Friday, 12 June 2015

Esau said, “Isn’t he rightly named Jacob? This is the second time he has taken advantage of me: He took my birthright, and now he’s taken my blessing!” Then he asked, “Haven’t you reserved any blessing for me?” – Genesis 27:36


Today’s Scripture Reading (June 12, 2015): Genesis 27

Vladimir Putin’s accusation against the United States a couple of weeks ago, in the wake of the American charges that had been laid against FIFA officials for corruption, opens up an interesting question. Basically Putin’s argument is that the United States is meddling in the affairs of other nations. He does not say that there was no wrong doing, but rather that the wrong doing had nothing to do with the United States. Putin’s argument is that the United States is trying to extend its domain and enforce its morality over things that ultimately have nothing to do with Americans – which in his eyes is essentially a political and a moral problem.

And Putin’s argument, if true, makes sense (admittedly as I write this the role of the Swiss investigators does not seem to be entirely clear.) Essentially this conflict seems to be an extension of the debate the United States had with Russia over the 2014 Olympics in Sochi and the anti-gay laws that were in place there. And as the Global Community continues to get more and more intertwined, the question of jurisdiction will become more and more of an issue. Travellers are frequently warned about the challenge of obeying laws in other countries that may differ from that of their country of origin. And some countries may have what seem to be backward or morally outdated laws, some may even become havens for criminals who are trying to escape the laws of their own country. But when you travel to those countries, it is your responsibility to be aware of those laws. And to a certain extent, it is the country’s right to maintain and pass the laws that it sees as essential – not those who view the laws from the outside. The United States has the authority to enforce the laws that it has decreed on actions committed within its territory, unless the action contravenes an international law; and Russia has the same privilege. And any sovereign nation can also inhibit incoming guests from entering into their nation. In other words, the United States is fully within its rights to refuse travelling documents to any FIFA official who, in the eyes of the United States, is guilty of ongoing corruption. The problem is that such an action would likely be a death blow to international sports. It might be that the only real solution is in some sort of international court jointly deciding on what is correct behavior in sport, rather than one nation taking the initiative on their own, and outside of their jurisdiction.

Esau and Isaac are upset that Jacob has stolen the blessing that Dad wanted to give to his older son. Some experts have waded into this issue asserting that in the action of Esau selling of his birthright to Jacob for a pot of stew, Esau was clearly in the wrong. He was not tricked into it in any way, his appetites overruled his desire for the birthright. Besides, he essentially saw the birthright as being spiritual in nature, and about spiritual things Esau was not concerned.

But the blessing was different. The blessing had to do with the physical and the material world, and Esau was very concerned about that. The same experts that see Esau’s culpability in the trade of the birthright for a pot of stew, argue for Jacob’s guilt with regard to the stealing of the blessing. The problem is that they have fallen for the argument that Esau is trying to sell here – that the spiritual birthright and the material blessing are not in any way connected. There would seem to be a jurisdiction problem here that neither Esau nor Isaac have any control over. As much as Isaac would like to bless Esau, and as much as Esau would love to receive the blessing, both had actually been sold to Jacob on the day that Esau valued a pot of stew more than his inheritance from his father. How Jacob got the blessing is really immaterial. He already owned it and had jurisdiction over it, not because he stole it from his brother, but simply because, at that time, his brother saw no value in it.     

Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Genesis 28

No comments:

Post a Comment