Alastair's Adversaria - Relitigating The Deception Of Isaac

Episode Date: September 18, 2024

The following is a reading from this post: https://argosy.substack.com/p/32-intellectual-salons-and-a-new. Follow my Substack, the Anchored Argosy, at argosy.substack.com/. See my latest podcasts at adversariapodcast.com/. If you have enjoyed my videos and podcasts, please tell your friends. If you are interested in supporting my videos and podcasts and my research more generally, please consider supporting my work on Patreon (www.patreon.com/zugzwanged), using my PayPal account (bit.ly/2RLaUcB), or by buying books for my research on Amazon (www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/3…3O?ref_=wl_share). You can also listen to the audio of these episodes on iTunes: itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/alast…d1416351035?mt=2.

The following is a version of one of my recent substact posts, re-litigating the deception of Isaac. Of the stories of the Old Testament, one to which I have most often returned is that of Genesis 27, the story of Isaac's blessing of Jacob. Reading scripture intertextually, one routinely finds its stories shedding light upon facets of others. For readers of scripture alert to such intertextuality, this frequently results in striking and hence confirmatory convergences in interpretation. However, in the case of Genesis chapter 27, some of the readers of Scripture whose attentiveness and insight I most admire markedly diverge in their understandings of passage. In a recent substack post, I addressed the question of why Mordecai refused to bow to Haman,

another story upon which readers of Scripture who have influenced me differ considerably. Like the story of Mordecai's refusal, to bow to Haman, the story of the deception of Isaac is one upon which the interpretation of much else hangs. While our understanding of Mordecai's actions will colour our reading of much of the rest of the Book of Esther, the deception of Isaac is a pivotal event in the first and foundational book of the Bible, and our divergences at such a point will likely prove even more consequential. puzzling through the reasons for divergences in reading might help us better to perceive not only key questions of interpretation for Genesis chapter 27, but also matters of interpretive principle more broadly. James Jordan, the first of the three commentators I will consider here, treats the story of the deception of Isaac in places such as his book, Prime Evil Saints, Studies in the Patriarchs of Genesis, and in his series of talks on the life of Jacob.

There are several features of the story to which Jordan directs our attention as interpreters, features that control his own reading. Perhaps the most important of these features relates to the initial explicit characterisation of the chief actors within the story. Jacob Jordan argues is first introduced to us as a complete or blameless man in verse 27 of chapter 25. While most translations use terms such as plain, peaceful or quiet, to translate the term in question, Tam, Jordan insists that this is ducking the most likely force of the term, the same term that is used to characterize Job in Job chapter 1 verse 1. Because they have already determined that Job is the bad guy, they shrink back from the most

reasonable translation of the text. Besides this positive characterization of Jacob, we have the very negative characterization of his brother Esau. In chapter 25 verse 24, Esau is described as having despised his birthright. Further, in chapter 26, verses 34 to 35, we are told of Esau's choice of Canaanite wives for himself, greatly distressing his parents. Esau seems to be wholly unsuited to be the heir of the covenant. Yet, despite his unsuitability, Isaac his father favours him, and has determined to bestow a great blessing upon him, making him lord over his brethren.

In chapter 25, verse 28, we are informed that Isaac, favored Esau as literally rendered, Esau's hunting was in his mouth. Considering also that the Lord had revealed to Rebecca that the older child in her womb should serve the younger, chapter 25 verse 23, Isaac's favoring of Esau over his brother, not to mention that he favors him as a servant of his appetite for game, seems utterly inappropriate. Indeed, Isaac seems to be prepared to jeopardize the covenant for the sake of his appetite. He plays God in favoring Esau on account of his game over the son whom God had indicated should be blessed. Isaac's senses are failing him as he loses his sight,

and notably he allows the lowest senses of taste, touch and smell to override his ears warning that the voice of the son is that of Jacob, not Esau, chapter 27, verse 22. In scripture there are recurring themes of women deceiving and outwitting serpent figures who oppose and or prey upon the righteous seed, The serpent deceived the woman in the garden, and now the serpent is repaid in kind, as his seed are deceived by the daughters of Eve. Rebecca Jordan argues stands in the line of such women,

acting courageously as other women such as Rachel, the Hebrew midwives, Rahab, Jail, Michael and Esther will do later in the scriptural history. Rebecca's deception of her husband, Isaac, rescues him from the great sin that he was about to commit, and ensures that the righteous son was blessed. Isaac's response to the deception is an indication Jordan believes that he recognized that he had not been in the right. Jordan definitely highlights important aspects of the text here, aspects that could be filled out further. For instance, we might notice unflattering resemblances between Isaac and the son that he sinfully favors. At the end of Chapter 25, Esau claiming that he was about to die, despised his birthright for some of Jacob's stew.

A curious feature of Isaac's blessing in Genesis chapter 27 is that it was occasioned by Isaac's belief that he was on the brink of death. In fact, Isaac would live for about 50 years more. Like Esau, driven by animal appetite, Isaac acts precipitously, unilaterally, Rebecca only found out because she overheard the conversation between Isaac and Esau, and recklessly. Jordan's reading might also be strengthened

by consideration of the providential factor involved in Rebecca overhearing Isaac's instruction to Esau. Furthermore, the Lord declares his promise to Jacob at Bethel in the chapter that follows and blesses him in the House of Laban. This would be surprising if Jacob were indeed acting viciously throughout. It seems to me that Jordan's claim that an unwarranted yet determined prejudice against the character of Jacob has settled the meaning of the term term for many commentators does not sufficiently reckon with some of the considerations informing such a reading. Not least among these considerations is the implied character of Jacob in the deception of Isaac.

It is not without some questionable interpretive moves and moral claims that Jacob can be regarded as upright and justified in his deception of his blind father. On the surface of things, Jacob's deception of his father, whether he was the rightful recipient of the blessing or not, appears to be sinful. allowing such a judgment to colour our reading of the earlier term and to suggest that it ought to be understood in a less common sense is not simply unreasonable, much as Jordan's use of his interpretation of the earlier term

to suggest a less common reading of Chapter 27 is not simply unreasonable either. They are both debatable judgment calls and both arguably require departures from the most natural reading of the text at key points. Besides this, we should observe the way way that in the text's characterization of Jacob, he seems to be juxtaposed with his brother Esau. When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a Tam man, dwelling in tents. There is a contrast between their respective realms of habitation. Esau is a man of the field, while Jacob is a man dwelling in tents, perhaps reminiscent of

the contrast between Cain and Abel. If we read the characterization of Jacob as Tam, as juxtaposed with the characterization of Esau as a skillful hunter, the sense blameless or perfect would seem to unbalance the juxtaposition. A more balanced juxtaposition would be given by a sense such as peaceful. See the parallel between Tam and Man of Peace in a place like Psalm 37 verse 37. The broader contrast then would be between Esau, a violent, impulsive, rough, aggressive, ruddy and hairy hunter, chiefly operating in the wild, and Jacob, a peaceful and more domestic man, smooth of skin and

quiet of temperament. Issa, the stereotypically masculine of the two, is favoured by their father Isaac, while Jacob is favoured by their mother Rebecca. I've previously written about Yoram Hazzoni's treatment of this passage, comparing his approach with Jordans. Hazzoni brings aspects of the text into view that are not really addressed in Jordan's approach. Hizoni claims that there are typically moral judgments upon such incidents to be discovered within the biblical text itself. If only we are attentive to the wider scope of the scripture and acknowledge a few illuminating guiding principles, including the following. First, characters are juxtaposed and contrasted in narratives

in ways that imply judgments upon their actions. Second, patterns of events are repeated in ways that highlight the character and consequences of past actions. Third, key recurring expressions alert attentive readers to specific connotations or connections. As we attend to such principles, we can arrive at far more sophisticated judgments upon events and actions. His only writes of the story of Jacob's deception of Isaac.

I don't think that there is much question that the narrative portrays Jacobs having deceived Isaac as a significant moral failing. In a sense, Jacob's entire life is described as being lived in the shadow of this one terrible name. mistake he made as a young man. And yet the narrative is equally insistent that Jacob was right to resist Isaac's wish that Esau, the firstborn, be his heir. The very name Israel, which God gives Jacob, is said to mean, you have contended with God and with men, and have prevailed, reflecting the pleasure

that God takes, not in Jacob's execrable deception, but in the fact that Jacob has resisted the fate his birth as the second twin had decreed for him. This means that as the story on foals, Jacob is punished for the way he treated his father and brother, even as the narrative reconfirms that his motives were the right ones, and even shows respect for his willingness to act on these motives. In arriving at this assessment, Hazz only deploys a principle that is much less pronounced in Jordan's thinking on Jensis chapter 27. Jacob's life was largely one of suffering, yet it is dominated by two key deceptions that he suffered at the hands of others. The first of these deceptions occurred in the darkness of Jacob's wedding night when his father-in-law Laban deceived Jacob,

giving him his weak-eyed older daughter in the place of Rachel, the beautiful younger daughter for whom Jacob had served. This deception is too reminiscent of Jacob's deception of his father Isaac to seem accidental. It seems reasonable to regard the misery that this deception brought to Jacob as a providential judgment upon Jacob's own deception of his father. Jacob had deceived his father using goats to make the stew and cover his smooth skin and a coat, the best garments of Esau. Jacob's deception is recalled in the second great tragedy that dominated his life, the apparent death of his favourite son Joseph. In Genesis chapter 37, verses 31 to 33, Joseph's brothers used Joseph's special robe and the blood of a goat to deceive their father concerning his son, and to prevent Jacob from giving the blessing to their younger brother,

that Jacob's actions seemingly come back upon his head in such terrible ways suggests that his actions were in fact sinful, undermining one aspect of Jordan's interpretation. Nevertheless, as I believe we shall see, Jordan's reading need not be entirely jettisoned. Here we arrive at the third interpreter, whose insights into the passage I want to consider, Rabbi David Foreman.

Foreman helps our reading, in part by, expanding the range of potential illusions and connections to which we are attending, arguing that we might hear some echoes of the story of the binding of Isaac in Chapter 22. In that story, as in Chapter 27, there are some significant words exchanged between a father and son, My father, and here I am, chapter 22, verse 7. In Chapter 27, both Isaac's exchanges with Esau, verse 1, and with Jacob, verse 18, recall this conversation he once had with his own father Abraham. In that story too, it had seemed that Isaac was near to death,

and its events had led to a blessing. It is not always clear what we should make of such apparent connections. This is not an observation that Foreman makes, but perhaps the details recalling Chapter 22 might invite us to contrast Abraham and Isaac. Abraham is prepared to sacrifice his beloved son and the heir of the covenant, Isaac, obeying and trusting the Lord. However, Isaac so favours Esau that he is not prepared to give him up, even when he knows that Jacob is the one whom the Lord wants to receive the blessing. Foreman's fuller treatment of the episode is found in two video series,

Isaac and Rebecca, Would You Steal a Birthright from Your Blind Husband, and Jacob, Man of Truth. Within these series, Foreman presents a daring and surprising reading of the events of Chapter 27, paying more attention to the actions of Rebecca. He observes that Rebecca had received a prophecy that Jacob was to be the blessed son, Chapter 25 versus 21 to 23. She loved Jacob from his birth, but Isaac had favoured Esau and gave Jacob an unflattering name. Rebecca overheard Isaac and realized that he was about to bless Esau,

but that he intended to give no blessing to Jacob. Indeed, when we read Isaac's blessing in verses 27 to 29, and his words to Esau in verses 34 to 40, it becomes apparent that the blessing intended for Esau seemingly implied a curse upon Jacob. When Rebecca overheard Isaac's instructions to Esau and realized his intent to bless Esau to the exclusion of Jacob, Rebecca sprang into action on Jacob's behalf.

However, Foreman, following an interpretive principle that he frequently applies very fruitfully, encourages us to read the story without having the end in mind, rather at each stage of the story we should be alert to the way that someone only knowing the details to that point would presume that things would play out. Reading the passage with this principle in mind, Foreman suggests that we stop reading at the end of verse 10 and ask ourselves what we think is taking place. Does it sound like she is planning a deception? Foreman makes a case that she is not.

Rebecca Foreman argues, aimed to win some blessing for her beloved son Jacob, sending him into his father to make a case for himself. None of the ingredients of a successful deception of Isaac seem to be present at this point. By all appearances, if this were a plan to deceive Isaac, it would be beyond hope of success, a harebrained scheme doomed to catastrophic failure. Jacob's voice is readily distinguished from that of his brother. He is bringing a meal of goat meat rather than the game that Isaac delights in. To make matters worse, he would be trying to deceive his own father that he is his brother.

There would be no margin for error whatsoever. What hope of success would such a plan have? What about Jacob's protest in verses 11 and 12? Does it not suggest that some deception is intended? But Jacob said to Rebecca his mother, Behold, my brother Esau is a hairy man, and I am a smooth man. Perhaps my father will feel me, and I shall seem to be mocking him, and bring a curse upon myself and not a blessing.

Foreman argues that it does not. Nothing has been said about Jacob pretending to be Esau, or that Jacob should take Esau's blessing by deception. The plan is rather that Jacob should seek a blessing from his father for himself before it is too late, lest he be left with nothing. Why then the dress-up? Nerdy Jacob knows that his father favours his jock brother Esau, and that he does so on account of his prowess as a hunter

and for his more masculine traits. Indeed, his mother may have told him that Isaac plans to bless Esau and leave Jacob with no blessing at all. If Isaac were to feel Jacob's smooth and hairless skin and his softer clothing, he would think it ridiculous to bless him. Such a son, seemingly so much less manly than Esau, was manifestly unsuited to bear his blessing and legacy. Isaac already seems to have intended to leave Jacob with no blessing, were Jacob to come into Isaac's presence and seek a blessing for himself without, anything to commend him to his father's favour, he might even end up with a curse.

The goat's skins and Esau's hunter garments are used so that Jacob can play the part of a son that Isaac will bless. Dressed up as a rough outdoorsman, perhaps his father will not lightly dismiss him. At least, this argues Foreman, was Rebecca's intention. Foreman also argues that even though she had the prophecy that her older son would serve the younger, Rebecca would have been quite unjustified to deceive her husband. While deception may be warranted on occasions, obtaining the blessing through an outright lie would not be such a case. Such a lie would be different and kind from the protective lie,

told by Rahab, for instance. The end would not justify the means. Things all went wrong when, questioned by his father, Jacob claimed to be Esau. Rather than making a case for himself as Jacob, Jacob pretended to be his older brother. The success of the deception might seem bizarre to the reader. Jacob's voice is recognisably his own, but Isaac was not expecting a visit from his younger son.

He was expecting Esau, whom the visitor claims to be, but not so soon. Isaac is surprised and wants to confirm that the visitor is in fact Esau, wanting to feel him. Even after feeling him, Isaac's senses give him a conflicting report. His ears tell him that it is Jacob, but the feel of the visitor's hands is like Esau's. After he eats the food and smells Jacob, he readily blesses him, dismissing his earlier uncertainty.

Isaac's blindness, his failure to attend to his sense of hearing, and his privileging of touch, taste, and smell over it is an indictment upon his character. Foreman adds further important details to the mix when he observes the way that at the fort of the Jabok, fundamental themes in Jacob's life resurface. Jacob was given an unflattering name, usurper, at his birth. He tricked his brother out of his birthright and deceived his father to obtain the blessing.

At the end of Genesis chapter 32, just before meeting up with his brother again for the first time in a couple of decades, Jacob wrestles with the mysterious figure at the Jabok, a place which mixes up the letters of his name. Refusing to let go of the figure, Jacob receives a new name and a blessing. Notably, when he meets with Esau again immediately, afterwards, Jacob bows to him seven times. He freely offers his brother the lion's portion of the wealth he has gained, and calls him Lord. He insists that Esau accept his blessing. Chapter 33, verse 11. He allows Esau to go ahead of him. Foreman suggests that these episodes imply a resolution to the conflict that has dominated Jacob's life to this point. His grappling with Esau in the darkness

of their mother's womb, from which he emerged grasping his brother's heel, his strong. His struggle with Esau in the darkness of his blind father's tent, and his wrestling with the figure in Chapter 32, are three paralleled episodes. At the end, having received a new name and a blessing from God, Jacob can performatively restore to Esau what he took from him. This suggests that not only was the deception of Isaac unjustified, it was also unnecessary. Jacob ends up receiving the true blessing, and his name by a different means entirely. I find Foreman's argument that Rebecca did not intend for Jacob to deceive Isaac, a very thought-provoking one, even though I am not entirely persuaded of it. His points about the connection between the events

at and after Jacob's wrestling at the ford of the Jabok are, to my mind, much stronger, and weigh against Jordan's reading of the deception of Isaac. I believe that important intertexts for our reading of the story of Jacob are found in Genesis' Chapter 3 and 4, the stories of the fall in Eden, and of Cain's killing of Abel. Esau is a beast-like man, a ruddy and her suit predator of the field, the realm of the beasts. Jacob, by contrast, is a domesticated man of tense, a smooth man without the beast-like hair of his brother. Yet he is cunning, and as a crafty man has much in common with the serpent, who is smarter than the beasts of the field. The contrast between Esau and Jacob is akin to that between

Kane and Abel. Of course, Kane, another predatory man of the field, also. sought to kill his younger brother when his brother was favoured over him. Jacob came out of the womb clutching his brother Esau's heel, chapter 25 verse 26. The last figure associated with an assault upon the heel was the serpent himself in chapter 3 15. As with the man and the woman in the story of the fall, Esau is driven by desires and appetites without a clear sense of that which is good. He surrenders something of immense value for a mess of potage. In the story of the stew, Jacob is in the role of the serpent, while Esau is Adam.

David Dorp notes that Esau's description of Jacob's stew as the Red Red Thing suggests that he might have thought it to be blood soup, forbidden food. We are told Esau was called Edom, Red, on account of his sale of his birthright for the Red Stew. The name Edom mentioned at this critical moment also sounds somewhat similar to another important name, Adam. Isaac, like his son Esau, also acts rashly, carelessly giving up something of immense value for the sake of food offered by Jacob. Like Esau's earlier selling of his birthright, Isaac's actions occur as he presumes that he is about to die.

Jacob gains the blessing through deception, while Esau receives something reminiscent of the curses of banishment received by the serpent and Kane, Genesis 3 verse 14 and 4 verses 10 to 12. behold away from the fatness of the earth shall your dwelling be and away from the dew of heaven on high as in other cases the intertexts play out in multifaceted and complex ways rather than as a straight mapping of one text onto another rebecca could be likened to eve fatefully giving food to her husband rebecca's clothing of jacob with skins might recall the lord's clothing of adam and eve with skins The themes of death, curse, food, heeding the voice of the woman and loss of birthright might also unite the stories.

The serpent-like deceiver and those who heed their lower senses and obey their stomachs, rather than the voice of the Lord, also might connect the stories. What we are to make of such possible connections requires much more reflection. I think that a key further clue to the interpretation of Genesis chapter 27 is found in the story of David, where several events recalling the stories of Jacob, Esau, Isaac and Rebecca are found. In the books of Samuel, David is a figure who is reminiscent of both Esau and Jacob in different ways. David and Esau are the two biblical characters described as red, or ruddy. In 1 Samuel, chapter 16 verse 12 and 17 verse 42, David is described in this manner. In chapter 25, David acts as Esau did, in Genesis chapter 32 verse 6, coming with 400 fighting men to attack Nable.

1 Samuel chapter 25 verse 13. Notably, Nable is Laban backwards. David is pacified by a wave of gifts from Abigail who behaves like Jacob. David is a man who dwells with the flocks in tents. While he is not a hunter like Esau, he is able to kill the predators, the lion and the bear, and later Goliath, the serpent-like giant. He brings together traits in. of Esau and Jacob. His interactions with Saul and Jonathan recall Jacob's interactions with Esau, Isaac and Laban, but with Esau especially. Like Esau, Saul is a foolish man who despises his birthright, losing it as a result. Jonathan, however, is like a good version of Esau. His greeting of David in 1st Samuel chapter 20 recalls Esau's greeting of Jacob in Genesis chapter 33,

While David refused the garments of Saul when they were offered to him in 1 Samuel chapter 17, verses 38 to 39, he received the garments of Jonathan in chapter 18 verse 4. Jonathan is the heir who willingly gives his place to the younger, recognising the Lord's purpose and fitting the younger for his role. He did what Esau should have done. Two crucial episodes are found in 1 Samuel chapter 24 and 26, episodes that recall Genesis chapter 27. In both occasions, the first in the darkness of the cave

and the second in the darkness of a deep sleep from the Lord, David has the opportunity to take Saul's life and to gain the kingdom as his inheritance. On both occasions, he resists the temptation. Even though the Lord had said that he would receive the kingdom, he must not grasp at it unlawfully, but must receive it in a rightful manner. as I have written of the episode in Chapter 24 before.

In the conversation that follows, where David's righteous restraint in seeking to take the inheritance for himself is revealed, Saul's words, Is this your voice, my son David? Recall the interaction between Jacob and his blind father Isaac. The chapter ends with Saul declaring that David is more righteous than he is, that the kingdom will be established in his hands and blessing him. Here I believe we find a key to understanding the conversation.

complicated story of the deception of Isaac. Here Jacob steps back from snatching the blessing and inheritance from the blind father, yet receives it nonetheless on account of his righteousness. The same question, Is This Your Voice, My Son David, is found in chapter 26, verse 17. Like Esau in Genesis chapter 27, Saul lifted up his voice and wept, chapter 24 verse 16 of 1 Samuel, as in Genesis chapter 27 verse 38. In contrast to Jensis chapter 27, while Jacob grasped at the blessing through deception and his brother sought to kill him, David refused to grasp the inheritance before the proper time and was blessed by his rival as a result. His rival, who had been seeking his life, also temporarily, came to be at peace with him.

In contrast to Esau, who sought to kill Jacob after he obtained the blessing through deception. Putting some of these pieces together, it seems to me. that both Genesis chapter 27 and the story of David can fruitfully be read against the backdrop of the story of the fall. Esau is like a brute beast, while Jacob plays the part of the crafty serpent. Yet Jacob must learn to be the complete man that he is, receiving the blessing not through subterfuge, but faith. In this, David exemplifies true maturity. He is cunning like Jacob and strong like Esau. He is a quiet man of tents like Jacob, yet also. an able warrior and defender in the field. Waiting for the Lord's good time, he receives the birthright

and blessing. A further aspect which I'll only gesture towards here is the possible connection between Jacob and Esau and the Day of Atonement Yom Kippur ritual. As in other episodes in Genesis, most notably Ishmael and Isaac, Genesis chapter 21 and 22, Joseph and Judah, Genesis chapter 37 and 38, and Peres and Zara in Genesis chapter 38. The story of Esau and Jacob involves a pair of brothers or twins who have divergent faiths, described in ways that might allude to the ritual of Leviticus chapter 16. Ishmael is sent out by Abraham into the wilderness by the hand of his mother Hagar. In a parallel account in the chapter that follows, Isaac, the other son of Abraham,

is offered as a sacrifice on the mountain of the Lord. In Genesis chapter 37, Joseph's death is fate using. the blood of a goat presented to the father for recognition. In the chapter that follows, Judah sends a goat into the wilderness by the hand of Hira the Adulamite. Perez and Zara are divided by the fact that one of them has a red cord, much as the two goats on the Day of Atonement traditionally were divided. Goat themes are important in the story of Esau and Jacob. There are two goats used in Genesis chapter 27, much as on the Day of Atonement.

Sia, the place where Esau settled, the word, hairy and a word for a he-goat are related or pun off each other in the Hebrew. The redness of Esau, his skin and the name Edom he receives as a result of the red-red thing that he requests from Jacob in chapter 25 would also connect him with the scapegoat, which is distinguished by the red cord. Esau is the scapegoat who departs from the land to Sia, whereas Jacob journeys on to Sokhov in Genesis chapter 33 versus 17 to 18. Gershon Heppner suggests that Jacob's movement to Sukkoth after parting ways with Esau is suggestive of the way

the feast of Sukhoth immediately follows Yom Kippur in Leviticus chapter 23. If this is correct, I think it probably is. The presence of Day of Atonement Yom Kippur themes provide a ritual framework for interpreting the Jacob and Esau stories. They are the twin ghosts with divergent destinies, one to be cast out and the other to be raised up. Their fates, though divergent, are intertwined. As Jordan has noted, Genesis chapter 27 has something of the form of a narrative of sacrifice,

an offering of food in search of covenant blessing. Genesis chapter 28, the story of Bethel that follows, might continue the theme. Jacob symbolically enters the most holy place, seeing his vision of the ladder reaching to heaven and the Lord's standing above it. There is a lot more that could be said about these connections, but I will leave fuller reflection upon them as an exercise for the listener. Thank you very much for listening. If you're interested in this, other reflections, my news and doings and writings,

then please take a look at our substack, argosy.substack.com. God bless.