The Woodchipper

Revelation 1:1-4

Boniface Option — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 19:28:12 GMT

First Steps Into The Most Difficult Book of the Bible

What is THE APOCALYPSE?

Boniface Option — Wed, 10 Jun 2026 20:45:47 GMT

Revelation is a “revealing” or an “unveiling.”

That is what the Greek word transliterated into English as “apocalypse” means.

Who or what is revealed in this book? Why has it been given to us?

And what does it mean that “the time is near?”

How NOT to Read the Book of Revelation

Boniface Option — Fri, 29 May 2026 19:54:48 GMT

In this, we discuss Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and (the correct one). What each get right and what they get wrong, and how we can read this part of God’s Word in a better way.

Why Revelation Was DEFINITELY Written Before AD 70

Boniface Option — Mon, 11 May 2026 19:56:57 GMT

In this episode, Ron and I examine the arguments for a late date (AD 90s) for Revelation and articulate why this is built upon weak evidence and also conflicts with the internal evidence of the book.

The End of the World

Boniface Option — Mon, 04 May 2026 17:33:00 GMT

Apocalyptic talk is all the rage today, even more than it normally is.

“Who could be the antichrist?”

“Is World War III around the corner?”

The mainstream of American Christianity is apocalyptic. That has been true our entire lifetimes. It remains true today, though things seem to be changing.

As people question the End Times obsessiveness, and historical alternatives begin to have purchase, the question always comes up, “what about the Book of Revelation? What is that about?”

Ron Dodson and I have begun to explore this book and plan to do so over the next several months.

In the first episode we start to set the groundwork of what this book is, how biblical exegesis has continued to develop over time, and how in order to approach this book you have to have an extremely well-developed understanding of the entire Bible before you can begin to make sense of anything in it.

Spring 2026 Update From Whitleyville Reformation Church

Boniface Option — Wed, 04 Mar 2026 17:34:08 GMT

All, I wanted to provide an update on our church and announce our need to hit a generous match offering.

We have now been worshiping for a little over a year, and our church continues to grow, not only in number but also in maturity as a worshiping body. We are encouraged by the things that God is doing in our midst and by the support that so many have shown. Starting a new church is no easy task, not for pastors and elders, nor for congregants. It takes determination. It takes dedication. It takes resources. It takes vision.

Thanks be to God that our people demonstrate those characteristics every day. We are growing much closer to moving into a more stable location while we continue to patiently build toward our permanent home. We hope to be the kind of church that is an example of faithfulness, maturity, and serious Christian life that can be an exemplar for the future of Christendom. We continue to pursue our goal of being a blessing to others, especially the families moving to join us, as we collectively enter into a very dangerous and uncertain future. We want to exemplify reverent, dignified worship in our quest to center the growth of community and society around the church. We want serious and deep study of God’s Word to strengthen the souls and bodies of all we come into contact with. We want our ministry to be the engine that drives forward conscious Christian living. This is why we are consciously fostering a Christian faith that draws from the traditions that long preceded us and ones that will be around long after we are gone.

To that end, we must build and continue to build. And we are in need of your continued help. We have been blessed by so many of you and continue to seek this blessing. We are not funded by large denominational church planting networks, or foundations, or any particularly deep institutional pockets. As we don’t have the luxury of billionaire donors, we must be faithful in reaching out to the grassroots—to you.

We have graciously been offered matching donations up to $20,000, which means that for every dollar you give, it will be worth two. Can you help our church in reaching this goal?

If you are blessed by our ministry here and wish to see it flourish, please donate here:

For one-time gifts (which will be matched), click here. (if link fails: whitleyvillechurch.com/donate)

Or for recurring gifts, click here. (if link fails: whitleyvillechurch.com/give)

We don’t take any of this lightly. We cherish every single gift. Sincerely, thank you, and God bless you.

The Ascension of Joseph (Genesis 41:1-57)

Boniface Option — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 14:27:03 GMT

This is the forty-first part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

Genesis 41 is the exaltation of Joseph. Joseph was the chosen son, the heir of the kingdom. He was taken by his envious brothers, nearly murdered, and sold into slavery. While in slavery, he rose to rule his master’s household, was falsely accused by his master’s wife, and was held in prison. There, he proves that the Spirit of God is with him by correctly interpreting both dreams of Pharaoh’s two servants. Finally, he interprets Pharaoh’s dreams, tells him of a coming famine, and is exalted to rule over the kingdom of Egypt.

Joseph’s Ascension

We left off in chapter 40 at Pharaoh’s birthday feast, and here we are in the beginning after exactly two full years. What does this mean? It is his birthday again, and it is the start of the third year. Yet another third day, week, month, year, in Genesis. At the end of a time period of three comes judgment, often in the form of a crisis. And here the judgment comes in the form of a dream from God. The question here, that is rarely ever noticed in the exegesis of this passage, is this: God has given Pharaoh a dream. He will send Joseph, who alone can interpret it. Will Pharaoh accept the interpretation and submit to God, or will he reject the interpretation and continue in exalting himself above God? The possibility that Pharaoh would reject this never seems to enter into anyone’s mind.

But it very much is a possibility. To the Egyptians, Pharaoh is a god walking on earth. It is He who keeps the Nile going each year, its floods replenishing the land and making it fertile. He makes the sun come up each day. For Pharaoh to submit to God is to relinquish this status. That is to say, no, these things are out of my control, and it is God alone who gives life through the Nile and gives the light of the sun.

The Nile features centrally in the dreams. The first dream is of the cows. They come up out of “the river,” which can only be the Nile. First seven fat cows, then seven ugly, scrawny cows came and ate the fat cows. A dream of zombie cannibal cows. That would be very disturbing! The next night, a second dream, this time of seven heads of grain on a single stalk, all plump and good. But then seven thin heads spring up as well, these are blighted by the harsh, hot east wind. And these ate the seven fat heads of grain.

Pharaoh woke up, and “his spirit was troubled.” One dream is bad enough, but a second one just like it is not a coincidence. Pharaoh, like in the chapter prior, is given a double-witness. This thing is from God. Another indication to him that it is from God is that all the magicians of Egypt and wise men could not interpret them for Pharaoh. Modern man looks at that statement in scripture and scoffs. “Oh, haha, magicians??? Hahaha! What primitive, superstitious idiots.” But then a novel cold virus starts to kill people, and what do we do? We call in all of our top magicians, in white coats, to vainly try to explain what to do. Of course, it doesn’t help that the magicians likely played a role in creating a thing they could not control in the first place. They might even try to manipulate nature to create a cure. But in the end, they are helpless to do anything about it at all. The magician attempts to control and manipulate God’s creation; he might even temporarily succeed in this endeavor, but in the end, it is God who is in control. Oh, no modern man, you have magicians just like the Egyptians did, and they are just as full of hubris in the face of God.

Pharaoh consults his magicians, maybe even one of them is named Ra-Fauci, and they have nothing. But Pharaoh’s cupbearer tells him that he has a guy. He tells him of Joseph correctly interpreting his dream and the baker’s dream. So Pharaoh calls Joseph out of the dungeon, Joseph is shaved (the Egyptian court required no facial hair), and he is clothed in the appropriate clothing to stand before the king. Pharaoh asks him to interpret his dream, to which Joseph responds that he will not, but God will. And Joseph presumes that God will give him an answer of peace before he even knows the content of the dream. It is not likely arrogance on Joseph’s part; why else would God give this ruler grace to know what God will do in the future?

Pharaoh tells Joseph the dream and interprets it. The two dreams are one. The seven fat cows and seven plump heads of grain are seven good years of harvest, and they will be followed by seven years of famine. God has given this dream so that Pharaoh would know what He is about to do. After interpreting the dream, Joseph gives the application: select a wise and discerning man to rule over Egypt. Have him collect 20% of the produce of the land in the seven years of plenty and store it as a reserve.

Pharaoh and his court thought so much of Joseph’s counsel that Pharaoh says, “Can we find such a one as this, a man in whom is the Spirit of God?” What does this mean? It goes back to our original question. Will Pharaoh submit to God or will he reject him? The answer? He submits to God. He acknowledges God as God. What has happened here? Pharaoh is converted. No longer is he the god-man walking on the face of the earth. He has bowed the knee to the true God. He knows that there is no one as wise and discerning in his entire kingdom as Joseph, and so he raises him up to be the ruler of Egypt directly under him.

And this is Joseph’s exaltation: he puts his own signet ring on Joseph’s hand, puts him in a garment of fine linen, and puts a gold chain around his neck. He gives him a chariot, Air Force Two to ride in. He also gave Joseph a new name: Zaphnath-Paaneah, which means “God speaks, He lives.” It is an appropriate name. One that also points to Pharaoh’s conversion. He gives Joseph a wife, the daughter of the high priest of the Egyptian religion. This is interesting as well. Joseph is married into the top of the Egyptian religion. He has political authority, and very subtly here, religious authority, too. And whatever he says, they have to listen to. So is Joseph marrying a pagan? No. Their religion no longer worships the sun god or the river god, but the true God.

With her, Joseph has two sons: Manasseh and Ephraim. The first means “forget trouble” and the second “enjoy blessings.” Then, at the end of the seven years of plenty, the famine came. The people cried to Pharaoh for their bread. No longer did the people exist to feed Pharaoh, but he existed to feed them. And not only did Pharaoh feed his own people, but the rest of the world.

Conclusion

Joseph’s exaltation is a picture of Christ. Joseph is both priest and king. He feeds the people bread. That Joseph is a type of Christ is obvious, but the details are rather striking. He suffers what he does not deserve, he undergoes a death and resurrection, and in the end, he is exalted and feeds the world. The world is saved; in the subsequent chapters, Israel will be saved. This, too, is a type of the Apostolic era. The Gentiles are brought in, and Israel’s jealousy is stirred to accomplish their salvation.

For us, as we reflect on Joseph’s story and how ours compares, consider this. The toil and suffering of the church today, the faith being relegated to the fringes and despised and hated. What is God doing with this? What might He be doing with this? He is preparing His people to be exalted. We are in the dungeon right now. We have the Spirit of God with us; He gives us the answers to the problems before everyone. Yet in the dungeon we remain. Then one day, out of nowhere, when no one expects it, a crisis comes, and Pharaoh is converted.

How will our nation, our home, become Christian again? It won’t be through voting. It won’t be through a political struggle. Those things are, of course, important; we should not neglect them. Those things are necessary to our survival. But it will come when God says, yes, my church is mature enough and wise enough to be raised up. He wants us to demonstrate our faithfulness, our wisdom, our maturity, in little things before He gives us great things. It will happen when God says, “Yes, now is the time.” And not one second earlier. We have so much work to do still. Pray that God would grow us, He would mature us, that His Spirit would indeed be with us, giving us wisdom like Joseph. And trust Him, that His church would be exalted once again.

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

The Divine Double Witness of the Baker and Cupbearer (Genesis 40:1-22)

Boniface Option — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 17:05:19 GMT

This is the fortieth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

Joseph’s time in prison is usually understood as a story about his miraculous ability to interpret dreams and little more than that. What it actually represents is something much more than that. What is revealed in this chapter is what Egypt is, and what Joseph’s ministry is going to do to it. Egypt is the inversion of the heavenly city; it is the antithesis of Salem.

Joseph in Prison

The cupbearer and baker of Pharaoh have committed an offense against him. We are not told precisely what the offense is, often it is assumed by commentators that Pharaoh was capricious and they were sent to prison simply for looking at him the wrong way. But that need not be the case. These were men who were among the closest in proximity to Pharaoh. They had to be maximally trusted. If someone were plotting a coup or an assassination, these are the men you would recruit. A little bit of poison in the king’s cup or his bread, and it is over. So you can understand why a sovereign would appear to be so paranoid with these men.

Notice, too, their particular positions: two men, one in charge of the king’s bread and the other in charge of his wine. These things are not random. Nor is the statement about the high-ranking official in Pharaoh’s court, Potiphar. All he was concerned with was what he ate and drank. So, too, his lord, it appears. Bread and wine. Usually, in much Reformed exegesis, in reaction to Rome’s emphasis upon sacramentology, the bread and wine in Genesis 40 are downplayed. This is a mistake. But there is also another mistake that can be made. For those with an eye to typology and sacramentology, you can easily leap forward thousands of years right to the Lord’s Supper first, rather than going back in Genesis and seeing the connection to what has already been revealed regarding bread and wine.

There was another king, with bread and wine, who freely gave it to the people of God. Who was that? Melchizedek, King of Salem and priest of God Most High, in Genesis 14. Abraham tithed to him, and he gave Abraham bread and wine. What is this? It is the priest-king, standing in for the Lord Jesus Christ, the priest in the same order as Melchizedek and king of the heavenly Salem, giving bread and wine to the people of God. Contrast this with Pharaoh. He instead must be fed bread and wine by the people. He is a god whose people serve him. A god in the image of the serpent. The antithesis of the Triune God who first feeds and serves His people, who then offer back what He has given them to Him. Joseph is going to turn this entire inverted Empire of the Serpent upside down. The Pharaoh will feed and save his people.

But before this is done, Joseph’s wisdom and the wisdom of Joseph’s God must be proven. And so God gives two witnesses, a double witness to demonstrate just this. The two officers are placed in the custody of the captain of the guard. Who is that? It is Potiphar, who also has charge over the prison. Potiphar personally puts Joseph in charge of these men to serve them while they are in custody.

Then one night, both men had a dream. This is a really incredible thing all on its own. They each had dreams, not identical but remarkably similar. Before they had even told him about it, Joseph was able to discern that something was up, and he asked them why their appearance was so sad. They told him that they both have had dreams and there is no one to interpret the dreams for them. To them, it doesn’t appear that dreams like these were that shocking, Pharaoh had an entire court of priests and sorcerers who apparently could interpret such things, but these men were despairing but none of these sorcerers were available to them.

The cupbearer first told his dream to Joseph of a vine with three branches, budding with grapes, which he took and pressed into Pharaoh’s cup. Joseph told him that the branches were three days and that Pharaoh would lift up his head and restore him to his office. Joseph told him to remember him when he was restored to his office and told him of being stolen from his home and sold into slavery and put into this prison, though innocent.

The baker, having seen the interpretation, was ready for his turn. The dream was similar. There were three baskets on his head and in the top basket was bread for Pharaoh that the birds ate. Joseph told him that the three baskets were three days and that Pharaoh would lift the baker off his head and hang him on a tree, and the birds would eat his flesh.

The third day came. Yet another third day (or week or month or year) in Genesis, and this always means judgment, either unto vindication or condemnation, and even more than this, the third day was Pharaoh’s birthday. Pharaoh made a feast for his birthday, which he invited his servants to, and he brought both men to the feast. The cupbearer he restored to his office, but the baker was hanged, just as Joseph had said would happen. But the cupbearer did not remember Joseph.

Conclusion

Joseph and His God are vindicated on the third day. God’s revelation and Joseph’s interpretation of it were proven true. There was a double witness, not just one revelation, but two, and their interpretations were correct. In God’s law, for any capital crime, only on the testimony of two or more witnesses, can someone be put to death. Throughout scripture, God regularly provides two or more witnesses to Himself. One dream and interpretation being correct could just be a lucky guess, but two is not luck. In the previous chapter, you might have had the question of “how did Potiphar know that the Lord, the true God, was with Joseph?” We aren’t told specifically, but it had to be stuff like this. For one, Potiphar didn’t even believe in Joseph’s God, so for him to 1. Believe in Joseph’s God and 2. Believe that this God was working supernaturally through Joseph, something remarkable had to take place to found this belief upon.

Your God is with you, just as He is with Joseph. That is the promise that our Lord, Jesus Christ, has made. That He will be with you, even unto the end of the age. He is with you. His Spirit dwells inside you. We may not have the same incredible supernatural signs that Joseph did. But we do have supernatural signs, nonetheless. God has given supernatural signs to His people even today. Primarily, they are baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Yes, you are part of a miracle today. That is what the supper is. The God who created heaven and earth is present here by the Spirit and feeding you the body and blood of His Son. How does a great empire of wickedness and filth like Egypt become transformed into a place that honors the Triune God? Through Word and Sacrament. Through the faithful service of the people of God. Through death and resurrection. You each are Josephs in Egypt. You toil in Potiphar’s household. You are falsely accused and languish in the dungeon. And yet, your God is using you, using your faithfulness to redeem others, to bring them out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light.

Trust in the Lord, that He is indeed doing this. That He is using you as Joseph to bring about the salvation of many. Trust Him and continue plodding away faithfully and wait for Him to do spectacular things. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

Christmas Update From Whitleyville Reformation Church

Boniface Option — Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:05:57 GMT

God has greatly blessed our work in Tennessee, and we have continued to grow. I have done more baptisms this year than any year prior, and families continue to move to the area to be part of what we are doing: participating in a small way in the rebuilding of Christendom. We are growing at a pace where more space will soon become a necessity.

We are not a megachurch. We are not selling a religious product to be easily consumed by the masses, especially in more affluent and populated parts of the country. Nor are we operating within the confines of a large, well-situated denomination that will support the expense of building a new church—but with strings attached. We don’t have the support of massive institutions or legacy endowments, nor do we want it. We want to do something entirely different, something much more difficult.

I have often written about the failures of our Christian institutions in guarding our doctrine and people from becoming beholden to the spirit of the age. Were we to be part of a large denomination, the expenses required to grow and build a new church would be provided for, but the latent wokeness and contemporary pieties (of the type not found in the Bible or Christian tradition) we would be required to submit to.

What the church at large needs is institutions that are prophetic, in the full biblical sense of that word. A “prophet” in modern parlance is merely someone who predicts the future, but in scripture is much, much more than that. A prophet stands outside the people—and with God—announcing God’s Word, correcting and rebuking the people. He does not say “nice” things, but he says true things that need to be said. The most powerful Christian institutions and denominations today are far more interested in saying only “nice” things and even “nice” untruths than ever saying a not-nice, true thing.

We aim to change that. We are changing that.

We seek to show the world that you can have a church that is faithful in its doctrine and practice that is not enslaved to the expectations of a culture that increasingly hates the Lord Jesus. One that will unashamedly speak the truth from God’s Word and never back down from it. To have an entire community operating within this frame: let God be true and every man a liar (Rom. 3:4).

To that end, we are asking for help. It is the end of the year, the time when many are planning out their giving for 2025. If you find what we are doing to be valuable, if you see hope for the future of Christendom in our efforts, if you want something to succeed outside of wokified denominations, and/or if you’d rather your income go to us than be taxed and later laundered to Al-Shabab in Somalia, please consider donating here.

If you give $50 or more, we will reach out for your mailing address so that we can send you a copy of my new hardbound edition of The Boniface Option, with a message of your choice. All your gifts are tax-deductible. Please email the church (contact@whitleyvillechurch.com if you’d rather give in some other way).

Thank You and Merry Christmas!

Pastor Andrew Isker

Faithful Slavery As The Path To Dominion (Genesis 39:1-23)

Boniface Option — Thu, 04 Dec 2025 18:18:40 GMT

This is the thirty-ninth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

Joseph in Potiphar’s house is another of the many stories in Genesis that are not what they appear to be. On the surface, it seems to be the story of Joseph’s humiliation and descent from a slave to a prisoner. But in reality, this is a story of a faithful man refusing to take hold of dominion that God had not granted him. This is the story of a new Adam who was faithful where the first Adam was not.

Joseph in Potiphar’s House

After being sold into slavery by his brothers, and after the seeming diversion that is the story of Tamar, Joseph has reached Egypt. Egypt is the place of the great world empire. Egypt was always an adversary, a place used by the serpent to attack the Bride and The Seed. Pharaoh, Abimelech, Hagar, and Ishmael, all Egyptians, all playing this role in the story. And now, The Seed is stolen and taken to the heart of the Serpent’s dominion. What we must see in Egypt is another theme that consistently runs through Genesis. While the patriarchs are patiently and faithfully sojourning in a land that they will one day possess, the City of Man is being built. That entire time, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are wandering in Canaan, and Egypt is becoming the great empire. Cain and his descendants get a head start on the sons of God. Babel gets a head start and builds a city. The Canaanites have a head start and build their kingdoms. Esau and his descendants get a head start on God’s people. The faithful have to wait and wait.

The captain of Pharaoh’s guard, a man of great power and authority, purchases Joseph from the Ishmaelites. But the entire time in his exile and his slavery, the Lord is with Joseph. Even in servitude, God made him successful in all that he did. Not only was the Lord with him, but it was so obvious that his master took notice of this. He made him the overseer of his entire household. This is not just like being made a butler of the house. A noble household in the ancient world was closer to a Fortune 500 company than four walls and a roof that a family lives in. And Joseph was made the CEO by the lone board member, Potiphar. Everything was left in Joseph’s hand. All that Potiphar was concerned with was the bread he ate. All he cared about was what he was going to eat. Who does this sound like? It sounds like Esau and Esau’s father, Isaac, in his period of rebellion. The godless often care about little more than their own immediate material comfort. Potiphar’s neglect of his household plays a role in how the story goes from here.

Joseph was a handsome man. And Potiphar’s wife took notice of this. She attempted to seduce him. But Joseph refused. He tells her that her husband does not know what is going on in his household because he has committed all that he has to his [Joseph’s] hand. He [Joseph] has control of everything in this house except for one thing, you, his wife. How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God? Usually, the focus of Joseph resisting adultery with Potiphar’s wife is on the sexual sin, which is understandable. But the adultery is the particular manifestation of a much bigger sin that connects with the rest of the book of Genesis. In other words, it isn’t just simple adultery that is at issue here, as wicked as that is. Even looking closely at the language here, you can see the parallels. Joseph is in a household where everything is given to him except one thing. What is that like? Like Adam in the Garden, where everything in it is given into his hand, every tree he can eat from, except for one. And what was that tree? A tree of knowledge of good and evil. A tree that opens the eyes to be able to discern between good and evil. It is a tree of wisdom. It is a tree of power, authority, and dominion. A tree of kings. Adam grasped for that power, authority, and dominion rather than wait for God to grant it to him. He was naked and had not been robed in authority. Later, his descendant, Noah, having demonstrated his faithfulness, was given authority and dominion greater than Adam had, and wore a vestment of this authority. His son, Ham, uncovers his father’s nakedness and takes this robe of authority in his hand to usurp him. Reuben does something similar in uncovering his father’s nakedness by sleeping with his concubine, an act that asserts authority he did not have.

If Joseph were to sleep with Potiphar’s wife, he would not know. He is only concerned with what he eats. Joseph would be taking authority and dominion for himself. The last piece of Potiphar’s house that he does not possess would become his. The temptation here is not just sexual temptation. It is not only a temptation of the libido, but a temptation of libido dominandi. Satan’s goal is to destroy the Seed and prevent Him from crushing his head. Throughout Genesis, he has attacked the bride in order to prevent The Seed from being born. But he also attacks The Seed directly. Here he is tempting The Seed to join him. Behold all the nations of the world and their glory. All this can be yours if you but bow down and worship me. That is the temptation at play here. Joseph has refused to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Repeatedly she tempted him, and repeatedly he refused. Eventually, she trapped him inside the house alone and grabbed hold of what? His garment. Again, clothing in the Bible, especially in Genesis, is not mere clothing. It serves a symbolic function. Joseph’s tunic of many colors symbolized his rule over his father’s household. The robes of the king and the high priest in Israel functioned similarly. His robe was in her hand. If you paid careful attention to the passage as you heard it read, you probably noticed the word “hand” appearing again and again and again. That is no accident. Having something in your hand is something within your power. Even the question of “why is the story of Tamar plopped right in the middle of the Joseph narrative?” finds an answer here. What does the firstborn, Zerah, stick out of the womb? His hand. The foundational story of the royal tribe of Judah—the one vested with power and authority—being placed adjacent to the story of Joseph resisting the temptation to grasp for power before it had been given is purposeful.

In the hand of Potiphar’s wife was Joseph’s garment, symbolizing his authority. He ran away, not just from sexual temptation, but also leaving behind his authority in her hand rather than sin in this way. After this, she falsely accuses him of attempting to rape her. Repeatedly, this is what Satan has done in Genesis. When his plots fail, he accuses the godly. That is literally what his name means, “accuser.” When Pharaoh and Abimelech attempt to steal the Bride and God judges them each for it, they accuse Abraham and Isaac. When Esau despises his birthright, he accuses Jacob of stealing it. When Laban steals from Jacob, he accuses Jacob of causing it. Here, when Potiphar’s wife attempts to commit adultery against her husband, she falsely accuses Joseph of rape.

The garment is held in her hand until her husband returns home. She uses it as evidence of her accusation. He, as one might expect, becomes very angry. But interestingly, he does not immediately execute him, which would be expected to happen to a slave accused of raping his master’s wife. Instead, he puts him in prison. Either he suspected his wife’s story did not add up, or he viewed Joseph as so valuable he didn’t want him dead. And what happens next? The Lord is still with Joseph, and he quickly begins running the prison just as he had run the Potiphar Corporation. Literally (almost), the entire prison was in his hand.

Conclusion

He who is faithful in little will be faithful in much. That is the pathway to dominion. Not grasping and taking authority that you have not matured into receiving. The wicked build powerful things quickly. But the godly, through patient faith and service, mature into wisdom, into the capability of exercising authority. It would be very stupid to hand the keys to the family car over to your 9-year-old son. But that boy will mature, and when he is 17, he might be mature enough to handle this. It would be foolish to hand over the rule of an entire nation to that 17-year-old boy, but when he is 50, he just might have the wisdom to exercise political authority.

The church is much the same way. Why did (the first) Christendom fall, and why have we been given over to godless, wicked ideologies in the 20th Century? Because collectively the church has been like little children, not prepared for the weighty task of authority. We don’t have the wisdom to do this even if we were otherwise able to. We have to serve, we have to prove ourselves faithful in the small things, in caring for our neighbors and those nearest to us, in patiently building all that God has presently put in our hands.

One thing is certain: it will not happen through grasping for it. The temptation to sleep with Potiphar’s wife is ever-present. This is an avenue never available to Christians. To seize power, to take what God has not yet given us. We will not be rebellious. We will not entertain power fantasies where we “overthrow the gubbermint.” Slowly, patiently building the kingdom of God through faithful service, serving others, pouring ourselves out for our brothers, even to the point of being falsely accused of vile things, this is how the gospel conquers. This is the way of Christ. He could have had dominion the easy way. Instead, He was falsely accused of vile things, went faithfully unto death, and was raised up to rule heaven and earth at His father’s right hand. That is the path to Christendom. Humility to the point of being a slave, to the point of death, and only then will God bring the nations into His kingdom. Trust in Christ, trust in His ways, patiently obey what He has commanded, and the nations will bow the knee to King Jesus. In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

Tamar Did Nothing Wrong (Genesis 38:1-30)

Boniface Option — Wed, 03 Dec 2025 15:44:25 GMT

This is the thirty-eighth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

The story of Judah and Tamar is yet another tale in Genesis that doesn’t seem to fit the narrative and isn’t exactly rated-G. But God has given it to us in His Word; it is given for our instruction and edification, and a great deal of the theology of Genesis is revealed to us here. All of Genesis moves from the younger son replacing the elder son to the younger son redeeming the elder son. All of Genesis points to the first Adam being redeemed rather than merely replaced by the Second Adam. And in this passage, it all happens because a New Eve turns the Serpent’s attack against him using his own weapon of deception.

Judah and Tamar

Judah left his brothers, presumably because he was opposed to their treatment of Joseph. This story takes place around the same time as Simeon and Levi raiding Shechem (and disqualifying and disinheriting themselves), as well as Reuben taking his father’s concubine (disqualifying and disinheriting himself, as well). So Judah at this point is the de facto firstborn son. Having departed from his brothers, he went to Hirah the Adullamite, and there he married a Canaanite woman, Shua. Now, it is possible this is a rejection of the covenant like Esau, or it is possible that this is a picture of the gospel going to Canaanites like Rahab. From the context, it is hard to tell in either case. With her, he had three half-Hebrew/half-Canaanite sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah.

Judah took a wife for Er, a girl named Tamar. But this half-Canaanite was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and He killed him. Then, Judah had his second-born take upon himself the duties of the Levirate. This law, later written down by Moses in Deuteronomy 25, described the requirement of the younger son to marry the widow of the deceased firstborn so that his children would be counted as heirs to the dead firstborn. In other words, the double portion of inheritance would skip the second-born son and go directly to his offspring.

Onan did not want to do this. He wanted the double portion of the inheritance to be his alone. So he made sure that during marital relations, a child would not be conceived. This is what the sin of Onan was, and not simply the act of preventing conception. He was attempting to steal the inheritance. That is what was such a great sin, that God killed him.

Judah told Tamar to remain a widow until the third son was of age, and she returned to her father’s house. Eventually, Judah’s wife Shua died. What does this mean? It means the Bride is dead, there will be no more seed raised up through her, and therefore Tamar inherits her place. It also means that Judah no longer had a righteous outlet for his passions. He went up to Timnah to shear his sheep, and here Tamar is told of it. She took off her widow’s garments and put on a veil and lay in wait for him on the way to Timnah.

Why did she do this? Because she had seen that Shelah was now grown, and she was not given to him as a wife. Either he had married someone else, or it was abundantly clear otherwise that Judah had reneged on his promise. Judah assumed that she was a harlot, and he went up to her to request her services; to this she asked for payment from him. He promised her a kid of the goats. Here, the details connect up with the deception of Isaac once again. The deceiver is in disguise, and a meal of a kid of the goats is central.

To this, she asks for a pledge for surety. He offers her his signet and cord (he is a wealthy prince) as well as his staff. What are these? These are symbols of Judah’s power and authority. The act was done, and Tamar had conceived an heir for Judah and his dead sons. Immediately after this deception, she put her widow’s garments back on. Why are we told this? Because she was not actually a harlot, she did so as a ruse.

Judah made good on this promise (interesting, he makes good on a promise to a prostitute but not to his own daughter-in-law). But no one could find this harlot. Interestingly, the word used here is different from the first usage, translated as harlot. Here, the word has even more meaning, that of a temple cult prostitute. Judah knowingly engaged in what he thought was a Canaanite sexual ritual, worship of the Canaanite gods. He has given himself over to the Canaanites fully and the demons they worship. And so he capitulates when she cannot be found. The Canaanites have his signet, cord, and staff. They have the symbols of his authority, and he just gives up.

And at this point, he is told that his daughter-in-law has played the harlot and become pregnant illegitimately. There is tremendous irony in this statement. She really did pretend to be a harlot, but her purpose in doing so was entirely righteous. She is converted and understands her role as the Bride who would bring forth the Seed to perpetuate God’s Covenant. She was forced (by Judah) to take the most extreme measures to ensure the covenant would continue.

Judah’s response to this, “bring her out and let her be burned,” is another example in this passage, along with the Levirate law, that the Laws of Moses were already known by this time in Genesis. In Moses’ Law, daughters who played the harlot were to be put to death, and daughters of priests were to be put to death and then burned with fire. What this shows is that the sons of the patriarchs operated as de facto priests; everywhere they went, they built altars and offered sacrifices upon them. Why were the daughters of priests burned? Well, when anything is burned, an animal, a person, a city, etc., what is it? It is a type of sacrifice. Rather than being redeemed by an animal pointing forward to the True Sacrifice, the person instead is killed and burned with no redeemer.

But Tamar came out and presented the evidence. She displayed Judah’s signet, cord, and staff and said the father is the man to whom these belong. What Judah says here is true and right: she has been more righteous than I because I did not give her to Shelah, my son. Tamar is vindicated. And Judah did not marry her nor know her again.

Tamar is further vindicated by bearing not one son but two. And something strange takes place. The first child put his hand out, and the midwife tied a scarlet thread on his finger, but he went back in, and his brother was born first. And that brother was named Perez, “breach.” The second brother, with the scarlet cord, was named Zerah, “rising or dawning.”

Conclusion

The end of Tamar’s story is confusing. Why is this bizarre story of their birth included? Because of the theological and typological themes in Genesis. Which one is the firstborn? It should be Zerah, since he broke out first and had the thread in his hand. But instead, it was Perez. It was through Perez that David would be descended from (and ultimately Jesus). The second-born supplants but also redeems the firstborn. The Second Adam supplants and ultimately redeems the First Adam and his descendants. He doesn’t merely replace the First Adam and create a separate lineage that is redeemed. God could have done that. He could have created a new, separate, sinless humanity descended from Jesus Christ. Have you ever thought about that? But instead, what God did was redeem humanity through Jesus. The second Adam doesn’t replace the first but redeems him. All of this was right there in Genesis from the very beginning if we have eyes to see it. Christ has redeemed His people. Trust in Him, that He is redeeming His entire creation. Trust that the Second Adam has taken his inheritance and He is redeeming it.

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

No, Joseph Did Not Provoke The Treatment He Got From His Brothers (Genesis 37:1-36)

Boniface Option — Tue, 02 Dec 2025 20:30:49 GMT

This is the thirty-seventh part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

The story of Joseph is one of the best-known tales of the Old Testament. But despite so many being familiar with this story, it remains poorly misunderstood. The deeper theological meaning of the story fulfills the themes of the entire Book of Genesis: the themes of The Seed, themes of deception (righteous and unrighteous), and themes of elder brothers being disinherited now change to the elder brother being redeemed by the younger. Joseph is the culmination of the Genesis narrative, the early fulfillment of the promises of God, which points forward to the ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Joseph’s Dreams

The story begins out of chronological order from the rest of the previous chapters. The Dinah Incident has not yet taken place. Joseph is seventeen, just about to enter manhood. Joseph brought a bad report to Jacob of his half-brothers, the sons of the concubines. Often, this is treated as though Joseph was a tattletale and obnoxious child, almost as if he deserved the treatment his brothers gave him. This is not the case. We are not told specifically what the bad report was, but given the conduct of these brothers in previous and following chapters, the report was surely accurate and necessary.

Joseph was beloved by Israel. It is interesting that the name Israel is specifically used here, Jacob’s kingly name. What does this mean? Joseph is selected as The Seed, the heir, and the rationale for this is that he is the son of Israel’s old age. Now, there were other sons born after Joseph, but Joseph’s birth was a miraculous one; the barren womb of Rachel was opened up, and he was born. In the previous two generations, for Isaac and then for Jacob, their mothers were barren, and then suddenly they became pregnant. Miraculous birth is an indication of who The Seed is. In Jacob’s case, God spoke to differentiate between the two miracle sons of Jacob and Esau. Joseph is not being chosen because Jacob loved Rachel most and therefore her son is loved more than all the others, but because he is “the son of his old age.” He is chosen because this is the son God has chosen.

Israel gives Joseph a tunic of many colors. He gives him a distinctive garment. What do particular garments signify in the Bible? Think of Noah’s robe, or the high priest’s robe, or Saul’s robe that David cut, or Jesus’s robe. All of these signify authority. Joseph has been given authority over his brothers. Remember the example of Laban being the chief negotiator for his sister, Rebekah, or in the Dinah Incident, the brothers being the chief negotiators, or Abraham’s and Isaac’s claims to Pharaoh and Abimelech of being their respective wives’ brothers. The society isn’t so much a patriarchy as it is more like a fratriarchy, where brothers rule. And Israel has either made Joseph the ruler or heavily implied that he is. The reaction of the brothers indicates this is the case; they hated him and could not speak peaceably to him.

Joseph began to have dreams after this. Dreams in the Bible are God speaking in a less direct way. In a way that is not so black and white as audibly speaking directly. Kings have to search out the meaning of these things. Joseph told his brothers about this dream, and it provoked them to even deeper hatred. Joseph dreamt of them all binding sheaves of wheat in the field, but his stood up, and theirs all bowed down to his. What does this mean? The brothers understood the meaning immediately. It was about them bowing down to him.

We should find that interesting. When dreams are presented in the Bible, they are usually somewhat mysterious and very difficult to interpret. In many ways, Jesus’ parables are like dreams. He told them to obscure His teaching as a judgment upon Israel’s hardheartedness. But when He told parables about the scribes, Pharisees, and chief priests, they all immediately knew it was about them. In the same way, Joseph’s brothers knew. And they hated him for it.

God gave another dream to Joseph. The sun, the moon, and eleven stars bowed down to me. This time, he told not just his brothers but also his father. And he, too, understood it was about him and them. And Jacob rebuked him for this dream. Think of the theological meaning of this dream. What was the promise that God made to Abraham, and repeated to Isaac, and to Jacob? That Abraham’s descendants would be like the stars in the sky. And here is a dream where the two great heavenly bodies, and the eleven stars, all bow down to Joseph. Israel is initially not happy about his son’s dream, but he kept his peace from here. But his brothers were all filled with even more envy.

Joseph is sold into slavery

After this, all the brothers were in Shechem feeding the flocks, and Israel sent Joseph to them as a judge. The key point is that he is to bring word to his father of them. He is supposed to be exercising authority over them. He is commissioned by his father to go to them and evaluate what they are doing and report back to his father. If we are thinking typologically, what does this sound like? This is the Father sending the Son to Israel.

A man found Joseph and asked him who he was seeking, and the man sent him to them in Dothan. What is the point of the inclusion of this in the story? It is that God has appointed these things to happen. It isn’t random. Without the man appearing, Joseph might not have found them. What does this mean? That God orchestrated these events to take place, a fact that Joseph later acknowledges in Egypt.

As Joseph approached them afar off, the brothers conspired against him. Again, thinking typologically, this is the leaders of Israel conspiring to have Jesus killed. They want to kill him and throw him in a pit, then lie to their father, alleging a wild beast killed him. But the eldest brother, Reuben, demanded that they not kill him but put him into a pit in the wilderness. When Joseph arrived, they seized his robe. What is the symbolic meaning of this? They are robbing him of his authority. And they cast him into an empty, waterless pit. Think also of the meaning of this empty, waterless pit. He is down deep in the earth, and there is no water. What is this the opposite of? Being on a mountain where there is lots of water, a mountain like Eden with four great rivers running out of it. Joseph has passed from symbolic life to symbolic death.

After the symbolic killing of their brother, the brothers sat down to eat a mock-peace meal. A perverse version of the Lord’s Supper. There they saw their distant kinsmen, sons of Abraham, the Ishmaelites, in a trade caravan going down to Egypt. Judah, seeking to save Joseph’s life like Reuben, persuaded the brothers to sell him to the Ishmaelites. The price of Joseph is also interesting. According to Leviticus, the valuation of a man between 5 and 20 years old is twenty pieces of silver, and that is the price for Joseph. For those 20-60 years old, it is fifty pieces of silver. This likely indicates that Joseph is still not yet twenty years old.

Reuben returned and discovered what had been done and was grieved to the point of tearing his robe. The brothers took Joseph’s tunic, killed a kid of the goats, dipped the blood in the tunic, and brought it to their father. Notice the details of this deception and the similarity to Rebekah’s deception of Isaac. A kid of the goats is sacrificed, and the garment of the brother is used to deceive the father. Unlike the righteous deception of Isaac, bringing him to repentance, the brothers deceive Israel to hide their great sin.

Jacob recognized Joseph’s tunic, and he began to mourn. He refused to be comforted by his sons, his daughter, and their wives. Why did he grieve so much? Not only because he loved Joseph, but because Joseph was The Seed. His entire life is dedicated to the covenant, as was his father’s life and his grandfather’s life. Now he does not know what God is going to do.

The story ends with Joseph being sold in Egypt to Potiphar, the captain of Pharaoh’s guard.

Conclusion

Joseph has undergone two deaths in this chapter. The symbolic death of imprisonment in the pit and being exiled and sold into slavery. Death is not the end of this story; there will be resurrection. Death is not the end of any story; the is always resurrection. The Christian life is one of regular death and resurrection. God brings us in and through such things. You all have experienced various kinds of deaths. Some literal, some figurative, all very painful. And God does not leave us down in the pit. He does not leave us in despair. He will lead us out of the pit. He will lead us into new life and greater maturity. It is difficult in the moment that you are in the pit to remember that He will bring you out. It is the hardest thing in the world to have patient faith and trust in God in that moment. But that is the moment where faith must be at its strongest. God will use every death you experience to lead you to life, to maturity, and to glory. Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, always, that he will do this, that He loves His people, and that what man means for evil, God will use for good. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

The Disinherited Nation (Genesis 36:1-43)

Boniface Option — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:54:30 GMT

This is the thirty-sixth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

In Chapter 36 of Genesis, the narrative comes to a halt, and we get a genealogy of Esau. Esau hasn’t really been part of the story for several chapters; only at the very end of Chapter 35 does he reappear to bury Isaac with his brother Jacob. And with that last mention of Esau, we are given the full history of Esau and his descendants, the chronology of which goes right up to Israel’s conquest of Canaan. Why is Esau’s history recorded here? Why does God put this in His story? This is God’s Word. Why does He want us to know this list of names? It doesn’t seem like there is much the people of God can profit from this genealogy at first glance. But what this shows us is the history of the elder brother. Edom’s history is a Bizarro-world history of Israel. Edom is a counterfeit Israel that gets a head start. Long before Israel conquered Canaan, Edom had conquered the country of Seir. Long before Israel had a king, Edom had kings. Edom’s history is complicated; there are many wicked men descended from Esau, the great enemy of Israel, and Amalek is descended from Esau, but there are also godly, faithful men descended from him as well. Edom is a disinherited Israel with a head start that builds the city of man. Edom’s history does not end here in Genesis 36, but continues on throughout the rest of the Bible, all the way to John’s Revelation of Jesus Christ at the very end. What this passage does is lay the foundation of this conflict.

Esau’s Family

We are told once again about the wives of Esau and their children. Two Canaanite wives and one Ishmaelite wife married many years later. From these marriages, Esau had five sons. Like Jacob, Esau makes an exodus from the Land, but instead of going down to Egypt due to famine, Esau leaves like Lot left Abraham, because the Land could not support the flocks and herds of them both. So Edom goes to the land of Seir, southeast of the Land.

At Seir, Esau’s firstborn son, Eliphaz, has a son of his own named Amalek. This son is the father of the Amalekites, Israel’s great enemy during the Exodus and throughout their early time in the Land. Amalek attacked Israel in the Exodus and continued raiding Israel after they entered the land. King Saul was commanded by God to carry out the ban and wipe out the Amalekites, but rather than obey God, he took the Amalekite king, Agag, hostage along with all their animals and goods, which were to be devoted to destruction. The prophet Samuel hacked Agag to pieces, and Saul’s disobedience here and in two other instances cost him the kingdom. This Amalekite king, Agag, had posterity that survived, and centuries later, after the Babylonians carried Israel away, and the Persians conquered the Babylonians, Ahasuerus had two particular advisors, Mordecai, a Benjamite from King Saul’s house of Kish, and Haman the Agagite, a descendant of Agag whom Saul refused to execute. The great conflict of the Book of Esther was a conflict between Saul and Agag, between Israel and Edom, between Jacob and Esau. And the foundation of this conflict that runs across centuries, even millennia, begins here in Genesis 36.

The Chiefs of Edom and the Conquest of Seir

After the people of Edom began to settle in Seir, they were organized by the chiefs of their tribes. Just as Israel had twelve tribes according to the sons of Israel, Edom was organized into tribes according to the sons of Esau. These tribes eventually grew in strength and came into conflict with the people of Seir, the chiefs of which, though not related to Esau, are also listed here. Why are these unrelated chiefs of Seir listed in Esau’s genealogy? To indicate the conquest of the land of Seir, which Edom took possession of. This history is showing us (without showing us) a Bizarro-world Book of Joshua. The Seirites were to the Land of Seir as the Canaanites were to the Land of Canaan. Edom’s conquest of Seir takes place long before Israel’s conquest of Canaan. Edom’s history and Israel’s history run parallel, with Edom having a century or two head start on the progression from tribal society conquering a land and developing into a kingdom.

The Kings of Edom

The king list of the Edomites is also very interesting. The first king listed is Bela, son of Beor. What is interesting about that is that Bela is one letter off in Hebrew from the name Balaam, son of Beor, from the Book of Numbers, who attempted to curse Israel. Chronologically, this seems to fit, and whether Balaam and Bela are the same person, they are both sons of Beor. If this is the case, Balaam’s attempted attack on Israel is an Edomite attack on Israel.

The second king is just as interesting. Jobab is also one letter off in Hebrew from the name Job. The data in the Book of Job shows that Job is a king, and what are called his “friends” are actually his royal advisors. And these advisors are Edomites, like Eliphaz (same name as Esau’s firstborn), the Temanite, a tribe of Edom. It is very likely that the second king of Edom is the titular figure in the Book of Job. And unlike most of the other Edomites, Job is very much a godly, faithful man.

The list of the eight Edomite kings comes to an end at about the time of the end of the Book of Judges, when Saul becomes king of Israel. This places the final work on this book, with all the place markers (phrases like “as it is to this day”) during this period.

The final list of chiefs of Edom seems out of place. Why are different chiefs listed after the list of kings? Some speculate that these are the chiefs of Edom after they broke free from Israel. David conquered Edom, and sometime during Solomon’s reign, Edom once again became independent. If the monarchy were lost in this period, it would make sense that they would revert to a tribal system, and these are their chiefs.

Conclusion

If Edom’s history is a counterfeit of Israel’s history, what does this mean for the people of God today? It is similar to the Cainites having a head start, building cities long before the faithful sons of Seth did. Throughout the Bible, the wicked have a head start, and these particular wicked men are very closely related to the people of God. They are not some distant tribe of pagans, but Israel’s own flesh and blood. Just as we are seemingly randomly told that Abraham’s brother has twelve sons while Abraham only has one, it appears that God’s promises are late in arriving. Why do the wicked flourish while we struggle and suffer?

It is a question that Christians today often consider. Why are the wicked in power? Why do they dominate everything? Why are we left to the margins, weak, and powerless? The answer is because this is typically how God writes His story. His people must have a patient faith that faithfully plods ahead, waiting for God to establish His kingdom. We do not grasp for it ourselves. Grasping for power that has not been given to you is what Adam did in the Garden. It is the recurring temptation for the people of God. It is literally what Satan tempted Christ with in the Wilderness. We must not envy the Edomites. We must not let ourselves be tempted to grasp for what they already have. What the people of God must do today is continue living faithfully, continue worshiping and obeying their God, continue building what He has called us to, and God Himself will give His people these good things. Trust that the Lord is faithful, that His timing is always right, and that He will build His kingdom. Trust Him that the Kingdoms of this world will become the Kingdom of our God and of His Christ. In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

A Rolling Stone reporter asked me questions, these are my answers

Boniface Option — Sat, 25 Oct 2025 23:47:31 GMT

They were not able to get a photo of me that looks like a Bond villain. More Hank Scorpio than Le Chiffre or Blofeld, I guess.

Recently, a Rolling Stone reporter came to Gainesboro, TN, to do a story on us. I don’t usually talk to reporters, especially those from far-left media outlets, but since he was going to do a story anyway and talk to the handful of libs in town who hate us, I decided I might as well speak for myself. So I agreed to answer pre-written questions via email.

The story is out now, and you can read it here. It’s behind a paywall and doesn’t really cover anything all that new, so don’t waste your money.

What I found interesting were the kinds of questions he asked. I am posting this because it is a good exercise to see how these people operate. You can see how many of these are softballs, to make you feel comfortable and drawn you in, especially the first ones. Then, however, we get to the controversial stuff. That is where they really want to get a killshot, something they can rip from context and make headlines with. The thing is, my views are fairly conventional paleoconservatism. Yeah, that’s very controversial in a world that believes cutting the testicles off little boys is normal, but to the half of the country that is still sane, nothing about what I believe is too shocking.

Anyway, he used almost none of this for the story. I wonder why?

Tell me about your background. Where did you grow up? What was your family like growing up?

I was born and raised in the small, rural, southern Minnesota town of Waseca. My father was an independent semi-truck owner-operator for nearly forty years. My mother also had a CDL and drove with him. After my sister and I started school, my mother worked at the elementary school as a special ed aide, as well as other part-time jobs. I spent my entire childhood in this town, where my great, great-grandfather had moved to shortly after it was founded. I went to college in nearby Mankato, MN.

Tell me about your own political awakening. When did you start getting interested in politics and why?

My interest in politics began when I was a child riding with my dad in the semi listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio. I started watching Pat Buchanan on the MacLaughlin Group when I was nine or ten and always liked his commentary. What attracted me to it, even at a young age, is that these were great public questions of what is right and wrong, good and evil; these were battles worth fighting. My interest in the politics of immigration began in seventh grade when a classmate of mine was raped and murdered by an illegal alien. This interest did not have an outlet until Donald Trump arrived on the political scene in my late 20s.

How did you come to move to Jackson County. What was the impetus?

In 2018, after years of doing ministry in other states, I was finally able to return with my family to my hometown. I had intended to remain there the rest of my life. But in 2022, Tim Walz was re-elected and with him a thin majority in both legislative houses, and the first two things he did was pass legislation that allowed abortion right up until birth and also a law that allows the removal of children from the custody of parents who opposed their child’s “gender transition.” The first was something I would have stayed to fight. The second was one that threatened my family specifically. My eldest son is autistic, and in Minnesota, homeschooling him was not legally possible. Autistic children typically compartmentalize: he will not talk about school with us. Because of this, we have no idea what might be suggested to him. Someone could tell him he is actually a girl, put dresses on him, etc., and we would have no idea until it was far too late. At that point, because of Tim Walz’s new legal framework, we would lose our son. The scenario might seem implausible or alarmist until you see the percentages of “transgender children” who are on the autism spectrum. Even a 1% chance of this happening was too much.

As soon as this bill became law, my wife and I began planning how we would move. At the same time as Walz was destroying parental rights in Minnesota, Matt Walsh was leading an effort to protect parental rights over this issue in Tennessee. We knew this was a place we wanted to relocate to.

When did you first learn about Josh Abbotoy’s plans for Ridgerunner? What made you think that it would be a good situation for you and your family?

I had known Josh for a few years through mutual friends working to bolster conservatism in evangelical institutions. Around the time we were first considering leaving my hometown, I had heard about this idea. The area checked a lot of boxes for us. It is a charming small town and beautiful countryside with warm, friendly people, and a lot of potential for growth. RidgeRunner is very open about wanting to partner with church planting efforts and selling land to churches. This seemed like an ideal platform in which to plant a new church—people moving from across the country, many for reasons similar to mine, and most in need of a good church. Most church plants do not have advantages such as these, particularly not ones in rural areas.

Were you approached by Josh or Ridgerunner to move here? How did you know him?

(See previous answer)

When I met with Josh, he showed me the two developments, the one across from the high school and the other, Brewington Farms. Did you buy property in either of those spots? If not, where did you (or are you planning to) buy and build a house?

Yes, our property is in Brewington Farms.

How would you describe the general reaction to you personally since you’ve been here?

I’ve met countless folks since moving who’ve been warm and welcoming. The typical reaction I have gotten from actual people I have met in person has been extraordinarily positive. There have been some people who are somewhat cautious, not knowing what to think, especially after a biased local reporter compared me to Nazis on a local nightly broadcast. There are a handful of liberals in the county (Trump won 80% of the vote here) who are very vocal, as I’ve said many times, I’d be happy to talk with them, but no liberal has taken me up on that offer so far.

Has your family settled in well?

Yes, we have. My eldest appears to really like the school. My children are involved in sports and community ed. activities and have taken to the area well. They all like the pace of life here and living in a town where you can walk to the park or downtown to get some gelato at Ariola’s.

What do you like about the area?

I like that it is a community that has a conscious sense of its own identity. Gainesboro is an actual town with actual people who have been here for generations. It is not some transient place with hundreds of random people with no connection or bonds of social trust. Much of contemporary American life is downstream of policy intended to eradicate places like this. You are supposed to be atomized, isolated, anonymous, and alone. This place is not like that.

In what ways have you been surprised by the area? In what ways has it been different from what you expected?

I am surprised by how quickly I became accustomed to driving ten plus miles below the speed limit on the highway. The pace of life here is so vastly different than anywhere else I have ever lived. It’s honestly very refreshing.

And you’re building a church here, right? What’s your vision for the church itself? What do you want it to become?

I’ve often made the point that rural America is horribly neglected, not just by our political and cultural elites, but especially by Christian leaders as well. All of rural America is a forgotten place that has struggled economically because of decades of globalism and has suffered horrifically from opioids and fentanyl. If you want to have a giant, glitzy megachurch, it is not the place you seek out as a pastor. But if you want to truly help actual people, many of whom have had very hard lives and have suffered much, it is absolutely where you need to go. At our core, we are a church that is robustly and historically Protestant, with beautiful liturgy and preaching that takes the Bible seriously. But those are not things meant to be done in a vacuum: I want us to be a community within the community that is joyful, generous, and serious about the gospel of Jesus Christ in every part of life.

In some podcasts and other interviews that you’ve done—I’m thinking particularly about the Tucker Carlson interview you did—you spoke about Ridgerunner as a project that you seemed to be intimately involved in. You gave people a lot of info about it, you gave out the company’s website if they wanted more info. Did you or do you see yourself as something of an ambassador or a representative of Ridgerunner? Was that something you had discussed with Josh, helping to bring friends, allies, like-minded folks to Jackson County?

I would’ve loved to also promote my own books and other things to Tucker’s millions of viewers, but RidgeRunner is what he wanted to talk about most, and it is understandable why. It’s an interesting story. It’s why you are asking me about it and not my Amazon top-100 bestseller, The Boniface Option. No, I am not an official ambassador for RidgeRunner. The official ambassador is RidgeRunner’s founder and CEO, Josh Abbotoy. My role is as a church planter and pastor of a church that is building in one of their communities. Obviously, there is a common alignment of interests. I want people to move here to come to my church, and Josh wants them to buy beautiful property. These worlds overlap to some degree, but aren’t identical. People have moved to the area to come to my church, who don’t buy property, and people buy property without joining my church.

Have you worked to promote the project to friends or like-minded travelers in the online right?

Is there anything in it for you? Were you or do you get any sort of commission for bringing in new business?

I have indeed taken every opportunity to promote what I am doing online. There is obviously significant interest in it. And I am all-in on this; I moved my family here from my small town, where my family had been for six generations. I want it to succeed. What is in it for me is building a thriving, healthy church. So many people are tired of living disconnected, spread-out lives, and desire to be in a place where they can have neighbors and community again. I want that for my family. And I want to make sure that other people who want that, just like I do, know something like this exists. I do not receive commission. My reward is seeing more joyful faces worshipping on Sunday morning.

I want to ask you about some specific things you’ve written or tweeted or said on podcasts, but before I do, just generally speaking, are there things you’ve said that you regret, that you feel like you wish you could take back?

Who hasn’t wished at various points they’d said something different or phrased things a different way? When you write and speak for a particular audience, which you know understands the context of things you are saying and picks up on obvious jokes, and then an irresponsible journalist clips snippets ripped from that context to make you seem extremely radical and scary to a very different audience, of course you’d want to tailor things in a way to be as certain as you can that you will not be misunderstood.

Do you think people misunderstand the intent with which you say some of these things?

You said on a podcast about Ridgerunner, “we’re building a town, we’re building a community.” A lot of people took offense to that because they already have a town and a community that they love. Do you think that was misinterpreted? What did you mean?

I am excited about the community I am hoping to build, but I regret causing any offense to the wonderful people of Gainesboro. Obviously, I am not building a town. Gainesboro is a great town with great people who take pride in where they are from. Why would they want something else? And I decided to come here precisely because I like it the way it is! What is not as easily seen is that there are thousands of people across the country who want what Gainesboro has—a small, safe, tight-knit community. I hope that the community I am helping to build will provide this blessing to more people without changing or destroying what long-term residents love so much about the area.

Ridgerunner’s project is to build charter communities in Appalachia. What is the community that you’re hoping to be a part of building?

(See answer above re: Brewington)

You co-wrote a book with Andrew Torba about Christian Nationalism. What does the term “Christian nationalist” mean to you and is that an accurate way of describing your own ideology?

Is it an accurate way of describing this Ridgerunner project as you understand it?

“Christian Nationalist” first began to gain currency as a pejorative for evangelical Christians who supported Donald Trump sometime after the mostly peaceful protests of January 6, 2021. We wrote that book to defend evangelical Christians who love and care about their country, who we saw being slandered and vilified, especially by the leaders of evangelical institutions. In it, we gave a defense of these Christians and a biblical and historical defense for the desire to see one’s nation become self-consciously Christian. It really is just a shorthand for the idea that it is okay to be a Christian and vote for someone like Donald Trump, which is why it has diminishing returns as a pejorative.

No, I do not think it is accurate to describe RidgeRunner as “Christian Nationalist.” The company itself is a real estate business and has no position on such things. Josh Abbotoy is on record saying he isn’t a Christian Nationalist. I have many other friends who feel the same way, and that’s fine. But from my perspective, I am a Christian and an American nationalist, so I happily self-describe this way, despite knowing bad faith critics will attempt to use the phrase in insidious ways.

Obviously, Phil Williams has kind of gone after you and C.Jay in particular in his reporting about this project. What has he gotten wrong?

The fundamental problem with Phil’s reporting is that he took small snippets, ripped from context, from a conservative political theory podcast with thousands of hours of content where we discuss, in depth, any number of fraught issues in a frank and forthright manner. And Phil did in that order to paint us in a false light to create the impression that C.Jay and I are Nazis, women haters, etc., while carefully avoiding outright calling us these things – presumably because it was too risky to do so in the absence of real evidence.

I’ll give you one example. Phil took a statement of C.Jay’s commenting on the voting habits of college-educated white women (who are one of the most reliable democratic voting blocs) and used that comment to imply that C.Jay and I are opposed to women receiving an education. That’s patently absurd. Both C.Jay and I met our wives in college, and we expect our daughters to likely go to college. No reasonable person who saw the full context of the discussion around voting patterns in the 2024 election could have taken C.Jay’s comment in the way Phil tried to spin it. Phil has done this many times over, and that is, fundamentally, what’s wrong with his reporting. It’s not journalism—trying to present our views objectively—it’s left-wing activism.

If Phil had been objective and accurate in his reporting, he’d describe me as a paleo-conservative, much like Pat Buchanan, Tucker Carlson, or Matt Walsh.

Andrew, you wrote that “questioning the narrative surrounding the deaths of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Emmett Till [is] an unforgivable sin.” What questions do you have around the historical narrative of these deaths? Are there things the historical narratives have gotten wrong?

Yes, each of these events have been and are still used to stoke racial tensions and violence. I am a Christian and a pastor, and Christians have a duty to both the truth and to bring peace. I do not want blacks hating whites and whites hating blacks. I think it is disgusting the way that the media leverages tragic deaths to push a false narrative that America needs fundamental change (like “defund the police” or George Soros DAs) to atone for its supposed original sin.

What do you think about the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s, in general? Was it, on average, a positive development for the country?

Have you read Age of Entitlement by Christopher Caldwell? That basically aligns with my ideas about the Civil Rights Act.

Andrew, you wrote, “Foreigners out, America is for Americans.” Who determines who is an American and who is a foreigner? Can only citizens live in the country legally? If you are a citizen by birthright, are you an American? If you are a Mexican-American whose family has lived in California since when California was part of Mexico, are you an American? If your Chinese ancestors came in the 1800s are you an American? Can Jews be Americans with all the same rights as Christians?

As a pastor and a Christian, I believe that governments have a duty to their own people first – and that comes before a duty to the entire world. But in recent years, our immigration policy has inverted this proper order. There’s been far too much illegal immigration and abuse of legal processes for entering our country. According to some estimates, nearly a third of our current population is foreign-born. No other nation in history willfully accepted this level of demographic change in such a short time. The entire last election was about this issue. Illegal immigration, the asylum system, work visas like H1B, etc., are out of control. Nearly every week, there is a story about an illegal immigrant committing a homicide or rape.

The Anglo-Protestantism that has been the core cultural, religious, and political foundation of this country has always been remarkably protective of religious minorities. Rights for Jews and other religious minorities have always been present in America since before the country became an independent nation. “A Christian nation” does not mean only Christians have political rights; it means that the cultural and political attitudes overtly reflect its Christian majority.

Andrew, you wrote, “You can have women’s liberation or civilization, not both.” Can you explain this?

Do you think women should be allowed to vote? Why or why not?

Since the women’s liberation movement and the sexual revolution, marriage rates and fertility rates have dropped off a cliff, while broken homes have skyrocketed. And almost 100 million American babies have been aborted in the last half-century. I see the wreckage from women’s so-called “liberation” every single day as a pastor. It’s been bad for people, and yes, I think it undermines our civilization. You cannot have a functioning civilization without marriage, families, and babies, and feminism is at war with marriage, families, and babies.

As to my “views on women voting,” my wife has voted for Donald Trump six times. I expect my daughters to vote when they are of age. Hopefully, my eldest daughter’s first vote will be to re-elect President J.D. Vance. My interest as a pastor, a student of historical theology, and as a social commentator is in how human society is socially and politically organized. The popular narrative, mediated through left-wing media and academia, is that all political and social thought prior to the 20th Century was patriarchal, oppressive, and misogynistic. When I read the political and social writing of my own Protestant and Reformed tradition prior to the 20th Century, I find the contrary. These men were deeply concerned about the welfare of women, families, and children. Our contemporary social and political order would never have occurred to them. Given the utter destruction of social life in America in the past hundred years, the collapse of marriage and birth rates, and the murder of 100 million babies, it is worth pursuing lines of inquiry that might be considered sacrilege to a society responsible for these ills.

How do you feel about representative democracy in general?

I think the original American Constitutional system was ingenious. It was a representative republic, comprised of a citizenry capable of self-governance. The system that we more or less have now, pure democracy, is not like that. Pure democracy is, as the founders warned, two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner. Pure democracies tend to be short-term focused and struggle to address long-term problems. For example, this more than anything else is responsible for $37 trillion in sovereign debt that threatens both our nation and a fragile global order.

You also wrote “God made men to rule, period.” Do you believe women should be allowed to be in positions of political or business leadership?

All Christian social thought until the 20^th century took the view that God has embedded hierarchies in nature, and that ordering the home, the church, and society in accordance with these hierarchies best promotes human flourishing. History and experience testify to this. But I do not think there should be laws or regulations prohibiting women from leadership positions any more than I think there should be laws or regulations requiring it. People should be allowed to make their own decisions freely.

Talking about Ridgerunner on The Auron MacIntyre Show, you said, “If you were able to take even a few hundred people that all think the same way and have all the same ideas about common good and politics and so forth, and you can consolidate them in the same place, you can exercise far more political power, even with a few hundred or a few thousand people, than you can on your own, widely dispersed across the entire country.” Is that still your goal in Jackson County?

Jackson County has wonderful cultural and political values that I highly align with. Over 80% of the county voted correctly in the 2024 election, for goodness’ sake! That general alignment is a big reason why I decided to move here.

If anything, I’d love to see the rest of America share more of Jackson County’s cultural, political, and economic commitments. For the last century, the cultural, political, and economic priorities of coastal and urban elites have been foisted on rural middle America, and it’s well past time to reverse this trend. Millions of Americans want exactly what places like Jackson County offer. It’s a generational opportunity for rural areas. My statement to Auron was calling young conservative guys to leave places where they are politically isolated, and put themselves in situations where they share cultural and political commitments with their neighbors, because that way they can be more effective in championing the cause of rural, middle America.

Do you feel like people who criticize a lot of your online writing or social media posts, don’t get your sense of humor, or don’t really understand the context of the online world you operate in?

Almost certainly.

When I was talking to Josh, he was talking about how there is less privacy living in a small town. Everyone knows who you are. They see you out at lunch or wherever. Does living in a small town, with the inherent visibility that you have there, change the way you think about your online persona and social media posts in any way?

Well, I am acutely aware that I am new to town and also that I was introduced by an inaccurate news story. Many of my new neighbors have met me and my family, and are getting to know my character, but others just know what the liberal media has said. Naturally, my new neighbors are a new part of my audience that I take into account now.

You and C.Jay have sort of become the poster children for this project whether you wanted to or not. Has Josh or anyone talked to you about being a little less visible and public, especially with regards to this project?

Above all else, I want to be the poster child for my church. God has blessed me with a large platform from which I can speak biblical truths to the key issues of the day to a large audience, which I will continue to do. That said, my church is taking an increasing share of my time as it rapidly grows. That’s my primary focus and calling, and my public platform is in service to that calling.

Looking back on it now, are there things you’d do differently in terms of how you’ve introduced yourself in Jackson County?

I obviously would have liked to have met people before sensationalist reporting made the first impression. But that, of course, was not up to me.

What are your personal goals in Jackson County?

I would like to have a strong, thriving church and to watch my sons play on State Championship football teams for Jackson County High School.

What do you hope Jackson County and Gainesboro look like in 10 to 15 years?

A lot like it does today. Lots of farms, pretty nature, and warm, friendly people. I do hope that RidgeRunner’s efforts bring more industry and commerce to the area and that everyone, locals and newcomers, are thriving because of it. If newcomers are all doing fine, but the rest of the county isn’t, that’s a failure. I’d like to see a full-sized grocery store come here. Selfishly, probably a golf course, too. Above all else, I want to see our church be a blessing and a place of hope for everyone.

The Ritual Separation of Israel (Genesis 35:1-29)

Boniface Option — Tue, 14 Oct 2025 11:03:21 GMT

This is the thirty-fifth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

After the rebellion of Simeon and Levi and their destruction and looting of Shechem, there is a problem. The children of Israel, the Seed people, cannot leave the Land of Canaan, but they also cannot conquer it (yet). What are they to do? How do they live in such circumstances?

Jacob’s Return to Bethel

Following Simeon’s and Levi’s treachery, God spoke to Jacob and told him to go back to Bethel and now build an altar there. Before they leave, Jacob purifies his household. All the Canaanite gods that the people in his house, whether his children, servants, or slaves worshipped them, all had to be put away. They had to be purified, presumably washed, and they had to change their clothing. What is the point of this? It is a radical, ritual separation. It is the answer to the question of, “We must live here with the Canaanites, we cannot yet conquer the Canaanites, so how do we live among them?” You live among them by external rites and rituals that separate you from them. You do not worship their gods. You bow down to your God in a way that is visibly and obviously distinct from them. It isn’t merely by imperceptible, internal heart change. It is external rites, rituals, and ceremonial way of life that point to what is internal.

Jacob took their foreign gods, and the earrings (which symbolically pertained to the Canaanite religion; this is not a condemnation of earrings per se), and Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree. He did not destroy them but left them behind in Shechem.

As they went about their journey, God put fear into the hearts of the Canaanites. Ordinarily, you would expect the Canaanites to avenge the city of Shechem against so small a force, but God went before the children of Israel and protected them. This is literally the same phrase that is said by Rahab of Israel in the book of Joshua. Everyone is terrified of you. God gave them safe passage to Bethel, and he built the altar that God commanded there, naming it God of the House of God. Here we are told of the death of Deborah, the nursemaid of Rebekah, though we are never told of Rebekah’s death. It seems as if she is a stand-in for Rebekah, who must have died years earlier. And paralleling the hidden Canaanite gods, she too is buried beneath a terebinth tree, and the place was called “the oak of weeping.” The altar is not just the place where God meets with his people, but it is also a place where the resurrection is anticipated. Deborah’s body is buried, like Abraham and Sarah, rather than burned, because of the hope that they will one day be raised.

After the construction of the altar and the death of Deborah, God appears to Jacob once more, reiterating Jacob’s name change to Israel; He commands Jacob to be fruitful and multiply, just as he told Adam and Noah. He promises that a nation and company of nations will come from his body. He confirms that the promise of the Land that He made to Abraham and Isaac now belongs to him. And after God went up from talking with him, Jacob set up another memorial pillar in Bethel, poured wine and oil on top of it, and once again, called the name of the place Bethel.

But they did not stay in this place. They continued sojourning through the land. Before they had reached Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, a very hard labor. The midwife comforted her with news of a son, but as her soul departed, she named him Ben-Oni, “son of my sorrow.” Rather than make commentary on Rachel’s psychological state and whether she was disobedient in naming him this (she was not), we should instead notice that this is directly correlated to the curse. The woman would have a painful labor in childbirth. What Rachel is doing is naming her son, with her dying breath, affirming what God has said is true. She has experienced great pain and is dying, and this child indeed is the son of her sorrow. But Jacob changes his name. Not because he disrespects his wife’s final wishes, but gives him a name pertaining to him just as the other name pertains to his mother. This is the son of Jacob’s right hand. The right hand is the place of prominence. Jacob is declaring that this son is his heir, the replacement for Joseph, chronologically at this point long presumed dead. Here, near Bethlehem, Jacob sets up yet another pillar for his beloved wife, again testifying in the hope of the resurrection.

Jacob then continued on journeying a little further. And his eldest son, Reuben, lay with Billah, Jacob’s concubine. It is worth pointing out that this is Rachel’s maidservant and this happens after Rachel’s death. She is essentially a freewoman now. Why did Reuben do this? He did this to seize his father’s authority. To set himself up as the heir. This is a type of the sin of Ham, who stole his father’s robe of authority to set himself up as the ruler. Jacob is a prince, and taking one of Jacob’s wives is not merely a sexual sin, incest, but is a political one. It is treason. The phrase “Jacob heard about it” is often taken to mean Jacob heard and did nothing, but that is not accurate. Jacob did do something. His eldest son is disqualified from inheriting because of this. The phrase is there to alert us to the fact that this did not happen in secret.

At the end of this section, Jacob’s twelve sons are listed in order of their mothers. Reuben, Simeon, and Levi are listed first and are already disqualified. Judah would soon be as well. Joseph, at this point in the narrative, is already presumed dead. The sons of the concubines are then listed. And then the section closes with the death of Isaac. Jacob came to his father at Hebron just before he died. And there, Jacob and Esau together buried their father.

Conclusion

The most important takeaway from this passage is the ritual separation of Israel from Canaan. How do you live among a wicked people and not become like them? It is an important question for the Christian today, just as relevant to us as it was to the children of Jacob four thousand years ago. American Christians typically reject anything that appears to be a rite or ritual. We only care about internal, “spiritual” things. But God has given us rites, rituals, and ceremonies. We are ritually separated from the world, just as Jacob’s children were separated from the Canaanites. He has given us a ritual washing of purification, just as Jacob’s household was purified at Shechem. He has given us ritual food that only those who have passed through these waters have access to eat. A common phrase in contemporary American evangelicalism is “in the world and not of it.” But how is this accomplished? Just by giving intellectual assent to all the right ideas? By affirming the right propositions? It is true we must do those things. But is it enough? The answer, of course, is “no.” God has given us these signs and symbols that make us His people. That separates us out from the world. We must do them and live in light of them. You are a baptized people. You are a people who eat with God, a people who eat God. You are not like the rest of the world. Because you are a baptized and communing people. You must live like a baptized and communing people. It is the sign that creates the reality. It is the sign that is the reality. You live in a world that belongs to your Lord, Jesus Christ, but it is not yet fully realized. You are in Canaan, but Canaan is not yet conquered. You must live as a people who have been separated out by baptism and by the eucharist. A holy and faithful people united around these signs that God has given us. Trust Jesus, trust in His promises, trust in the signs He has given you, and wait for the kingdoms of this world to become the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

The Rape of Dinah (Genesis 34:1-31)

Boniface Option — Mon, 13 Oct 2025 16:16:07 GMT

This is the thirty-fourth part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

The Dinah incident is another story in Genesis that seems to be out of place, that doesn’t seem to fit with the rest. You might be reading along with your family, and all of a sudden, you get to this and ask, “Why is this in here!?” There actually is very important theology in this story. Several theological themes are present here just beneath the surface. The sign of God’s covenant is used as a weapon of destruction, and two sons of Jacob disqualify themselves from being his heir. There is much more to this story than meets the eye.

The Assault on Dinah

In the previous chapter, in verse 18, in the King James Version, the name for the city is translated as Salem, the city of Shechem. Other versions, including the New King James Version, translate the word Salem, which means peace, as modifying the verb. It is indeed ambiguous. It could mean, “they arrived ‘shalom’/safely in the city of Shechem” or “they arrived in Salem, the city of Shechem.” Given that the city of Salem has already made an appearance in Genesis with Abraham, and that it seems somewhat odd that nowhere else their safety when arriving somewhere is made mention of, it is much more likely that this is a geographical reference point. Given that the current location of what is called “Shechem” is about a day’s journey north of Jerusalem, the two are at least very close. That “the city of Shechem” is or is connected to Jerusalem plays a role in the theology of this passage.

A second thing to note before we dig in is that Dinah must be at least 15 or 16 years old for this story to make any sense. That she is at least a young woman means this story’s placement is not in chronological order. Joseph would have been in his early 20s at this point and was already in Egypt when this story took place. Many Old Testament books are not given in a linear chronology. They usually follow a chronological order, but when one is out of order, this means that there is special theological importance for this particular story to be presented first. What that is we shall get to shortly.

Dinah leaves her family to go into the city to visit friends. Often, commentators will say something like “What is she doing being friends with Canaanites!?” Well, it is true that the Canaanites were indeed wicked, but the wickedness of the Amorites has not yet been filled up. They would not reach maximal wickedness until the time of the conquest. Here, there are still peaceable Canaanites, and many are willing to convert to worship the true God, as we shall see. Israel’s job is to minister to the Gentiles, and Dinah’s relationship with the women of the city is part of this.

But Shechem, like Abimelech and Pharaoh before him, sees the beautiful young woman and wants her. Initially, he is playing the exact same role as the Serpent attacking the Bride. He takes her, lies with her, and violates her. But there is a contrast here with a similar incident in 2 Samuel with David’s son Amnon. Amnon did the same thing but immediately hated the woman. Shechem loves her and wants to marry her. Now, obviously, it is not a good basis for a marriage for a young woman to be stolen and violated by the man who wants to be her husband, but given all that Shechem, his father, and the men of the city do after this shows that he appears to be sincere in his affection for her.

Jacob hears what has happened. And commentators almost uniformly take his inaction as a sign that Jacob has abdicated his role as patriarch and that he is bad. But what does the text actually say? Jacob waited until his sons returned from the field to say or do anything. Jacob is a king, and he is waiting for his junior regents to come and take counsel together. He is not paralyzed by inaction, but rather shows the patience of a king. Further, as we have seen with Laban and others, the brother is given the role of negotiating the courtship of his sister and not the father. It is not a patriarchal society so much as it is a fratriarchy. They need to be involved in this. And they are very grieved and angry. Their anger is justifiable, even if their later actions are not.

Hamor speaks to them, seeking peace. He wants Dinah to be given in marriage to his son, and their daughters to be given to Jacob’s sons. He wants them to dwell in the land, to deal and trade in it, and for them to become rich. Shechem also speaks and is willing to give Dinah whatever dowry they ask for her. The offer of a dowry is significant. This means that Dinah would be a fully endowed wife, with very high status, and could not be easily (further) abused or discarded. What his statement shows is that he is willing to do whatever must be done to make things right.

The sons of Jacob answered him deceitfully. They ask for something they do not even really want, but as part of a scheme to destroy. They demand that Shechem be circumcised and all their males be circumcised as well. They want them to join the sons of Israel as one people. Though their use of the sign of circumcision shows they truly do not understand it, in one sense, but in another, they understand it more than they realize. Circumcision really would make them one people. The Shechemites really do become part of Israel. They are no longer Canaanites or Gentiles. That is their demand, either do this or we take Dinah and are gone. One thing that should be noted is that if their offer had been sincere, this was actually a perfect lex talionis condition. Shechem would be wounded and violated on the very organ used to violate Dinah. And the end result is that they would become brothers and be at peace.

Hamor and Shechem speak to the men of the city, and in this speech, they have to convince the men of this city to do this. Some view their speech as revealing the wickedness of their hearts that they, too, are operating deceitfully, that this is merely a means for them to acquire Israel’s wealth. Perhaps this is indeed the case, or perhaps this is what Hamor had to say to these men to get them to do this. In any event, the men of the city were all circumcised and thus incorporated into the people of Israel. That they did this seems to be evidence that the liturgical ministry of Jacob has had at least some effect on them. They are at peace with him, they wish to maintain that peace, and submit to the knife of circumcision.

Then, on the third day, again in Genesis—a third day where judgment comes—when the men of the city were in great, debilitating pain, that Simeon and Levi took their swords, attacked the city, and killed all the men. They killed Hamor and Shechem, took Dinah, and left. Then they plundered the city as recompense for the crime committed against their daughter. The sheep, the oxen, the donkeys, all that was in the city and in the field, they took. They took as slaves all the women and children. And they even went through every house to take what they could.

What is interesting here is that if this is indeed Salem, is that this is a type, or perhaps an antitype, of the final destruction of Jerusalem. God destroys those who falsely use the sign of His covenant, He destroys the false circumcision, He rescues His daughter, the church, and as Jesus says, commenting on this in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, wherever the carcass is, the eagles will gather. The city is looted and plundered. The whole reason not one stone was left upon another is because, as the temple burned, all the gold melted and dripped into the cracks of the stones. The Romans busted up every stone just to get that gold. They also took every man, woman, and child left alive and carried them away into slavery. What happened to Salem in Genesis 34 is a preview of what would happen to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar came, and then when Titus finally came. The only difference, however, is that the wicked sons of Jacob were responsible for sacking peaceful, converted Gentiles, and in the latter cases, the Gentiles would be the ones destroying the wicked sons of Jacob.

Jacob hears of what his sons have done and is unhappy with them. Again, Jacob is a king responsible for his entire kingdom. He is in a very precarious position where the people of the land massively outnumber him. The actions of his sons have put the entire kingdom in jeopardy. But his sons respond like petulant children. They justify their actions because they feel their sister has been treated like a harlot. But, despite the very grave offense done to Dinah, she has not been treated like one. She was made a princess of the Canaanite city-state. The crime done to her did not justify their reaction.

In the next chapter, we get an indication of why Jacob’s sons themselves behave like Canaanites, slaughtering, looting, and plundering the city: there has been toleration of foreign gods among his household. Were Simeon and Levi among those worshipping the foreign gods? We are not told specifically, no. But it would make their actions, and their abuse of God’s sign of circumcision and the promises therein, make more sense. They do not actually care about the covenant, only their own personal vengeance. These two sons have disqualified themselves as Jacob’s heir, and as we continue through Genesis, we will see all the other sons, except one, demonstrate their unworthiness to receive the promises.

Conclusion

Besides the theology of this story, its practical application is that a lack of regard for God’s covenant correlates with a desire for personal vengeance. If you do not believe in God’s covenant promises and His grace to His people, then you will not believe God will be the one to avenge His people. The Canaanites had apparently repented. But that was not enough for the unfaithful man. The unfaithful man demands that his anger be sated by blood, and the blood of the circumcision rite was not nearly enough.

A Christian people must not be like Simeon and Levi. When God moves, as He apparently had done with the people of Shechem, we should rejoice that our enemies and God’s enemies become His friends and our brothers. We should delight in the grace that has been shown to us being shown to others. And so, people of God, trust that the Lord will avenge you, He will right every wrong, and He will do so in ways that demonstrate not just his righteousness and holy wrath, but also in ways that show His grace and lovingkindness. Trust in both the mercy and righteousness of the Lord. In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Peace Between Israel and Edom (Genesis 33:1-20)

Boniface Option — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 15:00:00 GMT

This is the thirty-third part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

Jacob meeting Esau is supposed to be the moment where Jacob “repents” for “what he did to” Esau. But if you have paid careful attention to the narrative of Genesis, Esau despised the covenant, despised his birthright, and participated in his father’s scheme to deny Jacob anything. God orchestrated a great reversal of this plot; Esau was the one who ended up with nothing. Still, God blessed him and made him the great nation of Edom, and when Jacob returns to the Land, this event is not Jacob’s repentance, but Jacob setting right what his brother and father had destroyed.

Jacob Meets Esau

After wrestling with God at Peniel, Jacob sees Esau coming with his army. He divided the company again, the maidservants and their children in front, then Leah and her children, and lastly Rachel and her son. But he did not put the women and children at the front and hide in the back; he went over before all of them and bowed to the ground seven times before Esau, paying homage to him.

What does Esau do? He runs to greet his brother, embraces him (this would look like wrestling, just as with God), then kisses him, and the two of them wept together. He looked up and asked him who all the women and children were that were with him. Jacob told him these were the children God had given him. Then each of the mothers and their respective children came and bowed down before Esau.

Esau asks him what Jacob meant by all the animals he had given him. Jacob told him these are meant to find favor in your sight, calling him Lord. Esau, at the moment, is a lord of the Land. He has dominion there that Jacob and his descendants would not have for a few hundred years. Esau tells him he doesn’t need the gifts. But Jacob insisted. Receive them as a sign that I have indeed found favor in your sight. The phrase in verse 11 is especially illuminating: “Please take my blessing.” After this urging, Esau indeed took it.

Esau asks for Jacob and his company to journey with him; he would lead them, and they would follow. What is he doing here? He is asserting authority as the older brother. He will follow, they will lead. But Jacob tells him, both the children and the flocks are too weak to go with them. Esau and his men travel quickly. Jacob cannot. Jacob tells him to go on ahead without him.

Esau suggests leaving some of his men with Jacob. Why would he do this? Because he wants to help protect his brother’s family as they travel over land, a very dangerous thing. Possibly. Because he wants to assert his authority over Jacob and his host, as the older brother? This is likely as well. But Jacob rejects this as well. We won’t need them. So Esau went home to Seir. Jacob, however, did not go to Seir. He went to a place called Succoth, which means tabernacle, or tent, or booth. It was named such because this is where Jacob built booths for his flocks, and also built a palace for himself.

At some point after this, he journeyed to Shechem, in the northern part of the Land, and purchased land outside the city of Shechem. There, like his fathers had done, he erected an altar to worship, naming it literally, “God, the God of Wrestles-with-God.”

Conclusion

If this passage is not really about Jacob’s supposed “repentance,” what is it really about? Isaac had intended to give Esau not just a double portion of the inheritance as was owed to the firstborn, but the entirety of the inheritance, leaving Jacob with nothing. Isaac was deceived into giving it all to Jacob, leaving Esau with nothing. What Jacob has done here is set things right. He has righted his father’s wrongs. He has given Esau the portion of the inheritance his father stole from him. Jacob doesn’t have to do this. Esau even gave him an out, but Jacob insisted. Jacob was righting covenantal wrongs. The inheritance was always supposed to go to Jacob, but Isaac, in his rebellion, had messed everything up in both directions.

Secondly, Esau still does not seem to get it. The tangible blessings that Jacob had received should have been evidence to Esau that Jacob was indeed the one God had chosen to carry forward the covenant. Jacob and his family paid Esau homage; Jacob called him “lord,” but it should have been the other way around, had Esau had regard for the covenant. Esau’s rage had been sated, but bringing the people to Seir would have been an Egypt situation. Jacob’s family would have been under Esau’s yoke. Jacob could not bring them there. Esau’s insistence to leave men with them would mean the same thing, that they would have to go to Seir, and be under Esau’s dominion. Jacob refuses to do this and never goes to Seir at all. He remains in Succoth, then goes even further away from Seir, to Shechem.

What do these two points mean for us? First, the people of God must be those who put things right, even at great cost to ourselves. When a man’s ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him. We should put an end to rivalries and feuds, even if it is our “right” to remain offended and keep a fight going.

Secondly, the people of God cannot be led by the ungodly. Jacob goes to great pains to be at peace with Esau, who again is a wicked man who despises the covenant and is at war with Jacob through no fault of Jacob’s. He does all he can to bring peace between the two, but he refuses to be led by him. This is an important lesson for the church to understand in our own age. You can and should do what you must to be at peace, even with those who hate you, but you cannot let them dictate anything to you. We will not journey with you to Seir. You will not leave your men with us to lead us there. We will not tailor what we say or what we believe according to what you want. We will go to Succoth, we will go to Shechem, we will not go with you to Seir. We are at peace with you, but we will not join with you.

This is an apparently very difficult concept for modern Christian people. We assume being at peace with those who hate God, His Word, and His church means we have to change what we believe; that we have to adapt to contemporary cultural attitudes. But the church is a separate city within the cities of men, just as Jacob was a separate people living within the Land of Canaan. He did what he must in order to be at peace, but under no conditions could he join with them.

The same must be true of us today. People will call believing all of the Bible and taking it seriously “hate.” They will hate you for it. And your job is to bless those who curse you, which does not mean simply submitting to them and their way of life, but something far, far more difficult. It is easy just to capitulate. It is much harder to live a Christlike life of blessing those who hate you while remaining steadfast in your faithfulness to God. But God has called us to do difficult things. He gives you grace to do difficult things just as He gave it to Jacob. God goes before you, just as He went before Jacob. He has promised to be with you. And so, people of God, truly love your enemies, just as Jacob did here. And trust in the faithfulness of God to bring peace.

In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

How You Can Help In The Struggle Ahead

Boniface Option — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 16:29:55 GMT

The past few weeks have clarified what is required to stand up for the Faith, my country, and my family. It has been obvious for my entire life that faithful Christian belief, public order and decency, and even the very existence of my nation have been under intense assault from all corners.

The onslaught against all that is good and true and beautiful has now reached a new, more violent level. It is not enough that voices who stand against it are marginalized, cancelled, and pushed to the fringes; now the enemy believes they must be killed. For the last few years, it seemed as if we were on the precipice of bitter political, cultural, and religious conflict, and now it has become clear that conflict has arrived.

It is abundantly clear to me that, in this moment, men are called to be bold and faithful and trust the Lord Jesus Christ in the path that He has laid before us. Nearly every day, I get questions about what in the world I am doing here in Tennessee as I seek to build up a church, minister to the community around us, and raise a family.

I chose to move here because I believe this is one of the most significant efforts taking place in our moment of monumental political, cultural, and religious strife—new neighborhoods being built with the church featuring centrally. We have the opportunity to rebuild Christendom, one brick at a time, concentrate our efforts in one location, and influence the direction of the battles ahead. Everyone who wants to see Christendom renewed should want what we are doing to succeed. If you want the church, Christian leaders, and all Christians to become bolder, this is the means to making that happen.

To this end, I am obligated to do what Christians have done for thousands of years now (even though I don’t like this part): I need your financial help. Over the next few months, we will be engaging in a fundraising drive for a full church building on land that we are securing at this very moment. In the near term, we would like to complete the funding for this land—we are VERY close; just a few thousand dollars away.

So today, I am asking you to help me do this. There are battles ahead that require more than what I can do alone, or even the handful of guys in my circle are able to do alone. If you have been blessed by anything that I have done, written, or said—or even appreciate the Christian vision of my friends like CJay Engel, or Josh Abbotoy, or others are putting forth in this region—please consider helping financially. The funds used here will go to the land, general church needs, and to protecting my own family.

Please (now, while you are thinking about it!) go to whitleyvillechurch.com/donate (you may have to copy and paste into the browser!) for digital payments.

For recurring payments, checks, or anything outside of that, please send me or the church an email: contact@whitleyvillechurch.com

Not everyone can give financially, so for those who cannot, please continue to pray for our efforts here. Spread the word, rally around us when we are attacked, and stay in communication with me. We really do read everything that is sent our way. We love the feeling of camaraderie and loyalty we have for you all in our time of religious and political struggle.

Blessings in Christ,

Pastor Andrew Isker

No, Jacob Was Not "Converted" At Peniel (Genesis 32:1-32)

Boniface Option — Fri, 26 Sep 2025 15:10:00 GMT

This is the thirty-second part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

Jacob wrestling with God at Peniel is popularly treated as the moment of his conversion. But as we have been going through Genesis, we have seen that Jacob has been a believing and faithful man his entire life. The scene at Peniel is actually God revealing to Jacob what his entire life has been about. He has struggled and suffered against men his whole life, but the struggle ultimately was with God and not men. Jacob’s life is a theological illustration that faithfulness to God’s covenant requires you to fight.

Jacob Strives with Men

As Jacob went on his way, he saw the angels of God. He saw God’s army camped out in the field, ready for war. God had promised to be with him. Jacob had, this entire time, apprehended this with eyes of faith, but here he gets to see it with his own eyes. He renamed the place after this, naming it Mahanaim, a “siege camp.”

As he re-entered the Land, he sent messengers to his brother in his territory of Edom. He tells them to tell Esau that he has become very rich in the land of Padan Aram. They come back to tell him that Esau is coming to him, with four hundred men. There is exactly one reason why Esau would gather four hundred men to go meet Jacob—for war.

Jacob understands this immediately. He was afraid and distressed. It is not a lack of faith to be fearful here. He should be alarmed at this, even if he trusts that God is still with him. He does what any faithful man should do and takes prudent action. He divides his company into two parts so that one can flee if the other is attacked. He also appeals to God, promising faithfulness if God would bring them back to the Land, and admits his own unworthiness of God’s grace to him. And he appeals to God’s covenant and promise that He has made to Jacob. Do not let your people be destroyed, Lord, you said they would make my descendants as numerous as the sand of the sea, so you cannot let them be destroyed now.

That night, they made their own war camp and prepared gifts to be sent to Esau to buy him off. He had his servants bring each drove to Esau separately, the goats, then the sheep, then the camels, then the cattle, and then the donkeys. Putting distance between the droves so they would arrive in slow succession. Why did he do this? Because he knew his brother Esau’s character. Remember, this man had no ability to delay gratification; the gifts had to be spaced out to maximize their impact. He was like a child on Christmas morning, instead of getting all his presents all at once, being forced to open each one separately, waiting for his turn. Jacob is making a bet on his brother’s own incorrigible gluttony.

Jacob Strives with God

That night, he took his wives, his concubines, his sons, and they crossed over the Jabbok, which is a tributary of the Jordan. They all went on ahead into the Land, while he stayed back. The geography here is important. He is not quite yet in the Land. Jacob was alone, and a man showed up and wrestled with him the entire night. Now, if you were Jacob, who would you assume this man was? You would assume that a guy showing up in the middle of the night and fighting with you would be your brother Esau. The man did not beat Jacob, and at the end, he touched his hip socket and pulled it out of joint, telling him to let Him go. Jacob refused to let him go unless he spoke a blessing. You do not allow your enemy just to leave until he makes peace with you. The Man asked Jacob his name, to which he responded. And here he renames him Israel, “He who strives with God.” He tells him that he has not been struggling with men, but also with God. And Jacob asks Him His name, but the Man refuses to give it. Why do you ask my name? (Essentially, I am the one doing the blessing and need to know your name; you don’t need to know mine.) And then the Man blessed Jacob, was at peace with him, and left.

Jacob named this place Peniel, “Face of God,” because he had seen God face to face and lived. Now he hadn’t really seen him; it was dark out. That too is theologically significant. The Old Covenant is in the dark. Only in the New Covenant do we see God’s face in the light.

At this point, Jacob crosses over the Jabbok limping. The limp, too, is theologically significant. This is a foot and leg wound. The promise of Genesis 3 is that the Seed’s foot would be crushed, whereas the Serpent’s head would be crushed. The Seed walks through life wounded and limping, but the Serpent is killed. And as a memorial of this, from this point on, the children of Jacob did not eat the muscle on the hip socket.

Conclusion

All of Jacob’s life, his struggles with his brother Esau, the struggles with his father Isaac in the grip of rebellion against the covenant, the struggles with his treacherous uncle Laban, and now the struggle with his brother again, all of these fights Jacob was not fighting merely with human beings. All these God ultimately raised up for Jacob. He raised them up to mature Jacob.

This is true of the whole history of God’s people. And so it is with us, as well. All the enemies that appear are there because God wanted them to be. They are there for us to deal with faithfully and to further trust Him to lead us and defend us. Even Satan and his host are this way.

The great error that is often found in the church today is the idea that Satan has a separate power and dominion apart from God. Something like Manichaeism. That good and evil have equal power, 50-50. But that is not what the Bible teaches at all. The Bible teaches that Satan is a created being who rebelled against God, and that God has 100% of the power. That Satan cannot do one single thing unless God permits him to do it. You see this in Job 1, for instance. Even this enemy, this great enemy, is one where we are ultimately struggling with God.

All of you have had conflict in life; most of you have had very serious conflicts with other people. With family, with erstwhile friends, with employers and coworkers or employees, with random violent people, or even in actual war. All the enemies that you have had to fight with, you thought, if I can just get over this conflict, if I can win, then things will be fine. But ultimately, your struggle is with God. You need to be at peace with Him before you can have peace anywhere else.

The same is true of the great conflicts for the church at large. All the enemies of the faith, the ones with very real power, are no different than Philistines or Assyrians that God has raised up. Our great challenge is not “what do we do with the people pushing utter degeneracy everywhere? How do we defeat them?” Our great challenge is how to get right with God? What have we done against God that caused Him to raise them up in the first place? That is what we give our fuller attention to.

The lesson of Jacob’s life is what Jesus says in Matthew 11:12: the kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. The covenant is kept, is maintained, and is brought forward into the future by those who are ready to fight for it; by those who are committed to the struggle and the suffering it entails. When your life feels like a slog, like it is nothing but conflict everywhere, that is because God has put you in that exact place for a reason. He wants you to remain faithful to Him, obeying what He has commanded, and to go through everything that comes at you. The Christian life is a life of war, and not merely war against flesh and blood (which sometimes does happen), but ultimately spiritual war.

So people of God, trust Him, that He is good, that whatever He raises up He will also give you the grace to overcome. Trust Him. Trust that He will be the one who brings peace. In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!

Jacob's Exodus From Pharaoh Laban (Genesis 30:25-31:21)

Boniface Option — Thu, 18 Sep 2025 16:06:23 GMT

This is the thirty-first part in a multipart series on the Book of Genesis. You can find the others here:

Introduction

The story of Jacob in Padan Aram is the opening melody in the grand symphony that is the Exodus. Like a great symphony, the first few notes often start out as quiet, small, and simple; there is very little fanfare, and only a few instruments can be heard. But the theme of those opening notes later crescendos into glorious harmonies. That is what is taking place in this passage here. This great symphony is beginning to be played. But like the aficionado of classical music, where only the well-trained ear can notice such subtleties, we must have the same kind of well-trained ears to hear the melody of Exodus in Jacob’s slavery and liberation from “Pharaoh” Laban.

The Tyranny of Laban

After Jacob’s service to Laban for his wives has come to an end, he announces to Laban his intention to return to his home. He has a duty as the Seed to return to the Land. He has served his time for his wives and their progeny; now he wants to leave. Laban instead makes an offer. On face value, it seems to be an innocent offer from Laban. “The Lord has blessed me because of you, so please stay. Name your wages and I will give them to you.” It is subtle and easy to miss, but Laban is again putting Jacob in the position of slavery. Jacob refuses to be given a gift. This might seem odd, especially if we are viewing this in the context of Laban lording over Jacob, reducing him from a son to a slave. Why would he refuse a gift? Abraham refused a gift from the king of Sodom. Abraham refused a gift from the Hittites. The gifts must come from God, not from the Canaanites, and not from a stand-in for the Canaanites like Laban. To accept the gift is to accept submission to the gift-giver. The only gift-giver that the Seed can submit to is God Himself. So Jacob must accept this term of slavery. He must receive his wealth from God’s hand alone.

So Jacob proposes that he receive the minority of Laban’s flocks. Most of the sheep and goats are white, so Jacob takes the ones that are not. And in this way, the deal is unambiguous; the sheep that are white are his, the ones that are not are Jacob’s. Laban agrees to this. But what does Laban do? He removes all the ones that would have been Jacob’s and gives them to his sons! And he puts three days of distance between the two of them. Once again, “three days” comes into focus here; three days being frequently the time of judgment in the Bible.

Jacob uses a folk method as the sheep are drinking from the troughs. Rods of green poplar, almond, and chestnut trees, with peeled strips of white. And notice the theme of “the well as the place of courtship and fertility” appears once again here. The flocks drink at the wells and mate, and the sheep they conceive all come out streaked, speckled, and spotted.

Then Jacob applies this method to the stronger of the flock and does not apply it to the more feeble sheep and goats. This result is that the stronger are all his and the weaker are all Laban’s. Bear in mind, he doesn’t do this until after Laban had cheated him in the initial deal. What is Jacob doing in the context of the Exodus? He is plundering the Egyptians, so to speak. He is building up his house with the wealth of his adversary and is doing so totally within the bounds of the deal. In doing so, Jacob becomes exceedingly prosperous with large flocks, male and female slaves, and camels and donkeys.

Jacob hears Laban’s sons complaining about him, that he has taken away all that belonged to Laban. They accuse him of stealing their father’s wealth and their own inheritance. What is the problem here? Before Jacob came, Laban was not wealthy with large herds, but since Jacob’s coming, Laban had grown very rich. There is a reason Laban had connived to keep Jacob around. The Lord was blessing Laban through Jacob. The wicked are accusing the righteous of theft when the righteous were the entire reason for them having any wealth in the first place. Laban, too, now no longer had the same disposition toward Jacob as he had before. It is at this point that the Lord spoke to Jacob and commanded him to return to the land of his fathers and that, again, like He had said at Bethel, “He would be with him.”

So Jacob called his wives to him, explained that their father’s countenance toward him had changed from friend to enemy. But, he tells them, “the God of my father has been with me.” He tells them that he has served their father with all his might, yet their father has deceived him and changed his wages ten times. As a result of Laban’s treachery, God has blessed Jacob and given him the wealth of Laban. Just as in the Exodus, God judges Egypt by destroying that nation and their wealth, and the wealth of Egypt is given to the Israelites.

Jacob then recounted a dream that he had as the flocks conceived, where rams leaped upon the flocks that were his, and the Angel of the Lord spoke to him, calling him by name. The angel told him that He had seen all that Laban was doing to him. He announced to him that He was the God that he had met at Bethel, and again He commanded Jacob to gather his household and return to the Land.

Rachel and Leah replied to Jacob, saying, “There is nothing left for them in their father’s house.” Their father had consumed their dowry, their mohar. He has, in effect, sold them as slave women to be concubines. The riches that Jacob had gained during this time, God had given them to be theirs and their children’s inheritance. Both Rachel and Leah understood what God had done for them during this time. They understood their father’s tyranny and God’s deliverance of them from it. They understood that it was time for Laban to “let God’s people go.”

So they gathered everything and everyone and left in haste. At this point, Rachel had stolen her father’s teraphim, the household idols. What this means we will get to in the next passage, if the Lord wills. But here Jacob is fleeing without telling Laban. He crossed the river Euphrates with his household and journeyed to the edge of the Land, in the mountains of Gilead.

Conclusion

Jacob and his house had been tyrannized by Laban, and God had vindicated them. Laban had made Jacob into a slave and his daughters into slave women. He had attempted to cheat Jacob out of any wealth that he owed him for his service. Laban had consumed the dowry of his daughters, leaving them destitute. What Laban had done was attack the Seed and the Bride, like Pharaoh. And God was delivering them from him and from that place, returning them back to the Land.

What we see in this passage is the wicked having great power and using that power against the righteous. We see the righteous accused by the wicked of doing the very things that the wicked are doing! And we see God prospering the righteous even in such conditions and ultimately delivering them from this terrible estate.

It is not difficult to see ourselves in this story. To see ourselves both as individuals and collectively as a people here. We seek to be faithful to God, while the wicked have all the power and all the wealth, while the wicked dominate everything. Yet, day after day, we pursue what the Lord has called us to; we pursue faithfulness in our daily lives, and God is with us. He prospers the things we do, He blesses the work of our hands, even as we toil under the tyranny of the wicked over us. What will the end result be? Well, we cannot say for certain in each of our own circumstances. We each have successes and failures, even as we pursue faithfulness and righteousness in obedience to Him. But the Lord has promised to be with us, just as He promised to be with Jacob. Just like Jacob, all that we have, all the successes we have, are all from His hand. And the end result, collectively, is that the wicked do not ultimately prosper in their tyranny. Proverbs 13:22 might be the most neglected and most important proverb of our age:

A good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children,
But the wealth of the sinner is stored up for the righteous.

Laban was wicked and consumed his children’s inheritance. He was not a good man. And the end result is that his wealth, which had been given to him by the Lord, was ultimately stored up for the righteous to have.

It is easy to be dismayed when you see the great wealth and power that the wicked have today and how it is used to do great evil. It is easy to feel weak and powerless. But you should not be discouraged. You should not be dismayed by this. What is the Lord doing? He is storing all of that up for His people. If we continue in the faith, if we pass this faith on to our children and to those whom the Lord has called, if we devote ourselves to Christ’s kingdom, all that is wielded against His kingdom will one day belong to Him and to His people. Trust in the Lord, trust that the things that He has shown in His word again and again, He will actually do once more. His kingdom will not fail. He loves His people and is with us. All that you strive for, all that you do with all your might in His name, will never be in vain. He will vindicate His people now, just as He vindicated Jacob in Padan Aram and Jacob’s children in Egypt. Trust in the Lord with all your heart, because He will do this. In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!