And Isaac digged again the wells of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father; for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham: and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them.
18 22 (J). Isaac’s Wells
18. in the days of Abraham ] Instead of “in the days,” Sam., LXX, and Lat. read “the servants,” i.e. “which the servants of Abraham his father had digged.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 18. In the days of Abraham] Instead of bimey, in the days, Houbigant contends we should read abdey, servants. Isaac digged again the wells which the servants of Abraham his father had digged. This reading is supported by the Samaritan, Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate; and it is probably the true one.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Though there might be a brook there, probably it was but little, and soon dried up.
And Isaac digged those rather than new ones, partly to keep up his fathers memory, and partly because he had most right to them, and others less cause of quarrel with him about them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18-22. Isaac digged again the wellsof waterThe naming of wells by Abraham, and the hereditaryright of his family to the property, the change of the names by thePhilistines to obliterate the traces of their origin, the restorationof the names by Isaac, and the contests between the respectiveshepherds to the exclusive possession of the water, are circumstancesthat occur among the natives in those regions as frequently in thepresent day as in the time of Isaac.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Isaac digged again the wells of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father,…. This seems to refer to the same wells made mention of in Ge 26:15, since it follows,
for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham; these were what Abraham’s servants had dug, when he lived at Gerar, and which the Philistines durst not stop during his life; but when he was dead and particularly out of envy to Isaac his son, whom they observed to prosper much, they stopped them up, that he might have no benefit by them; for otherwise they would scarcely have stopped them, if he had not been upon the spot, but would have made use of them themselves. The opening of them again by Isaac seems to be done, as Jarchi observes, before he removed from Gerar to the valley, though it is here related; unless it can be thought that Abraham dwelt in the valley also, and had dug wells there, which the Philistines stopped up after his death, and Isaac opened when he came there; and if so one would think he should have had no occasion to have dug other new wells, as we find he afterwards did; besides, this seems to be out of the jurisdiction of the Philistines, and not in their power to have stopped them here; it seems therefore most probable that these were Abraham’s wells at Gerar, and not in the valley. Origen k makes mention of wonderful wells being dug in the land of the Philistines by righteous men, meaning Abraham and Isaac; and particularly in Askelon which, according to some, is the same with Gerar; [See comments on Ge 20:1];
and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them; which he did out of respect to his father, to preserve the memory of his name, as well as to make his title and claim to them the more dear and certain.
k Contr. Cels. l. 4. p. 193.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Reopening and Discovery of Wells. – In this valley Isaac dug open the old wells which had existed from Abraham’s time, and gave them the old names. His people also dug three new wells. But Abimelech’s people raised a contest about two of these; and for this reason Isaac called them Esek and Sitnah, strife and opposition. The third there was no dispute about; and it received in consequence the name Rehoboth, “breadths,” for Isaac said, “ Yea now ( , as in Gen 29:32, etc.) Jehovah has provided for us a broad space, that we may be fruitful (multiply) in the land.” This well was probably not in the land of Gerar, as Isaac had removed thence, but in the Wady Ruhaibeh, the name of which is suggestive of Rehoboth, which stands at the point where the two roads from Gaza and Hebron meet, about 3 hours to the south of Elusa, 8 1/3 to the south of Beersheba, and where there are extensive ruins of the city of the same name upon the heights, also the remains of wells (Robinson, Pal. i. 289ff.; Strauss, Sinai and Golgotha); where too the name Sitnah seems to have been retained in the Wady Shutein, with ruins on the northern hills between Ruhaibeh and Khulasa ( Elusa).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
18. And Isaac digged again the wells of water. First, we see that the holy man was so hated by his neighbors, as to be under the necessity of seeking a retreat for himself which was destitute of water; and no habitation is so troublesome and inconvenient for the ordinary purposes of life as that which suffers from scarcity of water. Besides, the abundance of his cattle and the multitude of his servants — who were like a little army — rendered a supply of water very necessary; whence we learn that he was brought into severe straits. But that this last necessity did not instigate him to seek revenge, is a proof of singular forbearance; for we know that lighter injuries will often rack the patience even of humane and moderate men. If any one should object to this view, that he was deficient in strength; I grant, indeed, that he was not able to undertake a regular war; but as his father Abraham had armed four hundred servants, he also certainly had a large troop of domestics, who could easily have repelled any force brought against him by his neighbors. But the hope which he had entertained when he settled in the valley of Gerar, was again suddenly cut off. He knew that his father Abraham had there used wells which were his own, and which he had himself discovered; and although they had been stopped up, yet they were well known to have sufficient springs of water to prevent the labor of digging them again from being misspent. Moreover, the fact that the wells had been obstructed ever since the departure of Abraham, shows how little respect the inhabitants had for their guest; for although their own country would have been benefited by these wells, they chose rather to deprive themselves of this advantage than to have Abraham for a neighbor; for, in order that such a convenience might not attract him to the place, they, by stopping up the wells, did, in a certain sense, intercept his way. It was a custom among the ancients, if they wished to involve any one in ruin, and to cut him off from the society of men, to interdict him from water, and from fire: thus the Philistine, for the purpose of removing Abraham from their vicinity, deprive him of the element of water.
He called their names. He did not give new names to the wells, but restored those which had been assigned them by his father Abraham, that, by this memorial, the ancient possession of them might be renewed. But subsequent violence compelled him to change their names, that at least he might, by some monument, make manifest the injury which had been done by the Philistines, and reprove them on account of it: for whereas he calls one well strife, or contention, another hostility, he denies that the inhabitants possessed that by right, or by any honest title, which they had seized upon as enemies or robbers. Meanwhile, it is right to consider, that in the midst of these strifes he had a contest not less severe with thirst and deficiency of water, whereby the Philistines attempted to destroy him; such is the scope of the history. First, Moses, according to his manner, briefly runs through the summary of the affair: namely, that Isaac intended to apply again to his own purpose the wells which his father had previously found, and to acquire, in the way of recovery, the lost possession of them. He then prosecutes the subject more diffusely, stating that, when he attempted the work, he was unjustly defrauded of his labor; and whereas, in digging the third well, he gives thanks to God, and calls it Room, (39) because, by the favor of God, a more copious supply is now afforded him, he furnishes an example of invincible patience. Therefore, however severely he may have been harassed, yet when, after he had been freed from these troubles, he so placidly returns thanks to God, and celebrates his goodness, he shows that in the midst of trials he has retained a composed and tranquil mind.
(39) Latitudines, a literal Latin translation of the Hebrew word רהבת ( Rehoboth,) a plural form, expressing the notion of abundant enlargement and room. — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
6. The Contention over Wells (Gen. 26:18-22). The whole of the southern frontier of Palestine, called the Negeb or south country, consisting of vast undulating plains, which extend between the hills of Judah and the desert of Sinai, were neutral grounds, on the natural pastures of which the patriarchs fed their large flocks, before they had obtained a permanent abode. The valley of Gerar . . . about fifty miles south of the city Gerar, is perhaps the remote extremity of that pasture land (CECG, 192). Here Isaac digged againthat is, reopenedthe wells which had been dug in the days of Abraham his father, and which had been stopped (filled up) by the Philistines. The statement that they were wells that Abraham had first dug is not superfluous after Gen. 26:15, but clearly establishes his claim to these wells. To indicate, further, his right to these wells and to indicate his respect for what his father did, Isaac in every case revived their original names (EG, 727). The naming of the wells by Abraham, and the hereditary right of his family to the propertythe change of the names by the Philistines to obliterate the traces of their originthe restoration of their names by Isaac, and the contests between the respective shepherds for the exclusive possession of the water, are circumstances that occur among the natives in those regions as frequently in the present day as in the time of Isaac (CECG, 192).
The history of Isaacs sojourn in Gerar is very curious and instructive. Combining both pastoral and agricultural industry, it is not strange that he grew very great. The vast grazing plains around and south of his position enabled him to multiply his flocks indefinitely, while the hundredfold harvests furnished bread for his numerous servants; and, in addition to these advantages, the blessing of the Lord was on the labour of his hands in a manner altogether extraordinary. These things made the Philistines envy and fear him; and therefore Abimelech, king of Gerar, demanded and obtained a covenant of peace with him. Just so at this day the towns, and even cities, such as Hamath and Hums in the north, and Gaza and Hebron in this region, cultivate with great care friendly relations with the sheikhs of prosperous tribes on their borders. It appears that the country was deficient in water, and that wells, dug at great expense, were regarded as very valuable possessions. Isaac was a great well-digger, prompted thereto by the necessities of his vast flocks; and in those days this was an operation of such expense and difficulty as to be mentioned among the acts which rendered illustrious even kings. The strife for possession of them was a fruitful source of annoyance to the peaceful patriarch, as it had been the cause of separation between Abraham and Lot before him; and such contests are now very common all over the country, but more especially in these southern deserts. It was the custom in former times to erect towers or castles to command and secure the possession of valuable watering-places; thus Uzziah built towers in connection with his many wells (2Ch. 26:9-10). And to stop up wells was the most pernicious and destructive species of vengeancethe surest way to convert a flourishing country into a frightful wilderness. Israel was commanded thus to destroy the land of the Moabites, by stopping all the wells of water (2Ki. 3:19; 2Ki. 3:25). It would be a curious inquiry for the explorer to seek out these wells, nor would it be surprising if they should be found bearing the significant names which Isaac gave them. All travelers agree that water is so scarce and valuable in that region, that the places where it is to be found are as well known by the Arabs as are the most flourishing towns in other parts of the country. Isaacs place of residence was the well Lahai-roi, as we read in Gen. 25:11; Gen. 24:62the same that was so named by Hagar (Gen. 16:14). It may have been first discovered by her, or miraculously produced by the God that saw her, for the salvation of the maternal ancestor of the Arab race and her unborn son, as the fountain of Kadesh afterward was for all Israel, and perhaps that of Lehi for Samson (Num. 20:11, Jdg. 15:19). It seems to have been the usual mode to designate the dwelling-place in patriarchal times, and indeed long after, by some circumstance or fact which made it memorable. Abraham dwelt under the oak at Mamre; Isaac at this well; Jacob hid the idols of his family under the oak at Shechem; and long after, Joshua took a great stone and set it up under the same oak, as I suppose. Thus, also, Deborah dwelt under the palm-tree of Deborah; the angel of the Lord that was sent to Gideon came down and sat under an oak which was in Ophrah; King Saul is said to have tarried under a pomegranate tree in Migron; and it is yet quite common to find a village better known by some remarkable tree or fountain near it than by its proper name, The knowledge of these places and things is perpetuated from generation to generation; and I doubt not many of these wells in the south could be discovered, if one had the time and liberty to explore (LB, 559560). (Cf. Gen. 35:4, Jos. 24:25-27; Jdg. 4:5; Jdg. 6:11; 1Sa. 14:2).
Apparently, the rapid increase of Isaacs wealth brought about a need of additional wells, and so Isaacs servants began digging in the valley and found there a well of springing (living, bubbling, gushing) water. But the Philistines were keeping close watch, and immediately on hearing of the discovery they asserted their claim to the new well. No doubt, the distance from Gerar was sufficient to establish Isaacs claim to the well, otherwise this fair-minded man would never have sanctioned the digging. Isaacs policy is in keeping with the word, Blessed are the meek. He leaves a memorial of the pettiness of the strife behind by calling the well EsekContentionthe Quarrel Well. Perhaps a mild and tolerant humor lies in the name. Yet after all, what a fine testimonial to a great mans broadmindedness and readiness to sacrifice, lest the baser passions in men be roused by quarreling (EG, 727). Isaacs servants then moved some distance and brought in a new well: this they named Sitnah, i.e., enmity, hostility. In this case the opposition seems to have been more spiteful, more violent, as indicated by the name. Everyone must recognize that it is magnanimity and not cowardice on Isaacs part when he yields, because Isaac had ample manpower at his command (EG, 728). Isaac then moved even further away and his servants brought in a well which he named Rehoboth, i.e., wide places, room, rather, plenty of room, that is to say, the Lord hath made room for us. It seems that by now the patriarch had moved beyond the territory that Gerar could legitimately claim. It is possible, too, his generous example might have shamed the opposition. We shall be fruitful in the land, declared Isaac, that is, in this land where we now are. Is not Isaac thinking primarily in terms of that aspect of the Divine promise stated in Gen. 26:4? The character of Isaac is very marked and peculiar. He never traveled far from this spot during his long life of one hundred and eighty yearsprobably never removed from Wady Gerar and its neighboring city. There are but few acts of his life on record, and several of these are not much to his credit. He seems to have been an industrious, quiet man, disposed to wander alone and meditateat least when he had such an interesting theme to think about as the coming of the camels with his expected bride. He preferred peace to strife, even when the right was on his side, and he was much mightier than those who annoyed and injured him (LB, 561).
FOR MEDITATION AND SERMONIZING
Digging the Wells of the Fathers
Gen. 26:18. As stated heretofore, digging again here meant re-opening of the wells which Abraham had caused to be dug in previous years. Abraham, a powerful prince of the preceding generation had dug these great wells in Philistia when he was sojourning there, The supply of water was abundant and sufficient for generations to come. But the wells had been stopped up by the envious Philistines. Another great famine descended upon the same area in the time of Isaac. Isaac knew that there was an abundance of sparkling water flowing beneath the obstructions which had been placed in the old wells. He therefore did not dig new wells, but set about restoring (re-opening) the old wells. Having done this, Isaacs servants set about digging elsewhere in the valley and brought in (as men say in the oil fields) a well of springing (living) water, Gen. 26:13.
We all know that water is necessary to the existence of every living thing, including man himself. Because of this fact, the prophets especially, and many other Scripture writers, were wont to use wells and rivers of water as metaphors of the life-giving sources of salvation. Isa. 12:3Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. Isa. 41:18I will open rivers on the bare heights, and fountains in the midst of the valleys; I will make the wilderness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of water. Cf. again Joh. 4:13-14; Joh. 6:35; Joh. 7:37-39; also Rev. 22:1-2. This living waterthe Water of Life to all who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Mat. 5:6)poured forth from the old Gospel well, for the first time, on the first Pentecost after the Resurrection: it was on this day that the facts of the Gospel were pro-claimed for the first time (1Co. 15:1-4, Act. 2:22-24), that the commands of the Gospel were stated for the first time (Act. 2:38), that the promises of the Gospel were communicated to man for the first time (cf. Luk. 13:5, 2Co. 7:10, Rom. 10:9-10, Gal. 3:27, etc.), and that the ekklesia came into being, vitalized by the Holy Spirit (Act. 2:41-42; Act. 2:46-47). During the lifetime of the Apostles multitudes drank of this life-giving flow, the high and the low, the rich and the poor, the educated and uneducated alike. The Pentecost multitude, the people of Samaria, the Roman centurion and his household, the Ethiopian treasurer, the seller of purple from Thyatira, the Philippian jailor, the fanatical Saul of Tarsus, Crispus the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth, and many others, including a great company of the priests, alike drank of this living water and went on their way rejoicing. (Cf. Act. 6:7; Act. 2:41; Act. 8:12-13; Act. 10:1-44; Act. 8:26-39; Act. 16:11-15; Act. 16:27-34; Act. 9:1-22; Act. 18:8). The supply of the water of the Life Everlasting in this old Gospel well was sufficient to quench the spiritual thirst of obedient believers of all ages. (Cf. Joh. 6:63, Mat. 7:24-27; Joh. 5:40; Joh. 10:10, etc.).
As the centuries rolled on, however, the ugly face of human authority reared itself above the glorious image of the Logos. Man presumed to improve upon what the Spirit had revealed in the New Testament, The debris of human wisdom, tradition, and creed (stemming from the attempt to explain Christian doctrine by the use of philosophical gobbledygook and to improve upon the design of the ordinances of Christ by borrowings from the pagan mystery religions) continued to accumulate from generation to generation. Human interpretations, human speculation, human tradition filled the old Gospel well with the debris of the wisdom of the world (1Co. 1:19-21). The result was apostasy, heresy, clericalism, sectism, and all the devices that Satanic ingenuity could muster to destroy the structure of the Church of Christ as it existed at the beginning. Theologians, priests, cultists, sectists alike departed from the faith once for all delivered unto the saints (Jud. 1:3), and hewed for themselves and their misguided followers broken cisterns that held no relief for deep spiritual thirst.
Following the Protestant reformations, a group of spiritual leaders, by name Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Barton W. Stone, Walter Scott, and other spiritually-minded men who developed a keen appreciation of the simplicity of apostolic Christianity, its laws, its ordinances and its fruits, set out like Isaac of old to re-open the wells of the apostolic fathers and bring to men again the Water of Life that flowed from the old Gospel well that was opened on Pentecost, Not reformation, said they, but only restoration will revive the spiritual power that characterized the life of the church of the first century. Back of Wesley, back of Calvin, back of Luther, said they, indeed back of Roman Catholicism, back of Greek Catholicism, all the way back to Pentecost, and to the permanent features of the New Testament pattern of the church. The movement which resulted from their work came to be known as the Restoration movement. The message of this movement was essentially a plea for the recognition and acceptance of the Lordship of Christ over His church. This message became known as a Plea, a plea for Christ.
The chief thing in Catholicism is the machine, the visible hierarchy; in fact, Catholicism is the machine. The chief thing in Protestantism is the creed. True, men are breaking away from the creeds, yet the fact remains that the so-called Protestant systems have been built upon their respective creeds and the traditions of the fathers founded on these creedal statements. But the fundamental thing in Christianity as taught and practised by the Apostles and the first Christians was, not the machine (there was no ecclesiastical hierarchy in the apostolic age), not the creed (there were no stereotyped creeds until after the Apostles had passed from the stage of human events), but the personal Christ Himself. Christ was, and is, Christianity; and Christianity was, and is, Christ. That He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and that He ascended to the Father and was made both Lord and Christ (Act. 2:36; Act. 10:39-43; Act. 17:29-31, Rom. 10:9-10)this was the essence of the apostolic message. Christ was all in all apostolic preaching (Act. 8:12; Act. 8:35; Act. 16:31, etc.). (Cf. also 2Ti. 1:12, 1Co. 2:2, Gal. 2:20, Rev. 19:11-16).
As the Restoration movement stands for the reproduction of New Testament Christianity, it follows that the central thought and theme of its preaching is likewise the personal Christ. The Restoration movement differs from Catholicism in that it repudiates all ecclesiastical machines; it differs from Protestantism in that it rejects all human names, creeds and ceremonials, It is a protest, not only against Catholicism, but also against those things which Protestantism has borrowed from Catholicism that are not to be found in the New Testament church, The fundamental message of the movement is the preeminence of Christ. The Restoration plea may be defined in a single sentence as a plea for Christ. This plea comprehends the following particulars:
I. The name of Christ. The Restoration message pleads that the name of Christ may be worn by His people, to the exclusion of all human designations, for these reasons:
(1) it is the name in which they are baptized, Act. 2:38; (2) it is the divine name, because Christ is divine; (3) it is the preeminent name, Php. 2:9-11; (4) it is the only name in which we can be saved, Act. 4:12; (5) it is the name which was divinely bestowed upon the disciples, Act. 11:26; (6) it is the name in which we should do everything that we do, Col. 3:17. Human names are denounced by apostolic authority, i.e., as religious designations, 1Co. 3:4-5, Rom. 8:6-8. The name Christian is both Scriptural and catholic; it is the only name upon which the followers of Jesus can unite.
You and I have no credit at the Bank of Heaven. Suppose you were to step up to the window in that glorious Bank and present a check for your soul, what would the Great Teller say? He would tell you that your check must have an endorsement. Then, suppose you were to offer as endorsement the name of Paul, or Peter, or Martin Luther, or John Wesley, or Alexander Campbellwould any of these names be sufficient security for your soul? Noyou would find them insufficient. There is one Name, and one only, that will be recognized at the Bank of Heaventhe name of Jesus Christ. In it there is salvation, but in no other.
Tis noble to be a Christian,
Tis honor to bear the name,
To know that were honored in heaven,
Is better than earthly fame.
The name implies one is noble,
It means he is honest and true;
It means his life is Christlike
Does it mean all this in you?
II. The Person of Christ. The Restoration message includes the Person of Christ as the one sufficient creed for all Christians. The word creed comes from the Latin verb, credo, meaning I believe. The only article of faith imposed upon Christians in New Testament times was personal belief in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, Mat. 16:16, Joh. 20:30-31, Act. 16:31, Rom. 10:9-10, etc. But belief in Christ as the Son of God includes acceptance of the fact of His personal atonement for sin. That He offered His body as a living sacrifice, and shed His blood for the remission of sins, are the two facts of the atonement; and the atonement was sufficient because His Person was divine. Mat. 26:28, Rom. 3:24-25, Heb. 9:22; Heb. 10:20; Joh. 1:14, etc. The creed of Christianity is the personal Saviour.
Human creeds are incomplete statements and can not be universally accepted. At best they are nothing but the opinions of uninspired men. They set limits upon intellectual progress. They divide Gods people by submitting tests of fellowship separate and apart from Gods Word; they are written and enforced without divine sanction. They are superfluous and unnecessary. If a creed contains less than the Bible, it doesnt contain enough; if it contains more than the Bible, it contains too much; if it teaches what the Bible teaches, it isnt necessary because we have the Bible. Human creeds are the uninspired products of theological speculation and contribute tremendously to the spread and perpetuation of denominationalism.
The true creed of the church of Christ is a Person. It could not be otherwise, logically. Faith does not center in a dogma, nor in an institution. I do not believe in baptism as such, but I believe in the Christ who instituted baptism and to please Him I shall be baptized according to His example. I do not believe in the Lords Supper, but I do believe in the One who said, Do this in memory of me, and I shall exert every effort to be in my accustomed place when the memorial feast is spread on each Lords Day. We do not believe in things, but in persons. Therefore, says Paul, For I know him whom I have believed, 2Ti. 1:12.
This divine creed is Scripturalno question about that. It is also catholic, i.e., universally accepted by all who are worthy of the name Christian. It is the all-embracing creed. It includes everything in Gods revelation to man, and embraces everything in mans relation to God. It is as high as heaven, as broad as the human mind, and as inclusive as the illimitable spaces. This creed was not made at Nice, nor at Westminster, nor at Augsburg. The creed of the living church of the living God is the living, ever-living Christ. Christ is our creed; that is a simple creed; that is a growing creed; that is a heaven sent creed. (Combs, Call of the Mountains, p. 85).
III. The Word of Christ. The Restoration message includes the word of Christ as the sufficient book of discipline for His church. The word of Christ is the New Testament, Joh. 16:14-15; Joh. 20:21-23. It is quite sufficient to furnish the Christian unto every good work, 2Ti. 3:16-17. I recall a lady, who had been reared a strict denominationalist, asking me on one occasion for the book of rules of the church which I was serving as minister. I could do nothing but offer her a copy of the New Testament; this I did, even at the risk of having been pronounced discourteous. Truth is sometimes more needed than courtesy.
The New Testament is the Christians book of discipline. He should have no otherhe needs no other. If the Scriptures are sufficient to furnish the man of God unto all good works, written disciplines of human origin are unnecessary. Take this divine discipline and follow it. Are you inquiring what to do to be saved? Read Joh. 3:5. If Jesus says you can not enter into the kingdom. without being born of water and the Spirit, then how can you? Read Act. 2:38. What the Holy Spirit has joined together by the conjunctions, and and for, let no theologian put asunder. May every Christian follow the apostolic exhortation, Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, Col. 3:16.
IV. The Authority of Christ. The Restoration plea is essentially a plea for the authority of Christ. This is fundamental. Most of our present-day religious controversies are not over questions of interpretation, but questions of authority. The Bible teaches that God delegated all authority to Jesus, who, in turn, delegated the same authority to His apostles and clothed them with the infallible presence of the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth and to protect them from error in revealing His word to mankind, Joh. 16:13-14. There is no evidence anywhere in the Bible that divine authority was ever delegated to any one else; in fact divine authority ended with the work and revelation of the apostles. All authority in Christianity is vested in Christ. Mat. 28:18, Eph. 1:22. Every local church is a theocracy democratically administered. In matters of faith and doctrine it is an absolute monarchy subject to the will of Christ which is the absolute law from which there is no appeal. In matters of expediency, or method, it is a democracy subject to the wish and will of the majority. The historic episcopacy has no authority to make any changes in the teaching of Christ: therefore I am not an Episcopalian, but a Christian. The presbytery has no authority over the teaching of Christ; therefore I am not a Presbyterian, but a Christian. Not even the congregation has any authority over the teaching of Christ; therefore I am not a Congregationalism but a Christian. (How utterly absurd that the Board of Officers of any church of Christ should even discuss such a question as the reception of the pious unimmersed! That question was settled for us by Christ and the apostles almost twenty centuries ago. We are presumptuous to even consider or discuss it). I do not believe in baptism, but I do believe in the Christ who commands me to be baptized; therefore I am not a Baptist, but a Christian. I believe that everything in the local church should be done decently and in order, but I do not believe that the church should be named after the methods used; therefore I am not a Methodist, but a Christian. Again, who instituted the ordinances? Our Lord instituted them; therefore, He alone has the right to alter them, to make changes in their observance, or to take them away. The Pope did not institute baptism; therefore the Pope has no right to annul baptism or to substitute something for baptism. The church did not institute baptism or the Lords Supper; therefore the church has no right to change these ordinances in any way. They are the ordinances of Christ which are to be perpetuated by the church.
Restore the authority of Christ over His church and bring all professing Christians to accept His authority, and you will have solved many of the problems which harass modern Christendom. You will have swept away all popes, councils, synods, presbyteries, conferences, associations and assemblies which, in the past, have presumed to speak with authority. You will have swept Catholicism off the face of the earth and you will have destroyed every vestige of humanism that lingers in Protestantism. When all professing Christians recognize the exclusive authority of Christ over His church, Christian unity will soon be a reality. May God hasten the day when He shall reign on earth even as He now reigns in Heaven!
V. The Church of Christ. The Restoration message includes a plea for the restoration of the church of Christ. The modern world is so befogged by churchanity that Christianity has largely become obscured. We hear so much in these days about Luthers Church, Calvins Church, Wesleys Church, and so on, we are liable to forgetin fact the world at large has almost forgotten that our Lord Himself established a church. This church came into existence on the day of Pentecost, A.D. 30. Mat. 16:18here he speaks of it as His church. It is the church of Christ and the only church to which I care to belong. Let us go back of Wesley, back of Calvin, back of Luther, back of Rome, back of Constantinople, all the way back to Jerusalem and find, reproduce and restore the church of Christ, or, using the adjectival form, Christian Church. This is the supreme objective of the Restoration movement of the nineteenth century.
VI. The Ordinances of Christ. The Restoration plea has a specific message with reference to the ordinances of Christ. It says they are not ordinances of the church, but ordinances of Christ to be perpetuated by the church as sacred trusts committed to the church for safekeeping.
The ordinances of Christ are three in number: (1) Baptism, to test the loyalty of the penitent believer. (2) The Lords Supper, to test the loyalty of the Christian. (3) The Lords Day, which is a memorial of Christs resurrection from the dead.
True obedience does a thing commanded, does it without question, and does it in the way the author of the command wants it to be done. I might illustrate as follows: A gentleman who is about to die calls his two sons to his bedside. He tells them he owns a farm out in Kansas, that he has made extensive plans for the development of that farm, but that death threatens to prevent the execution of his plans. He asks for a map of the farm. He tells the boys just how he wants the farm developed. He points out on the map the spot where the house is to be erected, also the spot where the barn is to be built. Pointing to a certain place on the map, he says: This is all bottom land. I have prepared it for corn and I want you to plant corn there next spring when you begin to develop the land. Up here on this rolling ground I want you to sow the wheat because it is especially prepared for wheat. Then along the road here is a patch of new ground. The soil is fresh and fertile and I have planned to put an orchard on this spot. Now, boys, said he, after I am dead and gone, I shall depend upon you to develop the farm according to the plans I have given you. The sons agree to do so, and in a few days thereafter the father dies. Several months later the boys decide to go to Kansas and take a look at the farm. Taking the map with them, they make what would be called in modern language a survey. They find the place where the house is to be erected and they agree it is an ideal location. They next find the spot where the barn is to be built and again they agree. They take a look at the bottom land and they see it is quite evident that this is the ground which will produce the corn. They take a look at the rolling land and again they are of the same mind and judgment. They express their astonishment at the wise judgment manifested by the father; thus far they are in complete accord with his plans. By and by they stroll over the patch of new ground. John looks at it for a moment and Bill looks at it, then they look at each other and shake their heads. John says: It seems to me that father has slipped just a bit in selecting this spot for an orchard. It is full of roots and stumps that will retard the growth of the trees. Besides, it is right here along the road and all the bad boys in the neighborhood will be clubbing the apples, pears, and peaches. I think we had better put the orchard back from the road, etc. Bill is of the same opinion. Now I have a problem in mathematics for you. That father gave his sons five specific commands. The commands were very clear-cut; there was no danger of their being misunderstood. In how many of these commands did the boys obey their father? You say, They obeyed him in four particulars, but disobeyed him in one. No, my friends, they didnt obey him in anything. They accepted his judgment in the four particulars because it so happened that their judgment coincided with his; but when it came to the last item, they did not agree with the fathers judgment, and instead of obeying him without question, they followed their own judgment in the matter. How like people today! They are perfectly willing to believe and repent of their sins; but when they come to the baptismal water, they stop and say, This is a matter for me to decide in my own conscience, and in many cases they follow their own preference or inclination instead of submitting to the ordinance of Christ in the way it was performed in New Testament times.
That Christian baptism was immersion, under the preaching of the apostles, is readily admitted by scholars of all denominations. There is no more clearly established fact in church history than this. No man of any standing in the world of scholarship questions it for a moment. Moreover, immersion is the only catholic baptism: one who has been buried with Christ in baptism will be accepted in any church in Christendom with but one or two exceptions. There is no argument about immersion; all are agreed that it is baptism; the argument is all over the matter of substitutes for baptism. In other words, the controversy is not over what baptism is, but over what baptism is not. Why not accept the baptism that is unquestionably Scriptural and that is universally admitted to be right?
The plea of the Restoration movement is that the ordinances may be restored to their proper place and significance in the faith and practice of the churches of Christ.
VII. Unity in Christ. One of the most important items in the Restoration message is the plea for Christian unitynot union, but unity. There is a great difference between union and unity. Someone has facetiously remarked that by tying two cats together by the tail and throwing them over a clothesline one would have a union, but not much unity. Our Lord prayed for the unity of His people, Joh. 17:20-21. The apostles condemned division in no uncertain terms, 1Co. 1:10-13; 1Co. 3:1-5. The church of the New Testament was a united church, Eph. 4:4-6.
It is quite evident that the present divided condition of Christendom is the direct antithesis of the ideal for which our Lord prayed. It is equally evident that divisions are wasting the church and nullifying the effects of gospel preaching. As John R. Mott has said, The price that has been paid for a divided Christendom is an unbelieving world.
Someone inquires: Is Christian unity possible? If Christian unity is impossible, then our Lord prayed for an impossibility. Moreover, if Christian unity does not come to such an extent as to include all who claim to be Christians, it will be due to the fact that men will not allow it to come.
The question arises here: How did Christ, through the apostles, go about the task, in New Testament times, of building a united body} This is a worth-while question. The answer is very clear. The first thing the apostles did under the guidance of the Spirit, was to bring into existence a local church of Christ which was a united church. See Act. 2:44-47; Act. 4:32. Note that the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul. This church in Jerusalem was a wonderfully united church. In establishing such a united church of Christ, it should be noted that the apostles did not make their appeal to the Pharisees, nor to the Sadducees, nor to the Herodians, etc., as sects. Nothey made their appeal to individuals to come out of Judaism; those who obeyed the gospel were then added together into a local church and as other individuals came from time to time they were added to the original group. Thus there was a united church of Christ in Jerusalem. The next step was to establish churches of the same faith and order in adjoining cities and towns. By and by there was a church of Christ in Antioch, another in Samaria, another in Philippi, another in Thessalonica, and so on. In this manner the united church of Christ spread over the entire known world even before the death of the Apostle Paul. How was it all done? It started with a united local church in Jerusalem; thence the lines were extended by establishing local churches of Christ in other cities; and the sum total of all the members of these united local churches constituted the united universal church of Christ.
Herein lies a great lesson for the churches of Christ of the present century. Not only the Scriptures, but observation and experience as well, proclaim the absolute folly of appealing to any denomination or denominational group, as such, in the matter of bringing about unity. The appeal must be made to individuals to come out of denominationalism and to unite in Christ. This was the method used in apostolic times and by divine authority. It was the method used by the pioneers of the Restoration movement and the Word of God prevailed mightily. Churches of the New Testament order sprang up all over the country in an incredibly short time. Later, out of an exaggerated conception of religious courtesy, the method was changed from proclamation to negotiation. The result has been temporary stagnation. It should be remembered that a merger of denominations is not unity. The ideal for which Christ prayed is not achieved in a league of denominations, it can be achieved only by the elimination of denominational barriers and the breaking down of denominational walls. I look upon the time and energy that is being spent at present negotiating with the self-constituted leaders of denominationalism, in vain endeavors to achieve consolidation through human schemes of union, as nothing but sheer waste of effort. The thing to do is to rekindle the fires of evangelism; to extend the lines into every community in the land; and leave the results with God. Preach the Word to individuals; plead with them to abandon sectarianism and to become one in Christ Jesus; go here, there, everywhere with the New Testament message; until the whole Christian world shall come to recognize and accept the New Testament basis. Then, if it should turn out that the ideal for which Jesus prayed can not be achieved to the extent of taking in the whole of Christendom, due to the prejudices and perversities of mankind, we may have the satisfaction of knowing that it shall have been realized, to a limited degree at least, in the unity of the churches of Christ; and we shall be comforted by knowledge of the fact that when the Son of man cometh, He will find the faith on the earth (Mat. 24:14). The present-day ecumenical movement has been dubbed rightly, a conglomerate of conflicting units (Bulletin by Harry L. Owens, San Antonio, Texas.)
VIII. Consecration to Christ. The last, but by no means the least, item of the Restoration message, is a plea for personal consecration to Christ.
Baptism is not the end, but just the beginning, of Christian life and service. It is only the consummation of the divine plan whereby we are adopted into the family of God. It is the act in which we put on Christ. Gal. 3:27, Joh. 3:5, Rom. 8:14-17. Following baptism we are given the Spirit of adoption as the earnest of our inheritance, and this indwelling Spirit endows us with the privilege of calling God our Father. Baptism is the final act of primary obedience through which we are saved from a state of alienation and by means of which we obtain the right to approach our Father through Christ, our High-Priest, in daily confession and prayer. 1Jn. 1:9, Heb. 10:19-22, etc.
In other words, baptism is the consummating act of conversion. Conversion is the complete surrender of self and substance to God, the submission of the human will to the divine. New converts thus inducted into the body of Christ must continue stedfastly in the essentials of Christian worship, Act. 2:42; they must grow in divine grace, 2Pe. 1:5-11; they must bring forth in life and Conduct the fruit of the Holy Spirit, Gal. 5:22-25. They must work out their own salvation, Php. 2:12; they must fight the good fight of faith; they must press on toward the mark of the prize of the high calling of God; they must run the race with patience. The crown of life is promised only to those who endure, Rev. 2:10, the over-comers.
The Restoration ideal not only demands the proclamation of first principles; it also includes going on to perfection, It takes in the Lords Supper, prayer, liberality, meditation, consecration, personal piety and zeal. It includes everything essential to a devout Christian life.
Theres a sweet old story translated for man,
But writ in the long, long ago,
The gospel by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John,
Of Christ and His mission below.
Men read and admire this gospel of Christ
With its love so unfailing and true;
But what do they say and what do they think
Of the gospel according to you?
Tis a wonderful storythis gospel of love
As it shines in the Christ life divine,
And oh, that its truth might be set forth again
In the story of your life and mine.
You are writing each day a letter to men,
Take care that the writing is true,
Tis the only gospel some folk will read
The gospel according to you.
God highly exalted him and gave unto him a name that is above every name. And to think that He loves us so much He is willing to extend us the privilege of wearing that name! That privilege is yours this very moment if you will but accept Him as your Savior and obey him in Christian baptism. Allow Him to enter your heart and assume authority over your soul. No privilege vouchsafed a human being is comparable to this! May God help you to decidenow!
The wells of the fathers must be kept open: no ecumenical conglomerate must be permitted to fill them with theological rubbish. The pure water of the primitive Gospel, the true Gospel, the only Gospel, must be allowed to flow in all its pristine purity. Jesus is the Son of God. He is the Savior of the world. This must be the positive message sounding out from every pulpit that dares to call itself Christian, from now unto the end, His Second Coming, even until the redeemed shall join with the angels before the Heavenly Throne in proclaiming praise to His matchless name:
O that with yonder joyful throng,
We at His feet may fall,
Well join the everlasting throng
And crown Him Lord of all.
Review Questions
See Gen. 26:34-35.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(18-22) Isaac digged again the wells . . . This activity of Isaac called forth anew the opposition of the Philistines, His first well was in the wady of Gerar, and was the more valuable because it was not the mere remains of the water of the torrent, but was fed by a spring, as we learn from its being called a well of living water. But though Isaac had a right to these wells by reason of the old covenant between his father and the king, yet when his claim was resisted he abandoned the well, but in token of displeasure called it Esek, contention. When compelled to resign his next well he called it by a harsher nameSitnah, enmity; for their opposition was developing into bitter persecution. And now, wearied with the strife, he withdrew far away, and the Philistines, having gained their end, followed him no farther. In quiet, therefore, he again dug a well, and called it Rehoboth, wide open spaces. It has been identified with one in the wady Ruhaibeh now stopped up, but originally twelve feet in diameter and cased with hewn stone. It lies to the south of Beer-sheba, at a distance of 8 leagues, and about forty miles; away from Gerar.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
18. Digged again the wells Abraham’s long residence (comp . 21:34) in the districts of Gerar and Beer-sheba had left its traces in many a valley, and after his death the Philistines seem to have hastened to obliterate the witnesses of their treaty with him. Hence the repetition of oaths, treaties, and names like Beer-sheba. Gen 26:33.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Gen 26:18. Isaac digged again, &c. Many reasons might induce Isaac to open these wells again: 1st, Because he was sure to find water there: 2nd, Because he could open them more easily than dig new ones: 3rdly, Because thus he would give less umbrage to his neighbours: 4thly, Because he had the right of ancient possession: 5thly, Because thus he would perpetuate the memory of his father.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Gen 26:18 And Isaac digged again the wells of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father; for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham: and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them.
Ver. 18. Isaac digged again the wells, &c. ] Both for more certainty to find water – a scarce commodity in those hot countries; and because the labour was the easier, and his fight the better, since they had once been his father’s.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 26:18-22
18Then Isaac dug again the wells of water which had been dug in the days of his father Abraham, for the Philistines had stopped them up after the death of Abraham; and he gave them the same names which his father had given them. 19But when Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and found there a well of flowing water, 20the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled with the herdsmen of Isaac, saying, “The water is ours!” So he named the well Esek, because they contended with him. 21Then they dug another well, and they quarreled over it too, so he named it Sitnah. 22He moved away from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it; so he named it Rehoboth, for he said, “At last the LORD has made room for us, and we will be fruitful in the land.”
Gen 26:18 “he gave them the same names which his father had given them” This is simply keeping the family tradition or it may have been a religious act relating to the covenant with his father.
Gen 26:20-22 “Esek. . .Sitnah. . .Rehoboth” This is a series of three wells which were used to show what was happening in Isaac’s relationship with his neighbors.
1. the first well means “contention” (BDB 796)
2. the second well means “enmity” (BDB 966 II)
3. the third well means “broad places” (BDB 932), which is a Hebrew idiom to represent rest and peace and happiness
Gen 26:22 “At last the LORD has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land” Isaac had the manpower to easily overcome the Philistines, but he chose to wait in faith, on God who had made him a promise. The name of the third well and “room” are the same (BDB 932).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
in the days of Abraham his father. Isaac a placid character; shown by his obedience (Gen 22:6, Gen 22:8), his meekness in betrothal (24), his mourning for his mother (Gen 24:63-67; compare note on Gen 26:63), his following in his father’s steps to Gerar (Gen 20:1) in denying his wife there (20), his finding an Abimelech and Phichol there, and digging wells there, renewing the oath and renaming the well.
their names. Compare the four names below and their special meaning.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Isaacs Wells and Covenant
Gen 26:18-35
It is interesting to follow Isaac in his well-digging. Let us also dig wells and set streams flowing, which will bless men long after we have gone home to heaven. The first well was Esek-strife. The second, Sitnah-hatred. The third, Rehoboth-room. Thus is human life, too often, till it ends with Sheba-oath or covenant. But even the outward repose to which life may attain, as the result of the struggles of earlier life, may be interrupted by anxiety and trial, caused by children or grandchildren. Esaus marriage brought endless trouble in its train. And grief of mind will sow life with thorns. Let children take care lest they give needless pain to those who love them. That which hurts tender and true hearts is not likely to carry with it the blessing of God. As soon as a wandering soul gets back to God even his enemies make peace with him; he is at least secure from their hurt. See Pro 16:7.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
in the days: Houbigant contends, that instead of bimey, “in the days,” we should read, avdey, “servants;” agreeably to the Samaritan, Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate: “And Isaac digged again the wells of water which the servants of Abraham his father had digged.”
and he: Gen 21:31, Num 32:38, Psa 16:4, Hos 2:17, Zec 13:2
Reciprocal: 2Ki 3:25 – stopped 2Ch 26:10 – digged many wells
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Isaac reopened the wells that Abraham had dug but the native inhabitants had later filled with earth. He also dug three new wells. In contrast with Abraham, Isaac "was called not so much to pioneer as to consolidate." [Note: Kidner, p. 154.]
This incident shows God’s blessing of Isaac, too. Water in the wilderness is a strong symbol of God’s supernatural blessing in spite of nature.
The incident also reveals the peaceful character of this patriarch who did not battle his neighbors for the wells, even though he was stronger than they (Gen 26:16). His actions expressed his trust in Yahweh. [Note: See note on 48:22.]
Isaac’s decision to sojourn in Gerar and the territory of the Philistines (Gen 26:1-22) seems to have been unwise but not sinful. Though he sinned in misrepresenting his relationship to Rebekah out of fear (Gen 26:7), his choice to live in Gerar was not sinful. It did, however, open him to temptation and trials that he probably would have avoided if he had stayed away from Gerar.