After she reluctantly agreed to go to India and subsequently fell into a state of mental illness Carey focused almost exclusively on his work – even at the expense of his children who Tucker believes would have “gone entirely their own way,” if not for the kindness and care of Joshua Marshman’s wife Hannah. In short, it seems that Carey came dangerously close to ignoring the biblical mandate to take care of his family. Even our heroes have flaws, but despite these flaws God uses them.
The Sons of Thunder and Their Meddlesome Mom
For most of these posts I have been looking at the relationships between a man, his wife, and their children, but the case of James and John, I want to briefly touch on their relationship with their mother.
In verses 20-28 of the twentieth chapter of his gospel Matthew tells us that James and John’s mother came to Jesus to make a request of him. This same story is reported by Mark, but Mark says that the request came from James and John themselves. Mark was not being inaccurate when he reported that James and John made the request. He was merely communicating that while their mother voiced the request, James and John were standing behind the request. So, why do I mention this somewhat difficult passage in a paper about family dynamics in missions? At least two things appear to have happened. First, James and John demonstrated immaturity inappropriate for a follower of Christ by having their mother ask a hard question of Jesus that they really wanted to ask. Second, they also showed an unhealthy type of ambition which revealed head-strong attitudes which sought their own fame rather than the glory of Christ.
Despite these short-comings, John, the beloved disciple, and his brother James (the church’s second martyr and the only apostle whose death is recorded in Scripture[1]) are surely models to follow in ministry. John, the “beloved apostle” authored five New Testament books and is a model of love, long-suffering and commitment to Jesus. John MacAruthur refers to John’s brother James as “the apostle of passion,” and holds him up as a model for passion, fervor, and zeal. Like Peter, James was bold and showed a zeal for the name and fame of Christ. In other words, despite their short-comings as overly ambitious and headstrong young men, we can all learn a lot from James’ headlong pursuit of Christ and his kingdom and John’s passionate love for his Savior, Lord, and Friend.
[1]John MacArthur, Twelve Ordinary Men: How the Master Shaped His Disciples for Greatness and What He Wants to Do with You (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2002),92-3.
Peter the Rock and His Demanding Family Life
The stories about family dynamics in the New Testament are more limited in the New Testament than they are in the Old Testament. While there is clear teaching about families (i.e. there is clear teaching about different family members ought to act toward one another), narratives recounting family dynamics are few and far between. Over the next two blog posts I want to look at two families: Peter and his wife and James and John and their mother.
According to the biblical record, the Apostle Peter was married. We know that Peter was married because all three of the Synoptic Gospel writers recorded the fact that Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law when she was sick with a fever.[1] We also know that Peter was part of the original audience when Jesus spoke about the high cost of being his disciple:
Now great crowds were traveling with Him. So He turned and said to them: 26 “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his own father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, and even his own life—he cannot be My disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.[2]
In this passage Jesus told his would-be disciples that in order to follow him they had to be willing to make sacrifices. These sacrifices would often have been at odds with societal and cultural expectations of the day – often even radically so. So, the biblical record is clear that Peter was both married and heard Jesus’ radical call to discipleship. So, what did Peter do? In other words, how does the fact that Peter was married and called to radical obedience speak to our theme of families on mission? In his commentary on this passage John Phillips wrote,
We can be quite sure that the Lord was considerate of Peter’s situation. The four Evangelists record several fairly long preaching tours of Jesus. But as far as we know, most of the time He either stayed close to His home in Capernaum or came back to it often. (The bulk of all of the gospel narratives is taken up with just one week in the Lord’s life.) Peter’s home, then, seems to have been adopted by the Lord as His home once He moved to Capernaum to stay.[3]
So while Peter clearly took up Jesus’ radical call to discipleship he also apparently took seriously his role as husband and son-in-law – and presumably father.
Simon Peter’s short-comings as a follower of Christ are well-known. With the obvious exception of Judas (and possibly Thomas) no other apostle’s failings are more visible than Peter’s. He denied Christ three times[4], refused to let Jesus wash his feet[5], and tried to prevent Jesus from his divinely appointed task.[6] Peter’s failures as a disciple did not keep him from being “the rock” — the first among equals who was greatly used by Jesus to advance the gospel. Neither did these failures lead Peter to misunderstand his Lord’s call to be a call to avoid his family responsibilities. Jesus’ call is for all — husbands and fathers included, but his call is NOT to abandon family responsibilities; rather it is for men to lead their families with a kingdom-focus and an unwavering faith that He who calls them is faithful.
Hosea and the Prostitute
Contrary to the popular understanding of a prophet as someone who foretells the future and tells people about coming doom, biblical prophets are best thought of as bringing the Word of God to bear on their current situations. These proclamations, of course, have future implications, but prophets should not be thought of as fortune tellers.
Hosea is no exception. Hosea served as God’s mouthpiece to speak the truth about the nature of God and His covenantal relationship with the children of Abraham, yet, Hosea was a man whose family life was, to say the least, less than ideal.
The Apostle Paul testified that despite God’s people’s unfaithfulness, God remains faithful to His promise: “What then? If some did not believe, will their unbelief cancel God’s faithfulness? Absolutely not! God must be true, even if everyone is a liar.”
Hosea’s life and message illustrates this truth. Hosea’s wife was a prostitute named Gomer, and their relationship serves as a living testimony to God’s Word through Hosea. Hosea’s (and by extension YHWH’s) faithful love is seen in the way that Hosea relates to his wayward wife and her children. While Gomer’s first born was clearly Hosea’s child, the second two children, named Not My People and No Mercy, were most likely not from his seed, as the Bible refers to them as “children of adultery.” Hosea is commanded by the Lord to pursue and redeem his wife from a life of prostitution and adultery. Hosea obeyed the command of God, and Gomer is redeemed.
While we can appreciate Hosea and Gomer’s lives as being a picture of YHWH’s covenantal love (chesad) for His people, no one would tell you that the lives of Hosea and Gomer are patterns to follow. Once again we see that God choose to use less than perfect people to fulfill his perfect plan. His ways are not our ways; His thoughts are not our thoughts.
King David
The life of King David is often held up as a life to emulate, and in many ways it should be. He was often brave, humble, and devoted to God. However, a look at David’s family life demonstrates that he was far from perfect. Specifically, David and Bathsheba serve as models NOT to follow for how a husband and wife should relate to one another. However, God used this couple – and their children – to further His Kingdom and gather worshippers to Himself.
David was the youngest of Jesse’s sons, and when Samuel came to Jesse asking to meet his sons, Jesse thought so little of David that he did not even bring him out to meet the prophet of God.[1] David was the youngest and apparently, at least in Jesse’s mind, the least likely to be the one whom Samuel sought. Despite these limitations, David was precisely the man that God had chosen as His anointed, and he went on to serve as Israel’s ideal king.
After much time had passed, David ascended to the throne of Israel, and God established a covenant with David in 2 Samuel 7. Once on the throne David demonstrated that no solely human king could perfectly serve as the King of God’s people. Despite the fact that David was God’s anointed, David was also a great sinner. Just four chapters after the establishment of the Davidic covenant, David committed adultery and subsequently tried to prevent others from discovering his sin by having the women’s husband killed!
The child of this adulterous union died, and David’s family life went from bad to worse. One of David’s sons, Amnon, assaulted and raped one of David’s daughters, Tamar. After hearing about what Amnon has done, Tamar’s brother Absalom murdered Amnon. Next, Absalom conspired to overthrow his father David and remove him from the throne of Israel. In sum, David was clearly a flawed husband and father, yet the New Testament describes him a s a man after the heart of God.[2] God’s Messiah Jesus is called the Son of David,[3] the angel told Mary that her Son will sit on the throne of His father David.[4]
the TCK
Third-culture kids (TCKs) are children who were born into one culture and are raised in another culture. As a result, they never really fit into either their “home” culture or their host culture. As a result “elements from each culture may be assimilated into the TCK’s life experiences.”[1] Moses fit this description. Although ethnically a Hebrew, Moses grew up in an Egyptian household and was thus exposed to two different (and often conflicting) cultures. The result was that Moses felt at home neither in the palaces of the Pharaoh nor in the slave quarters of the Hebrews.
Generation after generation of Abraham’s descendants lived peacefully in Egypt. Then there arose a king in Egypt “who had not known Joseph.”[2] The people of God were forced into slavery, and God, once again, showed covenantal faithfulness and kindness to the children of Abraham. And once again, God chose an unlikely candidate to lead God’s people into the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – the cultural confused misfit Moses.
After fleeing Egypt for fear of his life after taking the life of an Egyptian task master and being rejected by the Hebrews whom he was trying to protect, Moses found a home in yet another culture – the home of a priest of Midian named Jethro. After coming to the rescue of Jethro’s daughters, “Moses agreed to stay with the man, and he gave his daughter Zipporah to Moses in marriage.”[3] It was this improbable individual who God chose to lead His people out of slavery.
When God came to Moses in the burning bush, Moses was reluctant. He made excuses regarding his status, his knowledge of God, and his physical ability (perhaps he had a stutter or some other speech impediment that made him uncomfortable speaking in public). Despite all of these insufficiencies and notwithstanding the anger of God that Moses provoked through his excuse-making, God told Moses that he was the man that He wanted to use. It is through Moses that YHWH demonstrated to the Egyptians that He is the Lord over all creation and not merely the god of an enslaved race: “The Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring out the people of Israel among them.”[4]
When Moses led the people of God out of Egypt and to the brink of the Promised Land, God was glorified because He used the strange and culturally awkward combination of an unqualified and out of place leader, his foreign Midianite wife, and his junior brother to accomplish the plans of God for His people.
The Heal Grabber
The third patriarch Jacob might be the worst offender of the three. He not only replicated the mistakes of his forefathers, he even added some distinguishing transgressions of his own. Like his great-grandfather, Terah, Jacob allowed idols in his home.[1] Like his grandfather Abraham Jacob schemed and devised plans to ensure his own physical safety even when it meant putting his family and others in harm’s way.[2] Like his father Isaac Jacob chose to pick a favorite son rather than trust in the provision of God.[3]
Jacob did not stop at repeating the sins of his fathers. He added his own unique offenses. From the beginning of his life, Jacob lived up to his name – which means “heal grabber” or deceiver. In addition to participating in his mother’s deception of his father mentioned earlier, Jacob also tricked Esau out of his birthright.[4] Jacob’s previously mentioned decision to favor one son over the others led to a great tragedy. By this time God had changed Jacob’s name to Israel, and sinful patterns of behavior began to show up in his offspring. Joseph, Israel’s favorite, demonstrated a tendency toward arrogance and pride, and his older brothers responded with anger, violence, and deception. Joseph’s brothers assaulted, nearly killed, and then sold Joseph into slavery in Egypt. They added to their sin by lying to their father about what had happened to him. This was truly a dysfunctional family!
In spite of these incredibly sinful patterns of behavior, God changed Jacob’s name to Israel — one who struggled and prevailed with God. The name Israel can be thought of as “soldier of God.”[5] Israel, of course, became the name the family which descended from Father Abraham was called. So, this man who surpassed his father and grandfather in his sinful behavior and often demonstrated a disturbing lack of faith was given a name that has become synonymous with the people of God. Jacob/Israel was a corrupt and fallen man who was used by a perfect and flawless God to accomplish His plans.
[1]Genesis 31:25-35. While Terah did not have access to special revelation like his son, grandson, and further descendants, we know from Romans 1 that this does not excuse him. He was still accountable to his Creator who designed him.
[2]Genesis 32:3-12
[3]Genesis 37:3
[4]Genesis 25:27-34.
[5]William Smith, “Israel” in Smith’s Bible Dictionary, WORDSearch Electronic Version.
