†. Gen 30:1a . .When Rachel saw that she had borne Jacob no
children, she became envious of her sister;
Sibling rivalry is bad enough. But when siblings compete for the affections of
the same love object, it's all the worse. I don't know what it is about kin,
but it's much easier to compete with someone outside the family than those
within. Rivalry within family is not just a competition; it is more like the
passions of a blood feud. The feelings run deep, and hot, and painful. People
who never had a brother or sister cannot understand this. You just have to
live it to know what it's like.
†. Gen 30:1b . . and Rachel said to Jacob: Give me children, or I shall
die.
Somehow Rachel felt the fault was Jacob's as if he were doing something to
deliberately prevent conception. According to Jewish folklore, it was a
common practice in that day for a man with two wives to give the prettier
one some sort of birth control herb to prevent her from getting pregnant and
losing her figure. Thus the prettier of the two was reserved for pleasure; and
the other for bearing children. Genetically, that was a pretty dumb idea since
the practice results in the perpetuation of inferior stock. I seriously doubt
you'll ever see breeders of dogs, cats, livestock and/or race horses
conducting their business like that.
Jacob wasn't doing anything to Rachel. She was just simply unable to have
children. If only she had followed her sister Leah's example in prayer instead
of getting in one of those moods, then she wouldn't have been so ready to
rag on Jacob for something over which he had no control.
†. Gen 30:2a . . Jacob was incensed at Rachel
Jacob's anger was no doubt an unpleasant mixture of hurt and indignation.
He really did love Rachel. She wasn't just a girl toy. For her to insinuate that
he was keeping her around just for pleasure must have bitten deeply into his
soul. Romantic love can easily turn into hate-- very suddenly and very
quickly; like turning a page in a book.
Romantic love is very different than the love of a loyal friend. Romantic love
seeks its own best interests and is very fragile and easily wounded. Fraternal
love is much better. It's like a strong anchor. The more a storm buffets the
ship, the deeper the anchor digs into its moorage.
†. Gen 30:2b . . and said: Can I take the place of God, who has
denied you fruit of the womb?
I'm sure that just as soon as Jacob lashed out at Rachel he regretted it. His
retort implied that she was a sinner who didn't deserve children. What an
ugly thing to say. But he was upset and felt betrayed by his best girl. So his
reaction is understandable. But isn't there a better way? Yes.
Instead of attacking her husband in an attempt to put blame, Rachel would
have been much better off just finding a nice quiet spot and telling God how
she was feeling about her sterility-- how it was hurting her and making her
feel inferior to her sister: and threatening her marriage. Would God respond
to that? Yes. Because that is exactly what Rachel did do eventually. It's just
too bad she didn't think of it sooner.
If Rachel felt that God cared about her at all, then she would have
recognized that barrenness was serving some sort of Divine purpose; even if
she couldn't think of one at the time. But Rachel's circumstances were
causing her feelings to override her thinking; and making her emotional and
reactive instead of objective and rational.
†. Gen 30:3-5 . . She said: Here is my maid Bilhah. Consort with her,
that she may bear on my knees and that through her I too may have
children. So she gave him her maid Bilhah as concubine, and Jacob
cohabited with her. Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son.
That was indeed a strange custom, and a cruel one at that. Why is it nobody
ever thought to ask the maids how they felt about it? I just don't think it's
ethical to subjugate women to the status of mere breeder stock.
Those who give their babies away in adoption, often don't want to see them
when they're born-- not even a glimpse; they don't even want to know their
gender. They want their baby delivered and whisked out of the room
immediately with no more feeling than doing their business in the lou.
Women who get abortions typically do not want to see a sonogram of their
babies nor listen to its heartbeat because that's just too bonding and
sensitive. Pharaoh's daughter (Ex 2:6) fell apart when she gazed upon baby
Moses weeping. What normal woman can resist something like that?
The maid's baby would be legally Rachel's, but she would never be the
biological mother. Nothing can ever change a thing like that.
†. Gen 30:6 . . And Rachel said: God has vindicated me; indeed, He
has heeded my plea and given me a son. Therefore she named him
Dan.
Dan's name means judge, and/or the past tense: judged. (or possibly: a
judgment)
In Rachel's mind, Bilhah's success proved that God wasn't withholding
children from her for being a sinner, as Jacob had insinuated. But Dan
wasn't really Rachel's child. He was only hers by adoption.
But who was going to nurse Dan? There was no such thing as formula in
those days. Somebody had to be his wet nurse. Well . . what about Dan's
biological mom? Didn't she just go through a pregnancy? So Dan remained
with his biological mother at least until he was weaned; and probably longer
too. It wasn't like they all lived miles apart. All four women were practically
living under the same roof.
So although Dan was reckoned legally Rachel's child, he wasn't taken away
from home. Trouble is; Bilhah became a single mom with no husband. But
she wasn't really alone. At least she had Dan; and her boy had Jacob; and
everyone was together, in one way or another. (chuckle) That sounds like
lyrics from the Beetles' song I Am The Walrus
I am he,
As you are he,
As you are me,
And we are all together.
Cont.
/
children, she became envious of her sister;
Sibling rivalry is bad enough. But when siblings compete for the affections of
the same love object, it's all the worse. I don't know what it is about kin,
but it's much easier to compete with someone outside the family than those
within. Rivalry within family is not just a competition; it is more like the
passions of a blood feud. The feelings run deep, and hot, and painful. People
who never had a brother or sister cannot understand this. You just have to
live it to know what it's like.
†. Gen 30:1b . . and Rachel said to Jacob: Give me children, or I shall
die.
Somehow Rachel felt the fault was Jacob's as if he were doing something to
deliberately prevent conception. According to Jewish folklore, it was a
common practice in that day for a man with two wives to give the prettier
one some sort of birth control herb to prevent her from getting pregnant and
losing her figure. Thus the prettier of the two was reserved for pleasure; and
the other for bearing children. Genetically, that was a pretty dumb idea since
the practice results in the perpetuation of inferior stock. I seriously doubt
you'll ever see breeders of dogs, cats, livestock and/or race horses
conducting their business like that.
Jacob wasn't doing anything to Rachel. She was just simply unable to have
children. If only she had followed her sister Leah's example in prayer instead
of getting in one of those moods, then she wouldn't have been so ready to
rag on Jacob for something over which he had no control.
†. Gen 30:2a . . Jacob was incensed at Rachel
Jacob's anger was no doubt an unpleasant mixture of hurt and indignation.
He really did love Rachel. She wasn't just a girl toy. For her to insinuate that
he was keeping her around just for pleasure must have bitten deeply into his
soul. Romantic love can easily turn into hate-- very suddenly and very
quickly; like turning a page in a book.
Romantic love is very different than the love of a loyal friend. Romantic love
seeks its own best interests and is very fragile and easily wounded. Fraternal
love is much better. It's like a strong anchor. The more a storm buffets the
ship, the deeper the anchor digs into its moorage.
†. Gen 30:2b . . and said: Can I take the place of God, who has
denied you fruit of the womb?
I'm sure that just as soon as Jacob lashed out at Rachel he regretted it. His
retort implied that she was a sinner who didn't deserve children. What an
ugly thing to say. But he was upset and felt betrayed by his best girl. So his
reaction is understandable. But isn't there a better way? Yes.
Instead of attacking her husband in an attempt to put blame, Rachel would
have been much better off just finding a nice quiet spot and telling God how
she was feeling about her sterility-- how it was hurting her and making her
feel inferior to her sister: and threatening her marriage. Would God respond
to that? Yes. Because that is exactly what Rachel did do eventually. It's just
too bad she didn't think of it sooner.
If Rachel felt that God cared about her at all, then she would have
recognized that barrenness was serving some sort of Divine purpose; even if
she couldn't think of one at the time. But Rachel's circumstances were
causing her feelings to override her thinking; and making her emotional and
reactive instead of objective and rational.
†. Gen 30:3-5 . . She said: Here is my maid Bilhah. Consort with her,
that she may bear on my knees and that through her I too may have
children. So she gave him her maid Bilhah as concubine, and Jacob
cohabited with her. Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son.
That was indeed a strange custom, and a cruel one at that. Why is it nobody
ever thought to ask the maids how they felt about it? I just don't think it's
ethical to subjugate women to the status of mere breeder stock.
Those who give their babies away in adoption, often don't want to see them
when they're born-- not even a glimpse; they don't even want to know their
gender. They want their baby delivered and whisked out of the room
immediately with no more feeling than doing their business in the lou.
Women who get abortions typically do not want to see a sonogram of their
babies nor listen to its heartbeat because that's just too bonding and
sensitive. Pharaoh's daughter (Ex 2:6) fell apart when she gazed upon baby
Moses weeping. What normal woman can resist something like that?
The maid's baby would be legally Rachel's, but she would never be the
biological mother. Nothing can ever change a thing like that.
†. Gen 30:6 . . And Rachel said: God has vindicated me; indeed, He
has heeded my plea and given me a son. Therefore she named him
Dan.
Dan's name means judge, and/or the past tense: judged. (or possibly: a
judgment)
In Rachel's mind, Bilhah's success proved that God wasn't withholding
children from her for being a sinner, as Jacob had insinuated. But Dan
wasn't really Rachel's child. He was only hers by adoption.
But who was going to nurse Dan? There was no such thing as formula in
those days. Somebody had to be his wet nurse. Well . . what about Dan's
biological mom? Didn't she just go through a pregnancy? So Dan remained
with his biological mother at least until he was weaned; and probably longer
too. It wasn't like they all lived miles apart. All four women were practically
living under the same roof.
So although Dan was reckoned legally Rachel's child, he wasn't taken away
from home. Trouble is; Bilhah became a single mom with no husband. But
she wasn't really alone. At least she had Dan; and her boy had Jacob; and
everyone was together, in one way or another. (chuckle) That sounds like
lyrics from the Beetles' song I Am The Walrus
I am he,
As you are he,
As you are me,
And we are all together.
Cont.
/
