Genesis 36:43

Gen 36:43 Duke Magdiel, duke Iram: these [be] the dukes of Edom, according to their habitations in the land of their possession: he [is] Esau the father of the Edomites.

Ver. 43. These be the dukes of Edom.] As the principality of Edom began with dukes, and rose to kings; so it returneth to dukes again, after the death of Hadad, in Moses’s time. {1Ch 1:51} It is likely, saith an interpreter, that, upon the unkind dealing of that Hadad, in denying to let Israel pass through his land, the Lord removed the dignity of kings from that commonwealth, and let it be ruled by dukes again; whereof eleven are here by name rehearsed. So sensible is God, and so severe, in punishing the least unkindness done to his people. Julius Pflugius, complaining to the Emperor, by whom he had been employed, of great wrong done him by the Duke of Saxony, received this answer: Have a little patience; tua causa erit mea causa. So saith God to his abused. "He reproveth," yea, deposeth "even kings for their sakes"; {Psa 105:14} and accounts that the whole "world is not worthy of them!" {Heb 11:38} nay, not worth one of them, how mean soever regard of outwards; as Chrysostom expounds it.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gen 36:43. In the land of their possession — While the Israelites dwelt in the house of bondage, and their Canaan was only the land of promise, the Edomites dwelt in their own habitations, and Seir was in their possession. The children of this world have their all in hand, and nothing in hope, while the children of God have often their all in hope, and next to nothing in hand. But, all things considered, it is better to have Canaan in promise than mount Seir in possession.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of Edom came the Idumeans.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 43. He is Esau the father of the Edomites.] That is, The preceding list contains an account of the posterity of Esau, who was the father of Edom. Thus ends Esau's history; for after this there is no farther account of his life, actions, or death, in the Pentateuch.

1. As Esau is so considerable a person in polemic divinity, it may be necessary, in this place especially, to say something farther of his conduct and character. I have already, in several places, endeavoured, and I hope successfully, to wipe off the odium that has been thrown upon this man, (see the notes on chap. xxvii. and chap. xxxiii.), without attempting to lessen his faults; and the unprejudiced reader must see that, previously to this last account we have of him, his character stands without a blot, except in the case of selling his birthright, and his purpose to destroy his brother. To the first he was led by his famishing situation and the unkindness of his brother, who refused to save his life but on this condition; and the latter, made in the heat of vexation and passion, he never attempted to execute, even when he had the most ample means and the fairest opportunity to do it.

Dr. Shuckford has drawn an impartial character of Esau, from which I extract the following particulars: "Esau was a plain, generous, and honest man, for we have no reason, from any thing that appears in his life or actions, to think him wicked beyond other men of his age or times; and his generous and good temper appears from all his behaviour towards his brother. When they first met he was all humanity and affection, and he had no uneasiness when he found that Jacob followed him not to Seir, but went to live near his father. And at Isaac's death we do not find that he made any difficulty of quitting Canaan, which was the very point which, if he had harboured any latent (evil) intentions, would have revived all his resentments. He is indeed called in Scripture the profane Esau; and it is written, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated; but there is, I think, no reason to infer, from any of those expressions, that Esau was a very wicked man, or that God hated or punished him for an immoral life. For,

(1) The sentence here against him is said expressly to be founded, not upon his actions, for it was determined before the children had done good or evil.

(2) God's hatred of Esau was not a hatred which induced him to punish him with any evil, for he was as happy in all the blessings of this life as either Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob; and his posterity had a land designed by God to be their possession, as well as the children of Jacob, and they were put in possession of it much sooner than the Israelites; and God was pleased to protect them in the enjoyment of it, and to caution the Israelites against invading them with a remarkable strictness, De 2:4-5. And as God was pleased thus to bless Esau and his children in the blessings of this life, even as much as he blessed Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, if not more, why may we not hope to find him with them at the last day, as well as Lot or Job or any other good and virtuous man, who was not designed to be a partaker of the blessing given to Abraham?

(3) All the punishment inflicted on Esau was an exclusion from being heir to the blessing promised to Abraham and to his seed, which was a favour not granted to Lot, to Job, to several other very virtuous and good men.

(4) St. Paul, in the passage before cited, only intends to show the Jews that God had all along given the favours that led to the Messiah where he pleased; to Abraham, not to Lot; to Jacob, not to Esau; as at the time St. Paul wrote the Gentiles were made the people of God, not the Jews. 5. Esau is indeed called profane, (βεβηλος,) but I think that word does not mean wicked or immoral, ασεβης or αμαρτωλος. he was called profane for not having that due value for the priest's office which he should have had; and therefore, though I think it does not appear that he was cut off from being the heir of the promises by any particular action in his life, yet his turn of mind and thoughts do appear to have been such as to evidence that God's purpose towards Jacob was founded on the truest wisdom." - SHUCKFORD'S Connections, vol.ii., p.174, c.

The truth is, the Messiah must spring from some ONE family, and God chose Abraham's through Isaac, Jacob, c., rather than the same through Ishmael, Esau, and the others in that line but from this choice it does not follow that the first were all necessarily saved, and the others necessarily lost.

2. To some the genealogical lists in this chapter will doubtless appear uninteresting, especially those which concern Esau and his descendants but it was as necessary to register the generations of Esau as to register those of Jacob, in order to show that the Messiah did not spring from the former, but that he did spring from the latter. The genealogical tables, so frequently met with in the sacred writings, and so little regarded by Christians in general, are extremely useful.

(1) As they are standing proofs of the truth of the prophecies, which stated that the Messiah should come from a particular family, which prophecies were clearly fulfilled in the birth of Christ.

(2) As they testify, to the conviction of the Jews, that the Messiah thus promised is found in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, who incontestably sprang from the last, the only remaining branch of the family of David.

These registers were religiously preserved among the Jews till the destruction of Jerusalem, after which they were all destroyed, insomuch that there is not a Jew in the universe who can trace himself to the family of David; consequently, all expectation of a Messiah to come is, even on their own principles, nugatory and absurd, as nothing remains to legitimate his birth. When Christ came all these registers were in existence. When St. Matthew and St. Luke wrote, all these registers were still in existence; and had they pretended what could not have been supported, an appeal to the registers would have convicted them of a falsehood. But no Jew attempted to do this, notwithstanding the excess of their malice against Christ and his followers; and because they did not do it, we may safely assert no Jew could do it. Thus the foundation standeth sure.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

43. the Edomites] Heb. Edom; cf. Gen_36:9.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The same Edom is Esau. Moses seems particularly attentive to assert both titles for the same person, ver. 8, &c. The time of Esau’s death cannot be ascertained. There is reason to hope that he died penitent; though in the early part of his life, he gave way to his ferocious temper, and became a figure of the reprobate. He lived on terms of friendship with his brother, assisted him to bury his father, &c. (Calmet) --- He was a hunter, indeed; which St. Jerome looks upon as a bad sign: "nunquam venatorem in bonam partem legi," in Micheas v. But this was also in his younger days. (Haydock) --- I have hated Esau, Matthew i., refers to his irreligious posterity, and to his being deprived of temporal advantages, attending the birth-right. (Tirinus) (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Mount Seir is called the land of their possession - While the Israelites dwelt in the house of bondage, and their Canaan was only the land of promise, the Edomites dwelt in their own habitations, and Seir was in their possession. The children of this world have their all in hand, and nothing in hope, while the children of God have often their all in hope, and next to nothing in hand. But, all things considered, it is better to have Canaan in promise than mount Seir in possession.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

מגדיאל MAGDIEL — This is Rome (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 38).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

MAGDIEL. This is Rome. Thus the words of Rashi. But I have not understood this. If we say that this is a prophecy for many days to come, and of times that are far off, then many Roman kings have ruled over the Roman kingdom, and Rome is not a chieftaincy, but rather it is a great empire, terrible, and strong exceedingly, there never having been her like among kingdoms. However, the Rabbis have said in Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, “In reward for having cleared out his utensils in the face of our father Jacob, G-d granted him one hundred provinces, from Se’ir to Magdiel, and Magdiel is Rome, as it is said, The chief of Magdiel, the chief of Iram.” By this the Rabbis intended to say that of which I have already informed you several times, i.e., that that which occurred with the first ones contains allusion to their descendants. Now these last ten chiefs, together with Magdiel who is the tenth, allude that there will be ten Edomite kings. in their sovereignty during the Fourth Kingdom. who will rule over Edom, and the tenth of these will rule over Rome, and from there their kingdom will spread over the whole world. It is to this that the name Magdiel — [from the words gadol and el] — hints that he will magnify himself above every power, as it is said concerning him, And the king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every power., 11:36. And it is this which is written, And as for the ten horns, [which were on the head of the fourth beast], out of this kingdom shall ten kings arise; and another shall arise after them, and he shall be diverse from the former., 7:24. And the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah, “All of the chiefs mentioned by Scripture are descendants of Esau.” And the Rabbis have further interpreted: “The chief of Iram — that he is destined to heap up [l’arom] treasures for the king Messiah.” May he speedily reveal himself.Vayeishev

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.