Kicking Off With Genesis

Webers_Home · May 5, 2018

-
Genesis 33:12-19

● Gen 33:12 . . And [Esau] said: Let us start on our journey, and I
will proceed at your pace.

Jacob undoubtedly told Esau his ultimate destination, which was probably
Hebron, the place where their dad would later die. Isaac's last known
address was Beer-sheba. Why he moved 26 miles north to Hebron is
unknown; but when you're a rancher, you've got to go where the pasture is
for the sake of the livestock.

● Gen 33:13-14a . . But he said to him: My lord knows that the
children are frail and that the flocks and herds, which are nursing,
are a care to me; if they are driven hard a single day, all the flocks
will die. Let my lord go on ahead of his servant, while I travel slowly,
at the pace of the cattle before me and at the pace of the children,

Jacob's children were all still kids, the eldest being no more than 12 or so,
and many of the female animals were caring for nursing young. Refusing to
accept Esau's kind offer was a practical consideration. He was traveling light,
probably on swift camels, and his rough-riding fighting men, desiring to get
back home as soon as possible for R&R, were likely to grow impatient with
the snail's pace of Jacob's unit.

● Gen 33:13-14b . . until I come to my lord in Seir.

Jacob wasn't going southward to Seir; but across the Jordan up into the
highlands of Canaan. The words for "go on ahead" are ya'baar which is from
'abar (aw-bar') which means: to cross over; and used very widely of any
transition (literal or figurative)

Jacob promised to visit with Esau at some later date after his household was
all settled in. But for now, it was necessary to take it easy and rest his herds
before making the final push on up into the West Bank. It's no simple matter
moving hundreds and hundreds of head of livestock; especially over rugged
country. Coming down from Paddan-aram through the Syrian Desert and the
Golan Heights must have been exhausting for everyone-- women, children,
and animals alike.

● Gen 33:15-17a . .Then Esau said: Let me assign to you some of the
men who are with me. But he said; Oh no, my lord is too kind to me!
So Esau started back that day on his way to Seir. But Jacob
journeyed on to Succoth,

There is more than one Succoth in the Bible. The precise location of this one
in particular is difficult to pin-point. But according to Judges 8:4-16, it was
on the east side of the Jordan; somewhere between the river and the place
where Jacob grappled with the angel.

● Gen 33:17b . . and built a house for himself and made stalls for his
cattle; that is why the place was called Succoth.

Stalls is from cukkah (sook-kaw') which means: a hut or a lair. That has sort
of a primitive ring to it. The huts, and very likely Jacob's house too, were
probably just rudimentary shelters constructed of poles cut from trees
(those hills grew lots and lots of trees in that day) and thatching fashioned
with reeds gathered from along the banks of the Jordan and the W.Zarqa
(Jabbok).

Succoth is from Cukkowth (sook-kohth') and/or Cukkoth (sook-kohth') and
is just simply the plural of cukkah; ergo: huts and lairs.

There was a place by that name in Egypt too. The exact location is difficult
to pin-point but it may have been somewhere north of the reed (Red) sea
crossing (Ex 12:37, Ex 13:20, Ex 14:1-4). How long Jacob remained at
Succoth is unknown.

It might be well to mention that not all events in the Bible relate to
important spiritual truths. Many are just simply historic and mean nothing at
all except that people lived normal lives in those days just like we live our
lives in these days with very few events of any lasting importance; viz: we're
born, we leave home, accumulate wealth, marry, buy a home, reproduce,
retire, and then die; same-O, same-O.

● Gen 33:18 . . Jacob arrived safe in the city of Shechem which is in
the land of Canaan-- having come thus from Paddan-aram --and he
encamped before the city.

The site wasn't originally named Shechem but probably well known as that
name by the time the author wrote Genesis. It was the very first place in
Canaan where God met with Abraham (Gen 12:5-7). Shechem was up in the
West Bank and very likely close to present day Nablus.

● Gen 33:19 . .The parcel of land where he pitched his tent he
purchased from the children of Hamor, Shechem's father, for a
hundred kesitahs.

The word for "kesitahs" is from qesiytah (kes-ee-taw') and means: an ingot
(as definitely estimated and stamped for a coin). The exact value of a
kesitah is unknown. It was probably a local money, in any kind of shape;
e.g. discs, bars, rods, or chunks. The metal of which a kesitah was made is
unknown.

Before paper and coins were introduced as permanent forms of money,
people used a variety of objects to serve for legal tender. Examples of early
forms of money include rice (China), dog teeth (Papua New Guinea), small
tools (China), quartz pebbles (Ghana), gambling counters (Hong Kong),
cowrie shells (India), metal disks (Tibet), and limestone disks (Yap Island).

Monies can be anything so long as everybody using them agrees upon their
value. In ancient time, various articles made of metals such as silver and
gold, as well as of iron and bronze, were used as money; while among
primitive peoples such commodities as shells, beads, elephant tusks, furs,
skins, and livestock served as mediums of exchange too. Anything that's
widely accepted in payment for goods and services, and in settlement of
debts, can be acceptable as money-- even Pokemon trading cards.

Why would Jacob purchase property in Canaan? For a cemetery? Maybe. But
some feel he did it with the intention of making Shechem his capital. I mean,
after all, God promised him complete ownership of the land; so why not pick
out a location for a sort of Washington DC? At any rate, a real estate
investment was, at the very least, a token of his confidence in God's promise
that his progeny would one day own every bit of Canaan outright. So when
Messiah takes over, whoever is squatting on Jacob's land at the time is going
to have to move somewhere else and maybe even pay some back rent too.

Shechem was a prominent city throughout biblical history, located on Mount
Gerazim in what later became the territory of Benjamin's tribe. It was very
close to the future city of Samaria, which became capital of the northern
kingdom of Israel.

/

Jay Ross · May 6, 2018

Webers_Home said:
Jacob's children were all still kids, the eldest being no more than 12 or so,
and many of the female animals were caring for nursing young. Refusing to accept Esau's kind offer was a practical consideration. He was traveling light, probably on swift camels, and his rough-riding fighting men, desiring to get back home as soon as possible for R&R, were likely to grow impatient with the snail's pace of Jacob's unit.

Right, your logic is based on the traditions of previous writers who also, IMHO, had got it all wrong. Their expressed conclusions as to the timeline of Jacob and his children's lives has been taken out of the silence of the scriptures and their own assumptions as what happened when and their understanding of Jacob's statement to Laban as to how many years he had spent with him and the relativity of the Pharaoh's dream outcome as to when the seven years of plenty began with respect to when Joseph was made second in command in the Pharaoh's kingdom. It is my understanding that Joseph became second in command in the Pharaoh's kingdom around 14 years before the seven years of plenty began.

Jacob had just spent 40 years working for Laban. Reuben, his eldest son would have been around 32 years old, while Joseph, his youngest at that time was only around 6 years old. Diana Lear's youngest, and her daughter was probably between 16-18 years old when Jacob returned back to see his father Isaac. Diana has to be around this age when the Prince of Shechem took delight in Jacob's daughter and wanted her to be his wife.

The Genesis account of the patriarchs does not make much sense if we adopt the timeline of their lives as you are suggesting.

Webers_Home · May 6, 2018

-
Genesis 33:20

● Gen 33:20 . . He set up an altar there, and called it El-elohe-yisrael.

El-elohe-yisrael is actually 'Eel-'Eloheey-Yisraa'eel which is a compound of
three separate words.

'Eel is from 'el (ale) and means strength; as an adjective; viz: mighty.

'Eloheey is from 'elohiym (el-o-heem') and means: god(s) in a generic
sense; but when used with the definite article "the" then 'elohiym identifies
the Supreme Being

Yisraa'eel is from Yisra'el (yis-raw-ale') and means: he will rule as God,
which, according to Gen 32:29, was Jacob's new name.

So, if we put it all together, Jacob's altar was dedicated to The Almighty God
of he who will rule as God; or just simply The God Of Israel. It was the very,
very, first altar to ever be named after the god of the people of Israel. A true
milestone in the nation's history, and Jacob's too.

"one who will rule as God" could also refer to someone in Jacob's blood who
speaks for God, speaks as God, and whose name is God. The only person in
Jacob who can possibly fill that office is Messiah.

"In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of
man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days
and was escorted into his presence. He was given authority, glory and
sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped
him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his
kingdom is the one that will never be destroyed." (Dan 7:13-14)

"God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above
every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow-- in heaven
and on earth and under the earth --and every tongue confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Php 2:9-11)

The world has known its maker by several designations. First He was the
god of creation. Later He became known as the god of Abraham. Then the
god of the people of Israel. Now, He is also known, as the god of many
Gentiles. So the Bible's God is available to everyone, and is everyone's god
in one way or another. To some, He's a nuisance, a frightful adversary; their
final judge. To others He is an enormous blessing, a faithful friend-- their
rescue, and their ransom from the wrath of God.

Just exactly how much time elapsed between Jacob's temporary camp at
Succoth and the events coming up in chapter 34 are unknown.

In the interval, Jacob very likely visited his dad and also traveled down to
Seir to visit his brother Esau too; like he promised in verse 14. Just because
the Bible doesn't say so; doesn't mean he didn't. One of the aspects of the
Bible that some people find very annoying is that it doesn't record every
little detail.

For example at Matt 2:22-23 it's reported that the prophets said Jesus would
be called a Nazarene. But you won't find that quote in the Old Testament, so
there's no use in looking for it; and that's because not every word spoken by
the prophets was recorded: same as not every word spoken by Jesus was
recorded in the gospels; and not every detail of the patriarchs' lives are
recorded in Genesis.

Scripture's omissions can often lead people into error via a kind of logic
called an Argument From Silence; which is a kind of reasoning that assumes
that if something isn't clearly stated, then it's inferred from the silence that
there was nothing to state.

According to Gen 36:6-8, Esau occupied two residences at this time; one in
Canaan, and one in Seir. Kind of like rich movie stars who maintain a
residence in Beverly Hills, plus a ranch in Montana

/

Webers_Home · May 7, 2018

-
Genesis 34:1-7a

● Gen 34:1 . . Now Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to
Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land.

"Do not be deceived: bad company corrupts good morals." (1Cor 15:33)

Paul's letter to the Corinthians wasn't written to bad people to encourage
them to live like Christians. No, it was written to Christians to discourage
them from hanging out with impious people. Even though Dinah was brought
up in a God-fearing home, she is going to fall prey to the morals of the local
culture.

● Gen 34:2 . . Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country,
saw her, and took her and lay with her by force.

The words "by force" aren't in the Hebrew text. By penciling those words
into the text, translators make Dinah appear to be the victim of a rape
rather than a willing partner in a hot affair. Most Bible students are well
aware of the oftentimes low moral character of the people of God, so if
Dinah was truly accommodating in this episode, it shouldn't surprise anyone.
After all, young girls are very susceptible to hero worship, and Shechem was
a prince; the son of a sheik. What young girl doesn't dream of being swept
off her feet by a prince? It's pretty common; and it's all part of being a real
girl; for example:

I was amazed at an AeroSmith concert by the numbers of shapely, drop
dead gorgeous young girls crowded up against the stage trying to get
Steven Tyler to notice them. If you've seen Mr. Tyler, I think you would
agree with me he will never qualify as a hunk. But Tyler is a famous
entertainer; and entertainers have a powerful sensual charisma regardless of
their looks.

I witnessed an even more impressive display at a Rolling Stones concert
(now there's a study in ugly). Women of all ages, sizes, and waistlines,
slingshot their bras and panties up on the stage for the men to keep as love
tokens. There were so many female undergarments cluttering the stage that
the situation became a safety hazard. Keith Richards and the others had to
kick them away to avoid tripping and falling.

● Gen 34:3 . . Being strongly drawn to Dinah daughter of Jacob, and
in love with the maiden, he spoke to the maiden tenderly.

Shechem's feelings for Dinah weren't the typical violent lusts that rapists
expend upon their victims. That boy was truly overwhelmed by Dinah; just
like Jack was overwhelmed by Rose in the movie Titanic. I wonder if anyone
reading this can remember the last time you felt that way about somebody--
how you had difficulty catching your breath, and how utterly vulnerable you
felt in their presence. No, I just can't believe Shechem raped Dinah. He
really did like her as a person. She wasn't just a girl toy for Shechem to
exploit; no, Dinah was "the one" and to him, she lit up the room the
moment she walked in-- everything around her was a silver pool of light.

● Gen 34:4 . . So Shechem said to his father Hamor: Get me this girl
as a wife.

In modern American culture, Shechem would be regarded as a wimp for not
being man enough to speak with Dinah's parents himself instead of seeking
his dad's assistance. But in that day, a man's parents or relatives did all the
negotiating in nuptial matters; and when it reached that stage, the romance
was pretty serious business.

● Gen 34:5a . . Jacob heard that he had defiled his daughter Dinah;

From whom Jacob heard the news is not stated. Dinah had been taken into
Shechem's home (Gen 34:2) and remained there until this episode was over
(Gen 34:26). So news came probably by some of Dinah's girlfriends from
town whose friendships she sought in Gen 34:1. By now, Dinah must be
feeling very alone, and afraid to come home and face the music.

When guys lose their virginity, it's different. They feel more like a man, they
feel better about themselves, and they feel highly regarded in the eyes of
their male friends. But girls oftentimes feel like cheap goods: soiled and
fallen; not to mention the fear of pregnancy and family disgrace. Not all girls
feel the same about pre-marital trysts. Some relish the excitement. But
others are scarred for life, and never really get over it.

The Bible is silent about Dinah's feelings about all this, and after chapter 34,
she's mentioned only one more time at Gen 46:15 and that's it.

● Gen 34:5b . . but since his sons were in the field with his cattle,
Jacob kept silent until they came home.

If Jacob had allowed his passions to overrule his better judgment, he might
have stormed out and confronted Shechem's family all by himself, and they
just may have been annoyed enough to murder him on the spot. No, best to
wait for back-up on this one. And besides, brothers were often key decision
makers in a sister's betrothal (e.g. Gen 24:29-61). So Jacob needed his
boys; if not for personal defense, then at least to take part in the decision
concerning whom Dinah would wed.

● Gen 34:6-7a . .Then Shechem's father Hamor came out to Jacob to
speak to him. Meanwhile Jacob's sons, having heard the news, came
in from the field.

Jacob probably sent a runner out to get the boys and have them come home
as soon as possible. By luck, they arrived the same time as Shechem and his
dad. So the key players are present, the stage is set, and they can all get
down to business.
_

Webers_Home · May 8, 2018

-
Genesis 34:7b-17

● Gen 34:7b . .The men were distressed and very angry, because he
had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter--
a thing not to be done.

This is the first instance of Jewish tribalism in the Bible. Ironically; the boys
were far more upset for what Shechem did to the family name then what he
did to their sister. However; that's a very common reaction from male
siblings. Brothers typically take it personal when a guy abuses their sister or
says something derogatory about her; even when the brothers themselves
don't even like her.

The phrase "a thing not to be done" didn't apply to Shechem and Hamor.
Promiscuity wasn't considered immoral in their culture. Extra-marital activity
was a normal social interaction in many parts of Canaan, and nobody gave it
a second thought. In fact, neither Shechem nor his dad felt any inclination
whatsoever to apologize for what happened and probably would have
become indignant if asked to; but Israel's moral standards were God
influenced, and ran counter to common mores. (cf. Gen 18:19)

● Gen 34:8-9 . . And Hamor spoke with them, saying: My son
Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him in
marriage. Intermarry with us: give your daughters to us, and take
our daughters for yourselves:

The only problem is: whose religion would be taught to Dinah's children?
Would it be the Canaanites' religion or Jacob's religion? Would they be
taught both religions; and thus create confusion in the children's minds?
People for whom religion means very little; can cross breed all they want
and it doesn't make any difference.

However; as a general rule, it is never, ever a good idea to marry outside
your own religion. Marriage is tough enough without dividing the family with
differing religious philosophies. Couples should make every effort to strive
for unity in all things; especially in the area of religion.

"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship
hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light
with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what province
hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple
of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said,
I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall
be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate,
saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and
will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the
Lord Almighty." (2Cor 6:14-18)

For Jacob's family, marriage with another culture was not a good idea at all.
Their granddad was called to a very high purpose-- a purpose in which they
were all supposed to play a role; and that would be the role of engendering
a great nation whose God would be Yhvh; and thus be a witness to the one
True God: and a nation that would ultimately be a blessing to the whole
world. A people like Hamor's were a serious threat to fulfilling that purpose.

● Gen 34:10 . .You will dwell among us, and the land will be open
before you; settle, move about, and acquire holdings in it.

That must have been a very tempting offer to Jacob. Hamor's people would
protect his family, and let him use choice grazing lands, and sell him
property to build a home on if he joined their clan instead of going off on his
own with no one but Yhvh to rely upon. But then Israel would be
assimilated; and that was something Jacob had to avoid at all costs.

A holy nation has got to remain separated and independent from its unholy
neighbors so God can bless. Just look what assimilation has done to the
people of Israel over the years. Only a measly ten percent of them today are
orthodox. Many of them are secular, worldly, conformed, and totally without
their God. That is truly pitiful; and totally unacceptable.

● Gen 34:11-12 . .Then Shechem said to her father and brothers: Do
me this favor, and I will pay whatever you tell me. Ask of me a
bride-price ever so high, as well as gifts, and I will pay what you tell
me; only give me the maiden for a wife.

Shechem really did love Dinah, and was willing to go to some pretty extreme
lengths to keep her. Unfortunately, he got off on the wrong foot with Dinah's
brothers; which would prove fatal to every man in his village, including
Shechem's dad.

● Gen 34:13a . . Jacob's sons answered Shechem and his father
Hamor

It's uncertain all eleven of Jacob's boys took part in this. Later, only two of
them, Simeon and Levi, would subsequently go into town and murder all the
men. Jacob apparently said nothing in the negotiations; he only witnessed it
all, listening to everything, but letting his sons do all the talking.

● Gen 34:13b-17 . . speaking with guile because he had defiled their
sister Dinah-- and said to them: We cannot do this thing, to give our
sister to a man who is uncircumcised, for that is a disgrace among
us. Only on this condition will we agree with you; that you will
become like us in that every male among you is circumcised.

. . .Then we will give our daughters to you and take your daughters
to ourselves; and we will dwell among you and become as one
kindred. But if you will not listen to us and become circumcised, we
will take our daughter and go.

It's difficult to ascertain what the boys were implying by the prerequisite of
circumcision. Were they implying that Shechem's clan could only blend with
the people of Israel via Abraham's covenant of circumcision? Apparently
that's the impression they were giving, and Hamor seems to understand that
if the two families were to become one clan, then Israel's religion has to be
in common.

Jacob's silence suggests he was thinking the very same. As for Hamor, being
a covetous man at heart; circumcision surely seemed an insignificant price
to become co-owner of Jacob's possessions.
_

Webers_Home · May 9, 2018

-
Genesis 34:18-31

● Gen 34:18-19 . .Their words pleased Hamor and Hamor's son
Shechem. And the youth lost no time in doing the thing, for he
wanted Jacob's daughter. Now he was the most respected in his
father's house.

Shechem took the lead and set the example for the rest of the men in his
village. He apparently had quite a bit of influence, and people looked up to
him.

● Gen 34:20-24 . . So Hamor and his son Shechem went to the public
place of their town and spoke to their fellow townsmen, saying:
These people are our friends; let them settle in the land and move
about in it, for the land is large enough for them; we will take their
daughters to ourselves as wives and give our daughters to them.

. . . But only on this condition will the men agree with us to dwell
among us and be as one kindred: that all our males become
circumcised as they are circumcised. Their cattle and substance and
all their beasts will be ours, if we only agree to their terms, so that
they will settle among us. All who went out of the gate of his town
heeded Hamor and his son Shechem, and all males, all those who
went out of the gate of his town, were circumcised

Hamor convinced the men of his village that they would prosper by
submitting to the surgery. His village apparently operated on the commune
principle: What you have is mine, and what I have is yours. So everyone
would benefit from assimilating Jacob's family because they would become
co-owners of his possessions; which, when he departed Laban, was a goodly
amount of livestock and slaves. The arrangement was appealing: it made
good business sense, and would have been very lucrative for Hamor's village
if only Jacob's sons had been honest about it.

● Gen 34:25-26 . . On the third day, when they were in pain, Simeon
and Levi, two of Jacob's sons, brothers of Dinah, took each his
sword, came upon the city unopposed, and slew all the males. They
put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword, took Dinah out of
Shechem's house, and went away.

The boys did all that without Jacob's knowledge. Exactly what effect the
massacre of her boyfriend and his dad had upon Dinah is not said. Family
rivalries, like the old hillbilly feuds, are bitter and driven solely by the code
of the vendetta. There's no justice in a vendetta; only pay-back.

Oh, The Martins and the Coys,
They were reckless mountain boys,
And they scarred the mountains up with shot and shell.

There was uncles, brothers, cousins,
Why; they bumped them off by dozens,
Just how many bit the dust is hard to tell.
(Gene Autry)

● Gen 34:27 . .The other sons of Jacob came upon the slain and
plundered the town, because their sister had been defiled.

Only two of the brothers did the killing, but apparently all who were old
enough participated in the pillaging. I tell you, some of the patriarchs were
brutal men; and it was from them that the nation of Israel sprang. Later,
they will sell their own kid brother Joseph into slavery simply because they
envied his favorite-son status with their dad.

● Gen 34:28-29 . .They seized their flocks and herds and donkeys, all
that was inside the town and outside; all their wealth, all their
children, and their wives, all that was in the houses, they took as
captives and booty.

What they did was what conquerors legitimately do in war. But Jacob wasn't
at war with Hamor's clan. Those boys were nothing in the world but
murderers, kidnappers, thugs, and thieves. To think Messiah came from that
blood line is beyond belief!

● Gen 34:30-31 . . Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: You have brought
trouble on me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land,
the Canaanites and the Perizzites; my men are few in number, so
that if they unite against me and attack me, I and my house will be
destroyed. But they answered: Should our sister be treated like a
harlot?

Dinah's brothers were rash and hot headed; placing their own rage above
and beyond their family's safety, and their father Jacob's honor. That is the
self-centered attitude of criminals; which is exactly what they were. Without
God's providence, surely all of Canaan would have banded together and
justly hanged every last male in Jacob's camp so that the nation of Israel
would have ended right then and there. There would have been no holocaust
and no crucifixion, and the Palestinians today would have a country to call
their own. It's almost impossible to comprehend how those boys could have
ever descended from the world's most respected religious figure the world
has ever known: Abraham ben Terah

Many years later, Yhvh's people came to the brink of annihilation again
because of the pride of just one lone Jew in the book of Ruth. Boy! I tell
you: God has really had His hands full keeping those people from destroying
themselves. Truth be told: if it weren't for God's promise to Abraham, the
Jews would have been gone as a people long ago.
_

Webers_Home · May 10, 2018

-
Genesis 35:1-5

● Gen 35:1 . . God said to Jacob: Arise, go up to Bethel and remain
there; and build an altar there to the god who appeared to you when
you were fleeing from your brother Esau.

That is some very strange language. Why didn't God say "build an altar to
Me; who appeared to you when, etc". On the surface, it appears that God is
speaking of a god other than Himself. But according to Gen 35:2, Jacob's
family had a number of gods in their possession and I think God just wanted
to make sure Jacob understood that He wanted no truck with them. For
example:

"You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself an
idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in
the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them; for I,
Yhvh your god, am a jealous god, (Ex 20:3-5)

● Gen 35:2 . . So Jacob said to his household and to all who were
with him: Rid yourselves of the alien gods in your midst, purify
yourselves, and change your clothes.

This is embarrassing. To top off the shame of recent events-- Dinah's tryst,
the murders, and the subsequent looting in town-- now it turns out that the
one family on earth who was supposed to be a witness to the one True God.,
and all that He stands for, had other gods in their midst! They were also
wearing clothing taken from the dead in town, clothing that more than likely
honored the religions-- and thus the morals-- of the Canaanite gods! No
doubt the alien gods themselves were booty too, collected from Shechem's
town after the massacre.

Precisely what Jacob meant for his household, and all who were with him, to
do in order be "purified" is not said. Bathing in water was the usual means of
purification in the Old Testament; and often done in preparation to meet
with God; but it's more likely that he simply regarded the alien gods and the
stolen booty as ill gotten gain; ergo: contamination.

● Gen 35:3 . . Come, let us go up to Bethel, and I will build an altar
there to the God who answered me when I was in distress and who
has been with me wherever I have gone.

Jacob thus made a distinction between the mute gods of the Canaanites, and
the vocal god of Israel. Jacob's god had been extremely active and useful in
his life; whereas the Canaanite gods were only inanimate pieces of
superstitious statuary, like voodoo dolls.

The altar would serve a couple of important purposes, but the one that
would really count in this case is its capacity as an official place of confession
and absolution of sins. The people of God, whether Jew or Christian, have
never been sinless. But sinless-ness is not an indicator that certifies whether
or not someone is in God's family. Confession and absolution are far better
indicators, e.g. Ps 32:5-7.

The advantage of being in the family of Israel's God is the latitude His own
have for being themselves. Jacob's household sinned big time, yes, but their
sins will effect neither their divine purpose, nor their eternal destiny.

● Gen 35:4 . .They gave to Jacob all the alien gods that they had, and
the rings that were in their ears, and Jacob buried them under the
terebinth that was near Shechem.

According to Webster's, a terebinth is a small European tree (Pistacia
terebinthus) of the cashew family yielding turpentine. The Hebrew word for
"terebinth" is 'elah (ay-law') which just means an oak or other strong tree.

The religious items Jacob collected, were not only in the possession of his
kin, but also in the possession of "all who were with him" (Gen 35:2) which
would have included servants, his slaves; and the recent captives. Some of
the items would have come from looting the town of Shechem, but many
would have been acquired in the area up and around Laban's vicinity in
Mesopotamia; which is where Jacob acquired the bulk of his labor force (Gen
30:43). Jacob lived for many years in close proximity to religions centered
upon gods other than Israel's God, and the influence of those religions had a
heavy impact upon the most holy community existing on the entire planet at
that time.

Exactly why Jacob chose to bury those items under a terebinth, instead of
just burying them in a hole out in pasture, is not said. He could have
incinerated them too, but, for some undisclosed reason, didn't. Some have
tried to find symbolism in that, but his decision may have been motivated by
something as simple as a hot day, and Jacob would rather work in the shade
than out in the open.

● Gen 35:5 . . As they set out, a terror from God fell on the cities
round about, so that they did not pursue the sons of Jacob.

The patriarchs had some very interesting advantages. Even when they
deserved to die, or at least assaulted and battered, the Bible's God was
often on hand to prevent it. Think about it though. If you knew that a small
force of Jews were able to overpower a whole town, would you want to lock
horns with them? I don't think so. Jacob's boys no doubt had a reputation in
those parts now, and made their neighbors nervous.

People were very superstitious in those days and often gave the credit for
military victories to their own personal gods; or to the gods of their
conquerors, if that's the way things went in battle. So that the god of the
people of Israel now became the one to be feared in those parts.

However, it's far better-- if at all possible --for the people of God to give a
testimony to the love of God rather than to the terror of God. But because of
the patriarchs' recent violent behavior, the love of God was far from the
minds of the people in Jacob's vicinity. They saw the people of Israel and
their god as a serious threat to the safety and well being of their
communities rather than seeing Israel's God as a potential source of blessing
and providence.
_

Webers_Home · May 11, 2018

-
Genesis 35:6-12

● Gen 35:6-7 . .Thus Jacob came to Luz-- that is, Bethel --in the land
of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him. There he built
an altar and named the site El-bethel, for it was there that God had
revealed Himself to him when he was fleeing from his brother.

Bethel is located approximately 11 miles directly north of Jerusalem. Jacob
erected a stone cairn there when he left home; and gave the site its name:
Bethel (House Of God). At least thirty years have gone by since then. He
stayed twenty years with Laban, and had lived for an undisclosed number of
years in the vicinity of Schechem. Jacob was 75 when he left home, and was
now easily over 100. He is not only older now, but he's a lot wiser too. The
experience at Shechem changed Jacob in a remarkable way.

This time he builds an altar instead of a cairn, and names the site El-bethel
(the god of the House Of God). So Jacob's focus has shifted. Previously his
emphasis was upon a special site to worship God. This time, Jacob puts the
emphasis where it should have been in the first place: upon the object of his
worship. Because, unless God is actually present during worship, then
designating a special place for worship is futile. In Rev 3:14-22, the church
of the Laodicians is so entirely christless that Jesus isn't even a member, no,
he's depicted on the outside of the building banging on the door trying to get
someone's attention to let him in. That was a solid Christian church at one
time; but as time went by; it somehow became quite christless.

● Gen 35:8a . . Deborah, Rebecca's nurse, died, and was buried
under the oak below Bethel;

By now, Deborah was very aged; older than Rebecca, and had come south
with her to Canaan twenty years prior to Jacob's birth (Gen 24:59, 25:20,
25:26). Deborah was already a mature woman when she came south with
Rebecca because the word for nurse-- yanaq (yaw-nak') --indicates a wet
nurse. So Deborah did the surrogate task of breast feeding the infant
Rebecca, whose biological mom, for reasons unknown, couldn't do it herself.
Jacob knew Deborah quite well, having grown up with her in his own home,
and remained with her a good number of years before leaving home himself
at 75.

There's pretty good reason to believe that Rebecca had died prior to Gen
35:8 because it's extremely doubtful Deborah would leave her to join Jacob's
troupe otherwise.

● Gen 35:8b . . so it was named Allon-bacuth.

Allon-bacuth means: oak of weeping. Deborah's passing was surely as
emotionally painful a loss to Jacob as the loss of his own mother.

● Gen 35:9a . . God appeared again to Jacob on his arrival from
Paddan-aram,

Paddam-aram was the region up north, in and around where Laban lived,
and from whence Jacob fled a number of years prior to Gen 35:9. But God
reckoned Jacob still on-route for the simple reason that he had yet to strictly
comply with the order to "Return to the land of your fathers where you were
born" and "arise and leave this land and return to your native land." (Gen
31:3, 31:13). Instead of going directly to Bethel, as God apparently
expected Jacob to do, he settled in the region around Shechem-- where his
daughter became promiscuous, his sons became murderers and thieves, and
Jacob alienated his neighbors: thus; he, and his whole family, had become
quite useless as a witness to the knowledge of the one true God in that
region.

● Gen 35:9b-10 . . and He blessed him. God said to him: You whose
name is Jacob, you shall be called Jacob no more, but Israel shall be
your name. Thus He named him Israel.

This wasn't news to Jacob. He was renamed Israel by the angel (Gen 32:29).
But Jacob wasn't living up to his new identity. He needed urging to live as
who he now is, not live as who he once was before meeting God face to face.

● Gen 35:11a . . And God said to him: I am El Shaddai.

The patriarchs were aware of God's other name Yhvh, and often referred to
Him by it; but El Shaddai is a name of God that they knew Him by in a
personal way. It means: God of all might; viz; the all-power god; or the god
who invented, created, and controls all natural and supernatural powers. El
Shaddai is the god who can make things happen, even things that are
impossible by natural means, and things that are above and beyond Man's
mortal imagination; so that El Shaddai is "the" god of providence who is
easily strong enough to meet any, and all, human need.

The name El Shaddai relates to Jacob's vow in Gen 28:20-21 where he said:
If God remains with me, if He protects me on this journey that I am making,
and gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear, and if I return safe to my
father's house-- Yhvh shall be my God.

God did remain with Jacob, protected him, provided for him, and got him
back home. Time to make good on that vow.

● Gen 35:11b . . Be fertile and increase;

At this point in his life, Jacob was just about done reproducing. He had one
more to go: Joseph. But Jacob's increase went way beyond his twelve sons
were just the beginning.

● Gen 35:11c . . A nation, yea an assembly of nations, shall descend
from you. Kings shall issue from your loins.

That's pretty much what God promised Abraham back in chapter 17. The
most important kings were those of Israel, and in particular, the ones in
David's line who preceded Messiah.

● Gen 35:12 . .The land that I assigned to Abraham and Isaac I
assign to you; and to your offspring to come will I assign the land.

Ownership of the land didn't pass from Abraham down to Isaac, and then to
Jacob as if it were an heirloom. God promised each patriarch full ownership
along with their progeny. We might call that kind of ownership tenancy in
common, community property, or joint-heirship. However, there's yet a
fourth tenant in common: Christ. (Gal 3:16)
_

Webers_Home · May 12, 2018

-
Genesis 35:13-16a

● Gen 35:13-14 . . God parted from him at the spot where He had
spoken to him; and Jacob set up a pillar at the site where He had
spoken to him, a pillar of stone, and he offered a libation on it and
poured oil upon it.

The pillar that Jacob erected on this same site back in Gen 28:18 received a
somewhat different treatment. In that instance, Jacob poured only oil on it.
In this instance, he added a libation. The precise recipe is unknown, but
could have been a forerunner of the libation rituals that would come later in
Israel's history-- typically an alcoholic beverage made from grapes. (e.g. Ex
29:40, Lev 23:13)

Wine is an ingredient in a formal Temple offering called the daily burnt
offering (Ex 29:38-46) whose recipe lists a lamb, a paste made of flour and
oil, and some wine. The entire offering is totally destroyed; incinerated by
fire. The residing priests, serving at the Temple, arranged this offering every
day during the course of their duties; including the Sabbath day; which
normally would be illegal since it's against the law to kindle a fire on the
Sabbath. (cf. Ex 36:3, Mtt 12:5)

Some have interpreted the libation as representing the offerer's life's work;
which in the case of the daily burnt offering, would be the life's work of the
entire nation of the people of Israel; and of course including the priests
themselves. So that every twenty-four hours, the whole nation's every-day
activities went up in smoke.

We could interpret Jacob's libation as a formal act of dedication-- not of the
pillar; but of Jacob himself. Right after his first encounter, on this very spot,
with the God of his fathers Abraham and Isaac, a good thirty years ago;
Jacob vowed to dedicate himself to Yhvh if only He would fulfill certain
stipulations.

Jacob's vow at that time included a promise to make Yhvh his god-- implying
his only god --and to give God a tithe of "all that You give me". Jacob's
libation implies that, from here on in, its his sincere intent to start living up
to his new name, and to make good on those promises.

This is a really huge event, and marks a serious milestone in Jacob's spiritual
life. And I believe it's important to point out that Jacob didn't take this
turning point when he was living at home with ma and pa. Too many people
are in their parents' religion just because they were born into it. Jacob chose
a spiritual path for himself long after he became an adult.

● Gen 35:15 . . Jacob gave the site, where God had spoken to him,
the name of Bethel.

That could look back in time to Gen 28:10-22; or it could just simply mean
that Jacob decided that the name Bethel would not just be a pet name of his
own: but knowing (and believing) that this land would one day be inhabited
by his progeny, Jacob willed it to be on the map as the town of Bethel when
such a time as his progeny took actual physical possession of Canaan later
on in the book of Joshua.

● Gen 35:16a . .They set out from Bethel; but when they were still
some distance short of Ephrath,

This is the very first mention of Ephrath; which is actually Bethlehem (Gen
35:19, Gen 48:7). Apparently this area wasn't yet on the map as either
Ephrath or Bethlehem in Jacob's day, but later during the author's day. It's
not uncommon for Bible authors (or later scribes and/or editors) to give the
contemporary name as well as the ancient name of a city or town so that his
readers knew where to look in their own day for those old-time places.

Ephrath can also be spelled Ephratah. The founder of Bethlehem was a
Jewish man named Ephratah, and his name became attached to Bethlehem
so that you could refer to it in compound form as Bethlehem Ephratah; or
Bethlehem of Ephratah (e.g. 1Chrn 4:4, Mic 5:2). Ephrath is apparently the
female spelling (1Chrn 2:19) and Ephratah is the male version.

The next incident didn't actually occur in Bethlehem, but "some distance"
from it. Other than Gen 48:7 (which is a citation of the section we're in
now), the only other place the phrase "some distance" is used again in the
entire Old Testament is 2Kgs 5:19; where some feel it indicates a distance
about equal to that required for a runner on foot to catch up with a chariot
on the move; but the true meaning is lost in antiquity.
_

Webers_Home · May 13, 2018

-
Genesis 35:16b-20

● Gen 35:16b . . Rachel was in childbirth, and she had hard labor.

Rachel was no longer a spring chicken. Rueben, Jacob's firstborn, is now old enough to
fool around with grown women. It's probably been in the neighborhood of 40+ years
since Rachel's first meeting with Jacob back in chapter 29; when she was just a
youngster of perhaps 15-20 years old at the time.

● Gen 35:17 . .When her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her: Have no
fear, for it is another boy for you.

Rachel, no doubt remembered why she named her other son Joseph, back in chapter
30, while they were all yet still living up north with Laban. Joseph's Hebrew name is
Yowceph (yo-safe') which is a mini prayer that says: May the Lord add another son for
me. (Gen 30:24)

● Gen 35:18 . . But as she breathed her last-- for she was dying --she named him
Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin.

A complicated delivery in those days typically ended in tragedy. People had
no surgical skills nor tools and procedures to save either the mother or her
child. The exact nature of Rachel's problem isn't stated. She could have
experienced severe hemorrhaging, eclampsia, or maybe her heart just
couldn't take the stress, and gave out.

Ben-oni possibly means: "A Son Born In Grief". But Jacob changed it to
Binyamiyn (bin-yaw-mene') which possibly means: "The Son At My Right
Hand".

Personally, I think that's a mistake because Joseph was doubtless Jacob's
favorite; and the only one of the twelve upon whom he could rely. (cf. Ps
16:8, Ps 110:1)

BTW: Benjamin holds the distinction of being the only one of Jacob's children
born in the land of Canaan, i.e. he was a native son while the other boys
were immigrants. Abraham was an immigrant too, having migrated from the
area in and around what we know today as Iraq.

● Gen 35:19 . .Thus Rachel died. She was buried on the road to Ephrath-- now
Bethlehem.

The postscript "now Bethlehem" indicates an editorial insertion by someone later;
possibly a scribe or someone assigned the task of making copies; which was a
perpetual task in the ages prior to the existence of modern papers, printing presses, and
electronic storage media.

● Gen 35:20 . . Over her grave Jacob set up a pillar; it is the pillar at Rachel's
grave to this day.

The pillar was probably just a pile of rocks, like a cairn. The phrase "to this day"
indicates the day of the writer rather than the day upon which somebody in our own day
might read this passage.

By the time of 1Sam 10:2-- roughly 1020 BC --Rachel's Tomb was a famous landmark.
The traditional site, presently so-called, lies about four miles south of Jerusalem, and
one mile north of Bethlehem. The current small, square shaped, domed structure isn't
the original, but a relatively late monument. In 1841, the "tomb" was renovated, and in
1948 taken over by Jordanian invaders. Jews were barred from visiting it, and the area
was converted into a Muslim cemetery; which was eventually liberated by Israelis in
1967.

NOTE: Loss of access to an important ancestor's grave site isn't just an archeological
loss; it's a family loss.

When my father-in-law passed away in 2012 a step-daughter tried to commandeer his
body from the hospital so she could get him cremated and spread his ashes somewhere
over the landscape in Arizona without the slightest consideration for the feelings of his
blood kin who, except for my wife, all live on the East coast.

Well; thank God my wife and her sister intervened with the appropriate legal documents
in the nick of time to take custody of their father's body before the step-daughter got
away with her nefarious scheme. My father-in-law certainly deserved better than just
discarding his ashes somewhere out in the desert. He was a pipeline engineer with the
US Army on the Ledo Road (a.k.a. Stilwell Road) in the China/Burma/India theater in
the second world war. His remains are now safely buried back East in the family's
cemetery; where his real kin can come and visit him on occasion.
_

Webers_Home · May 14, 2018

-
Genesis 35:21-22a

● Gen 35:21 . . Israel journeyed on, and pitched his tent beyond Migdal-eder.

Although Israel is Jacob's spiritual name, it's also the name of his whole household (e.g.
Gen 34:7) so that when Genesis says "Israel journeyed" it means everybody associated
with Jacob was on the move.

An important technicality to note is that Abraham and Isaac were no more Israelites
than Noah was. The name Israel began with Jacob, and was carried forward by his
sons. In its infancy, Israel was a family name rather than the name of a nation that it is
now. It might sound ridiculous, but in order for Abraham and Isaac to become Israelites,
it would be necessary for Jacob to legally adopt them.

Migdal-eder is a compound word. Migdal can mean a tower, a rostrum, or a pyramidal
bed of flowers. 'Eder is a proper name, of either a man or a place-name in Palestine. So
Migdal-eder could be 'Eder's tower, which may not have even existed in Jacob's day but
was a well known landmark in the author's.

Migdal appears only three times in Genesis: once here, and twice in chapter 11 in
reference to the Tower of Babel. The tower in Babel was probably an elaborate
ziggurat, but 'Eder's tower may have been something very rudimentary, quite simple to
construct, and used for agrarian purposes-- e.g. tending herds; and watching for rustlers
and predators --rather than especially for religious purposes.

● Gen 35:22a . .While Israel stayed in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah,
his father's concubine; and Jacob found out.

Bilhah was Rachel's maid, and quite a bit older than Reuben. She was also the mother
of two of Reuben's half-brothers: Dan and Naphtali. Exactly why Reuben took an
interest in Bilhah isn't stated. But, it's not like there was a shortage of girls his own age
among the women in Jacob's camp. Jacob had a lot of hired help, and plenty of slaves
too. If Reuben just wanted to sow some wild oats, it would have been very easy.

Reuben may have been interested in Bilhah for quite a while prior to this recorded
incident; but was kept at bay by Rachel's oversight. Now, with her dead, and out of the
way, the coast was clear for a carnal liaison. Exactly how Bilhah felt about the affair is
not said; but may have been quite flattered by a younger man's interest; and who's to
say she wasn't a cougar at heart.

One possibility, that seems quite reasonable, and actually makes much better business
sense than the motions of a young man's passions, is that Reuben took a bold step to
insure Rachel's maid Bilhah would not ascend to the position of favored wife over his
own mom Leah. He was surely aware of the sisterly rivalry between Rachel and Leah,
since he was in the middle of a conjugal struggle between the two back in Gen 30:14
16; and he must have been fully aware of his mom's feelings over being switched on
Rachel's wedding night. By sleeping with Bilhah, and thus "defiling" her, Reuben may
have hoped Jacob would be sufficiently revolted enough by the affair so that he'd be
inclined to avoid Bilhah from then on and turn his full attention upon Leah.

If the above is true, then it only goes to show just how heartless Reuben could be. His
plan, if successful, would leave Bilhah in living widowhood, and the clutches of
loneliness and sexual frustration for the remainder of her life. That very scenario was a
reality in the case of David and his son Absalom. (2Sam 15:16, 16:20-22, and 20:2-3)

An additional possibility is that in ancient times, firstborn sons commonly inherited not
only their father's estate, but also his wives and concubines. Reuben may thus have
been claiming his future inheritance. But in so doing, he was, in reality, whether
intentional or not, taking steps to depose Jacob; and thus gain immediate headship in
the clan. This seems likely because the boys really didn't think much of Jacob's
competency. They went over his head in the incident at Shechem, and were disgusted
with Jacob's lack of strong response to their sister's escapades: an episode which in
reality disgraced the family of Israel. (Gen 34:30-31)

Whatever the true circumstances, and the motives, the thing Reuben did earned him
Jacob's reprimand, and cost him the loss of his privileged position in the family (Gen
49:3-4). Reuben's birthright was transferred to Joseph (1Chron 5:1).
_

Jay Ross · May 15, 2018

An unlikely story IMHO.

Jacob was so distressed at the death of Rachel, that he was dysfunctional in his relationships with his other wives. He may have thought to have comforted Leah, Rachel's older sister, but I would suggest that he would have ignored Bilhah and it was possibly Bilhah's grief at the death of her mistress and her need to have a shoulder to cry on was Reuben's undoing.

Bilhah was probably very young when Laban gave her to Rachel as a maid, such that she may have been only six to ten years older than Reuben. It is my understanding that Jacob had spent 40 years in Laban's household such that Reuben was around the age of 32 or 33 years old when he was comforting Bilhah and Bilhah may have become emotionally attached to Reuben and so one thing lead to the other.

This incident of Reuben going into Bilhah and laying with her in all likelihood only came about because Jacob did not take care of Bilhah's emotional needs and provide her with comfort during her time of grieving for her mistress.

Webers_Home · May 15, 2018

-
Genesis 35:22b-29

● Gen 35:22b-26 . . Now the sons of Jacob were twelve in number.
The sons of Leah: Reuben-- Jacob's first-born --Simeon, Levi, Judah,
Issachar, and Zebulun. The sons of Rachel: Joseph and Benjamin.
The sons of Bilhah, Rachel's maid: Dan and Naphtali. And the sons of
Zilpah, Leah's maid: Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Jacob who
were born to him in Paddan-aram.

By the customs of that day, a maid's children sired by her mistress's
husband, belonged to the mistress. So that Leah's children, counting Dinah,
totaled nine; and those of Rachel: four.

Of the four mothers, only two can be proven biologically related to Abraham.
The genealogies of the maids Bilhah and Zilpah are currently unknown and
wouldn't matter anyway seeing as how in the Bible, it's the father who
determines a child's tribal affiliation rather than the mother.

It's sometimes assumed that Jesus' mom Mary, and Zacharias' wife
Elizabeth, were members of the same tribe seeing as how the New
Testament says they were cousins (Luke 1:36). However, Elizabeth was
related to Aaron, who himself was related to Leah's son Levi, while Mary was
related to David, who himself was related to Leah's son Judah. So Mary and
Elizabeth were cousins due to the same grandma.

● Gen 35:27 . . And Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, at
Kiriath-arba-- now Hebron --where Abraham and Isaac had
sojourned.

Modern Hebron is located about 33 kilometers (20½ miles) south of
Jerusalem as the crow flies.

Although this is the first mention of a visit from Jacob since returning from
up north, it probably wasn't the first instance: just the first one mentioned
when his whole family, and the entire troupe-- servants and animals --came
with him.

Isaac was around 135 when Jacob left home to escape his sibling's wrath in
chapter 28. His eyes were going bad even then, and by now, many years
later, Isaac was probably quite blind. Since there is neither a record of his
reactions, nor of a cordial response to his son's visit; it's possible Isaac had
gone senile as well as blind.

● Gen 35:28 . . Isaac was a hundred and eighty years old

At the time of Isaac's death, Jacob was 120 years old, having been born
when his dad was 60 (Gen 25:26). When Jacob was 130, Joseph was 39 (cf.
Gen 41:46, 53, 54; 45:6, 47:9). So that when Joseph was sold into Egyptian
slavery at 17 (Gen 37:2), Jacob's age was 108; which was 12 years prior to
Isaac's death. The insertion of Isaac's passing in the Bible record at this
point, is sort of like a parenthesis because, chronologically, it's too soon.

● Gen 35:29a . . So Isaac breathed his last and died, and was
gathered to his people, being old and full of days.

Christ said the very hairs of our head are numbered. Well . . so's our
breaths. Finally, one day, after countless thousands, we inhale that very last
one, and it oozes back out as a ghastly rasp.

While some people see a glass as half full, and others see as half empty;
engineers see as overkill: viz: the glass is too big. Well . . in Isaac's case,
the glass was full up to the top. On Sept 11, 2003, the actor John Ritter died
of a torn aorta just one week shy of his 55th birthday. That is way too young
to take your last breath. His glass wasn't full yet. With adequate health care,
John Ritter may have lived another 25 years.

● Gen 35:29b . . And his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.

A death in the family often brings its members closer together than a birth.
By this time, Jacob and his brother were older and wiser, had mended their
fences, and were getting on with their lives; refusing to hold any grudges.
Esau, I believe, by this time fully understood what happened concerning the
stolen birthright-- that it was God's intention for Jacob to have it in the first
place --and he was peaceably resigned to accept it.

After the funeral, Esau will begin planning to move away from the region; no
longer having a paternal tie to the land wherein his father lived. It's not
uncommon for children to settle within driving distance while their parents
are living. But when your parents are dead, there's not much reason to stay
in the neighborhood anymore-- and for some, it might be just the excuse
they need to finally move away and start a new life elsewhere.
_

Webers_Home · May 16, 2018

-
Genesis 36:1-12

Chapter 36 is mostly a genealogy, so I'm only going to do just a few of its
forty-three verses.

● Gen 36:1 . .This is the line of Esau-- that is, Edom.

Edom is from the Hebrew word 'Edom (ed-ome') which is the color red; and
was the tag hung on him back in Gen 25:30.

● Gen 36:2-7 . . Esau took his wives from among the Canaanite
women-- Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah
daughter of Anah daughter of Zibeon the Hivite-- and also Basemath
daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth. Adah bore to Esau
Eliphaz; Basemath bore Reuel; and Oholibamah bore Jeush, Jalam,
and Korah. Those were the sons of Esau, who were born to him in
the land of Canaan.

. . . Esau took his wives, his sons and daughters, and all the
members of his household, his cattle and all his livestock, and all the
property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to
another land because of his brother Jacob. For their possessions
were too many for them to dwell together, and the land where they
sojourned could not support them because of their livestock.

Just as Lot had done, Esau chose to migrate rather than remain and cause
problems for Jacob. Some say Esau did this out of respect for Jacob's
patriarchal position; but no one really knows why. Maybe Esau just thought
the grass was greener elsewhere.

Esau had done well for himself in spite of his loss of the birthright: which
would have given him the lion's share of Isaac's estate-- and with no tax
complications; heirs in those days made out pretty good.

● Gen 36:8 . . So Esau settled in the hill country of Seir-- Esau being
Edom.

Seir was the name of an oblong-shaped region extending south from the
Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba-- a.k.a. Idumaea. Seir includes the ruins of
Petra, which were used as a movie set in a portion of the Indiana Jones
trilogy.

● Gen 36:9-12 . .These are the names of Esau's sons: Eliphaz, the son
of Esau's wife Adah; Reuel, the son of Esau’s wife Basemath. The
sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz. Timna
was a concubine of Esau's son Eliphaz; she bore Amalek to Eliphaz.

Of all Esau's progeny, Mr. Amalek really stands out in the Bible as the father
of a very disagreeable people. Keep in mind that all of Esau's clan, including
Amalek, are just as much Abraham's biological kin as Jacob's family. (Deut
23:8)

During his journey with the people of Israel, after their liberation from
Egyptian slavery, Moses was attacked by Amalek's clan. (Ex 17:8-16, Deut
25:17-19) Thus resulting in a perpetual curse upon the Amalekites as a
people. An Agagite (descendant of Amalek, 1Sam 15:2-8) named Haman
initiated a large-scale genocide against Israel in the book of Esther.

Haman's infamy is memorialized every year during the Jewish holiday of
Purim. It's customary to boo, hiss, stamp feet and rattle noisemakers
whenever the name of Haman is spoken in the Purim service.
_

Webers_Home · May 17, 2018

-
Genesis 37:1-4

● Gen 37:1-2a . . Now Jacob was settled in the land where his father
had sojourned, the land of Canaan. This, then, is the line of Jacob:

Genesis doesn't list a big genealogy right here like the one for Esau in
chapter 36, but rather, it's going to "follow" the line of Jacob from here on in
to the end of Genesis.

● Gen 37:2b . . At seventeen years of age, Joseph tended the flocks
with his brothers, as a helper to the sons of his father's wives Bilhah
and Zilpah.

Although "his . . .wives" is vernacularly correct; there's no record of Jacob
actually marrying either of those two servant-ettes. They were his
concubines in the same manner as Hagar when Sarah pushed her handmaid
off on Abraham as a "wife" (Gen 16:4). But when the male possessive
pronoun "his" modifies the Hebrew word 'ishshah, it typically, though not
always, indicates a man's spouse; so there you are.

NOTE: Jacob was pretty much stuck with Bilhah and Zilpah because were he
ever to emancipate them, he would forfeit any and all children the two
servant women bore for him; which is exactly how Abraham disinherited his
eldest son Ishmael. We talked about that back in chapter 21.

The words "as a helper to" aren't in the actual Hebrew of that passage.
They're what is known as inserted words that translators sometimes employ
to smooth out texts so they'll clearly say what the translators think the
author meant to convey. Some translators insert the preposition "with" at
that point, so the passage reads; "At seventeen years of age, Joseph tended
the flocks with his brothers; the sons of his father's wives Bilhah and Zilpah.

Actually, Joseph was in charge of his brothers Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and
Asher; who were all older than him. And it was he who was responsible to
manage the flocks because the phrase; "tended the flocks" actually connotes
he was shepherding the flock; i.e. Joseph was the trail boss.

Joseph's authority was also indicated by the "coat of many colors" that his
dad made for him. The Hebrew word for "colors" is of uncertain meaning and
some translators prefer to render it "long sleeves" rather than colors.

It seems clear that the intent of this special garment was as a badge of
Joseph's authority-- sort of like a military man's uniform --and of his favored
position in the family. Joseph may well have been the only one of Jacob's
twelve sons that he could fully trust since, for the most part, the older men
had proved themselves beyond control in the past.

The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah weren't really Joseph's full brothers, but half.
The only full brother was Benjamin, and at this time, he was too young to go
out on trail drives.

Genesis displayed a pretty bad case of sibling rivalry back in chapter 4,
which led to a younger brother's untimely death. This case of sibling rivalry
would surely have resulted in Joseph's untimely demise if God hadn't
intervened to prevent it. It's really sad that the majority of Jacob's sons
were dishonorable men; the kind you definitely don't want your own
daughter bringing home to meet the folks.

Although Joseph was an intelligent boy, and a responsible person, he
certainly lacked tact. His social skills were immature, and needed some
serious refinement because he really had a way of boasting, and chafing his
older brothers.

● Gen 37:2b . . And Joseph brought bad reports of them to their
father.

Whether or not the "reports" could be construed as tattling is debatable.
After all, Joseph, as trail boss, was directly responsible to Jacob.

It's been my experience that upper management doesn't want to hear those
kinds of reports. All they want to know is whether or not the company is
meeting its deadlines and operating at a profit. It's lower management's
responsibility to manage the work force so that upper management can
remain undistracted to do other things that are far more worthy of their
time, their talents, and their attention. A lower manager who can't rectify
personnel problems in their own department usually gets fired and replaced
by somebody who can.

● Gen 37:3a . . Now Israel loved Joseph best of all his sons

Uh-oh! Doesn't that sound familiar? Isaac had his favorite too: Mr. Esau.
There's nothing like favoritism to divide a family and guarantee it becoming
an ugly environment festering with sibling rivalry, yet that is so human a
thing to do. Put grown-ups in a group of kids and in no time at all, the
grown-ups will gravitate towards favorites, and become merely tolerant of
the others.

● Gen 37:3b . . for he was the child of his old age; and he had made
him an ornamented tunic.

The "ornamented tunic" is all the same as what's usually known as the coat
of many colors.

One might be tempted to think Joseph was Jacob's favorite son because of
his love for Rachel; but Genesis says it was because Joseph was "the child of
his old age". Well, Benjamin was a child of Jacob's old age too but not nearly
as favored. So the real meaning may be that Joseph was a child of wisdom,
i.e. the intelligence of an older man; viz: Joseph was smart beyond his years
and thus more a peer to Jacob rather than just another mouth to feed.

● Gen 37:4 . . And when his brothers saw that their father loved him
more than any of his brothers, they hated him so that they could not
speak a friendly word to him.

Genesis doesn't say the brothers wouldn't speak a friendly word; it says they
"couldn't".

Hatred does that to people. It just kills a person overcome with malice to be
nice to the people they hate. They just can't do it. Their eyes narrow, their
lips tighten, they look away, they become thin-skinned, their minds fill with
epithets, they constantly take offense and can barely keep a civil tongue in
their head, if at all, because deep in their hearts, they want the object of
their hatred either dead or thoroughly disfigured and/or smitten with some
sort of terrible misfortune.
_

Webers_Home · May 19, 2018

-
Genesis 37:5-17

● Gen 37:5-8 . . Once Joseph had a dream which he told to his
brothers; and they hated him even more.

. . . He said to them: Hear this dream which I have dreamed. There
we were binding sheaves in the field, when suddenly my sheaf stood
up and remained upright; then your sheaves gathered around and
bowed low to my sheaf.

. . . His brothers answered: Do you mean to reign over us? Do you
mean to rule over us? And they hated him even more for his talk
about his dreams.

Considering the already hostile mood fomenting among his brothers, Joseph
really should have kept the dream to himself. There wasn't any real need for
the others to know about it anyway, and I just have to wonder if maybe
Joseph wasn't gloating over them just a little.

● Gen 37:9-11 . . He dreamed another dream and told it to his
brothers, saying; Look, I have had another dream: And this time, the
sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.

. . . And when he told it to his father and brothers, his father berated
him. What; he said to him; is this dream you have dreamed? Are we
to come, I and your mother and your brothers, and bow low to you
to the ground? So his brothers were wrought up at him, and his
father kept the matter in mind.

As the family's prophet, Jacob's inspired intuition instantly caught the
dream's message; though he was a bit indignant. However, Jacob didn't
brush the dream off because his prophetic insight told him there just might
be something to it.

Jacob interpreted the moon in Joseph's dream sequence to be Rachel; so
one might ask: How could she be subject to Joseph while deceased?

Well; the mother element of the family of Israel at that time was a
composite unity consisting of four biological moms-- Rachel and Leah, and
Bilhah and Zilpah --not just the one. So the logical conclusion is that the
moon's identity wasn't restricted to Rachel; there were still three moms
remaining alive to represent the moon and thus fulfill Joseph's dream.

● Gen 37:12-14a . . One time, when his brothers had gone to pasture
their father's flock at Shechem, Israel said to Joseph: Your brothers
are pasturing at Shechem. Come, I will send you to them. He
answered: I am ready. And he said to him: Go and see how your
brothers are and how the flocks are faring, and bring me back word.
So he sent him from the valley of Hebron.

A guy like Joseph is every supervisor's dream. When asked to do something,
his response was; "I am ready."

Hebron (a.k.a. Hevron, a.k.a. Al Khalil) is still on the map. It's about 18½
miles west of the Dead Sea, as the crow flies, and about 20½ miles south of
Jerusalem.

Shechem (a.k.a. Nablus) is still on the map too. It's about 48 miles north of
Jerusalem; ergo: 68½ miles north of Hebron.

So Joseph had a long ways to go. It's amazing that people pastured their
herds so far from home in those days; but then it wasn't unusual for out
west cattle barons during America's 1800's to pasture cows that far; and
even farther.

The Prairie Cattle Company once ranged 156,000 cows on five million acres
of land. At 640 acres per square mile; that factors out to something like
7,812 square miles; viz: an 88⅜ mile square; which really isn't all that big
when you think about it. It's a lot of area; but 88⅜ miles is really not all that
great a distance for an automobile; though the distance around the
perimeter would be something like 353½ miles. At 55 mph it would take
roughly 6½ hours start to finish-- quite a bit longer on a camel and/or a
donkey's back.

Personally, I would have been concerned about Joseph's safety more than
anything else; but apparently nobody interfered with Jacob's family in those
days (Gen 35:5) so they pretty much had carte blanche to graze wherever
they liked in those parts.

● Gen 37:14b-17 . .When he reached Shechem, a man came upon
him wandering in the fields. The man asked him: What are you
looking for? He answered: I am looking for my brothers. Could you
tell me where they are pasturing? The man said: They have gone
from here, for I heard them say "Let us go to Dothan". So Joseph
followed his brothers and found them at Dothan.

It's interesting that the man isn't on record asking Joseph who he was nor
who his brothers might be. Probably everybody around Shechem knew
Jacob's family personally because they had all lived around there for some
time before moving south. In America's olde West, people knew each other
for miles around because, quite simply, there just wasn't all that many
people to know.

Dothan has yet to be precisely located. Some say it was about 12 miles
north of Shechem; but that's really only an educated guess. Years later,
Dothan became the stage for a pretty exciting event. (2Kgs 6:8-23)
_

Webers_Home · May 20, 2018

-
Genesis 37:18-20

● Gen 37:18a . .They saw him from afar,

Just how far isn't said; though it was probably the youngest among Joseph's
brothers who saw and recognized him first. A few of the men were getting
up in years at this time and were well past young adulthood.

Optical science is relatively recent. For millennia, people got by on just their
natural eyesight without the aid of lenses. Prior to the invention of
eyeglasses, Solomon rued that one of the curses of old age is failing
eyesight. (Ecc 12:1-2)

The first recorded use of a "corrective" lens was by the emperor Nero (ce
37-68) who was known to watch the gladiatorial games through an emerald,
presumably to correct for myopia. The gem probably wasn't ground to any
specific prescription, nor even any particular shape. Nero probably
discovered, like any kid does with a water glass, that the shape of the stone
somehow modified light; and as luck would have it, Nero's emerald worked
pretty well for him.

The Arabs had some understanding of lenses sometime around ce 1200, and
eyeglasses began to come into common use in Italy around ce 1300.
Practically all advances in the science of optics have taken place within just
the last thousand years, so when the Bible says people like Isaac had "dim"
eyes, it probably just means they could have used a pair of glasses.

● Gen 37:18b-20 . . and before he came close to them they conspired
to kill him. They said to one another: Here comes that dreamer!
Come now, let us kill him and throw him into one of the pits; and we
can say a savage beast devoured him. We shall see what comes of
his dreams!

The brothers' display of intended cruelty to their own kid brother Joseph is
shocking coming from the sacred patriarchs of the people of Israel.

I seriously doubt the brothers were intent upon ending Joseph's life only so
his dreams wouldn't come true. That was just bombastic rhetoric. Truth is:
they just hated him; simple as that.

Isn't it odd that when people hate someone they want them dead? How
about maybe a beating instead? Why not throw hot coffee or scalding water
in their face, or maybe singe their back with a hot steam iron while they're
sleeping? Why death? Because death is all that will truly satisfy the human
heart's hatred. Maybe nobody reading this will ever actually murder
anybody; but that doesn't mean you aren't a murder. Wishing somebody
would die, is the wish of a murderer's heart; and that's the plain truth of it.

"Whosoever hates his brother is a murderer" (1John 3:15)

The koiné Greek word for "brother" in that passage is adelphos (ad-el-fos')
which refers to one's kin rather than to one's neighbor.

Hatred for one's kin doesn't make the hater guilty of murder; it's only saying
that someone harboring hatred for their kin has the nature of a murderer.
For example: if a lion never ate meat even once in it's life, it would still be a
carnivore because lions have the nature of a carnivore. In like manner, if
kin-haters never get around to killing the objects of their hate; they would
still be murderers because they have the nature of a murderer.
_

Webers_Home · May 21, 2018

-
Genesis 37:21-25a

● Gen 37:21-22 . . But when Reuben heard it, he tried to save him
from them. He said: Let us not take his life. And Reuben went on:
Shed no blood! Cast him into that pit out in the wilderness, but do
not touch him yourselves-- intending to save him from them and
restore him to his father.

The suggestion to murder Joseph was apparently discussed in private among
only some of the brothers at first. When they attempted to bring Reuben in
on it, he balked. Reuben, the eldest son, seems to be the one dissenting
opinion in Joseph's case-- so far. Exactly why, is not stated; but even
though he messed up by sleeping with his father's concubine; that doesn't
mean he's okay with murdering his own kid brother.

No doubt Simeon and Levi had no reservations about ending Joseph's life on
the spot; having already displayed malicious tempers and made their bones
while handling their sister's scandal back in chapter 34. Reuben's balk seems
honestly motivated by a sincere concern for his dad's paternal feelings.
Reuben already hurt Jacob's feelings once before by sleeping with his
concubine. I don't think he wanted to do that again.

● Gen 37:23-24 . .When Joseph came up to his brothers, they
stripped Joseph of his tunic, the ornamented tunic that he was
wearing, and took him and cast him into the pit. The pit was empty;
there was no water in it.

Some of the brothers would have sorely loved to burn that "despicable" coat
to ashes since it fully represented their kid brother's lording it over them.

The Hebrew word for "pit" is bowr (bore); and means a hole (especially one
used as a cistern or a prison). Bowr is variously translated cistern, well,
prison, dungeon, and sometimes a pit as bottomless; viz: an abyss.

The "pit" may have been one of two widely-known natural water tanks in
that area. Some commentators believe the word "Dothan" means two wells,
or two natural tanks; like the Terrapin Tanks in the 1948 western movie The
3 Godfathers with John Wayne and Ward Bond. I seriously doubt that
experienced drovers like Jacob's sons would have dropped Joseph in a tank
with water because if he were to die in there; his putrefying body would
have contaminated it; thus rendering the precious resource unfit for drovers
and their herds. Natural water sources were essential to the safety of both
man and beast in those days.

Ancient Jewish commentators made the tank home to some lethal critters.

T. And when Joseph came to his brothers, they stripped him of his garment,
the figured garment that was on him, and took and threw him into the pit;
but the pit was empty, no water was therein, but serpents and scorpions
were in it. (Targum Jonathan)

● Gen 37:25a . .Then they sat down to a meal.

Would you be comfortable sitting down to a meal while listening to
somebody weeping and sobbing in the background? According to Gen 42:21
that's what Joseph's brothers did. He spent some of his time down in that
tank begging for his life; and they just kept right on dining like he wasn't
even there.

I read a story of the torture and mistreatment of captives in Sadaam
Hussein's pre-invasion jails. This one poor Iraqi man was forced sit down
upon the jagged neck of a broken glass pop bottle; and while the bottle filled
with blood from his torn bowel, Iraqi police played a game of cards
_

Webers_Home · May 22, 2018

-
Genesis 37:25b-28

● Gen 37:25b . . Looking up, they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites
coming from Gilead, their camels bearing gum, balm, and ladanum to
be taken to Egypt.

In our day, the Ishmaelites would be driving diesel trucks loaded with flat
screen TVs, 501 Levi jeans, Nike sports apparel, Apple iPhones, and Doritos.

The gum may have been tragacanth, or goats-thorn gum, because it was
supposed to be obtained from that plant.

The balm (or balsam) is an aromatic substance obtained from a plant of the
genus Amyris, which is a native of Gilead. In point of biblical fact, Gilead was
famous for its balm (Jer 8:22, Jer 46:11). Balms were of medical value in
those days.

The ladanum was probably labdanum, (possibly myrrh), a yellowish brown to
reddish brown aromatic gum resin with a bitter, slightly pungent taste
obtained from a tree (esp. Commiphora abyssinica of the family
Burseraceae) of eastern Africa and Arabia.

Gilead was located in the modern-day country of Jordan-- a mountainous
region on the east side of the Jordan River extending from the Sea of Galilee
down to the north end of the Dead Sea. It's about sixty miles long and
twenty miles wide. Its scenery is beautiful; the hills are fertile and crowned
with forests. It was on Gilead's western boundary that Jacob confronted
Laban in chapter 31, and also on Gilead's western boundary where Jacob
grappled with the angel in chapter 32.

The land of Gilead connected to a major trade route (spice road) from
Turkey and Mesopotamia to Egypt; and all points in between. Quite possibly
the Ishmaelites were following a track that would eventually take them right
down the very road that Hagar had taken towards Shur on her flight from
Sarah back in chapter 16.

The Ishmaelites were a blended people consisting of the families of Ishmael
and Midian, who were Abraham's progeny (Gen 16:15, Gen 25:2). The two
ethnic designations-- Midianites and Ishmaelites --are interchangeable (e.g.
Gen 37:28, Jdgs 8:24, Jdgs 8:26). Since the Ishmaelites were Abraham's
progeny, then they were blood kin to Jacob's clan; ergo: blood kin not only
to Joseph, but also to all the rest of the people of Israel.

● Gen 37:26-27 . .Then Judah said to his brothers: What do we gain
by killing our brother and covering up his blood? Come, let us sell
him to the Ishmaelites, but let us not do away with him ourselves.
After all, he is our brother, our own flesh. His brothers agreed.

Judah's alternative made good sea sense. There was always the risk that
somebody might rescue Joseph out of that tank and he would then high-tail
it for home and tattle on his brothers for what they did to him. With him an
anonymous slave, miles and miles away in Egypt, everything would work out
just the way most of them wanted, and the brothers would get a little
something in return for Joseph's hide.

● Gen 37:28 . .When Midianite traders passed by, they pulled Joseph
up out of the pit. They sold Joseph for twenty pieces of silver to the
Ishmaelites, who brought Joseph to Egypt.

The money in this instance isn't by weight as it had been in the purchase of
Sarah's cemetery back in chapter 23. This money is by the piece; of which
the precise nomenclature and value are currently unknown. They could have
been any size and worth; depending upon international merchant
agreements in those days. Joseph was sold at a price that Moses' Law later
fixed for juveniles. (Lev 27:5)

Incidentally, Christ was sold out for thirty pieces of silver (Matt 26:15) about
which the Bible says was a "lordly" price. (Zech 11:12-13)
_

Webers_Home · May 23, 2018

-
Genesis 37:29-36

● Gen 37:29-30 . .When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that
Joseph was not in the pit, he rent his clothes. Returning to his
brothers, he said: The boy is gone! Now, what am I to do?

Precisely where, and why, Reuben wasn't present when his brothers sold
Joseph isn't stated.

Reuben wasn't privy to his brothers' scheme to sell Joseph so he innocently
"informs" them of their kid brother's disappearance. Imagine his dismay to
discover that they, of all people, sold their own blood kin into slavery! How
in blazes is he supposed to explain that to his dad!?!

Reuben is so disturbed that he can't think straight; so his brothers, in their
characteristic cold, calculating way, devise yet another nefarious scheme.
They will stain Joseph's ornamental garment with blood and let their dad
draw his own conclusions about it.

● Gen 37:31-32 . .Then they took Joseph's tunic, slaughtered a kid,
and dipped the tunic in the blood. They had the ornamented tunic
taken to their father, and they said: We found this. Please examine
it; is it your son's tunic or not?

So without any explanation, nor details of the circumstances leading up to
Joseph's disappearance, they let Jacob jump to his own conclusion. That is a
very, very common, and very, very human way of perpetrating a lie.

● Gen 37:33-34 . . He recognized it, and said: My son's tunic! A
savage beast devoured him! Joseph was torn by a beast! Jacob rent
his clothes, put sackcloth on his loins, and mourned for his son many
days.

This is the very first mention of sackcloth in the Bible. It's a rough, coarse
material like burlap commonly used for packaging grain in bags. Though an
inexpensive fabric, it's prickly and chafes the skin so it's not really suitable
for undergarments. Exactly where Jacob got the idea to abuse himself like
that is unknown; but it's common in the Old Testament: mostly donned as
an outer garment rather than under.

If Joseph was "torn" then why was his tunic still in one piece? It's not
uncommon for carnivorous beasts like grizzly bears to devour a portion of
people's clothing right along with their flesh.

Well . . poor Jacob is so overcome with grief over the loss of his favorite son
that his logic chip just simply overheated and crashed. People who are
gravely upset sometimes have trouble finding their car keys even if they're
right inside their own pants pocket.

● Gen 37:35a . . All his sons and daughters sought to comfort him

"sons and daughters" is somewhat ambiguous and can indicate not just
Jacob's progeny, but every man, woman, and child in the whole family
regardless of age with himself the paterfamilias of the whole bunch.

● Gen 37:35b . . but he refused to be comforted, saying: No, I will go
down to the grave mourning for my son.

The Hebrew word translated "grave" is sheol (sheh-ole') and this is its
first appearance in the Bible.

Sheol is sometimes translated grave, sometimes hell, sometimes
netherworld (a.k.a. the world of the dead; viz: the afterlife) and sometimes
not translated at all but left as-is in Hebrew; presumably to avoid
controversy.

The New Testament equivalent of sheol is haides (hah'-dace) which is an
afterlife place where all the dead go, both the good dead and the bad dead,
and the young and the old regardless of race, age, religion, and/or gender.

The prophet Jonah went to sheol at some time during his nautical adventure
(Jonah 2:2) a place that he described as the roots of the mountains (Jonah
2:6a). Well; the mountains aren't rooted in the tummies of fish; they're
rooted down deep in the earth (Jonah 2:6b).

According to Ps 16:8-10 and Acts 2:22-31, Christ spent some time in
sheol/haides while waiting for his body to be restored to life.

According to Matt 12:40, sheol/haides is in the heart of the earth. Well;
Christ wasn't buried in the heart of the earth; he was buried on the surface
in a rock-hewn tomb. So in order for Christ to be on the surface of the earth
and simultaneously in the heart of the earth, he and his body had to part
company.

● Gen 37:35c . .Thus his father bewailed him.

Sometimes it's really best to leave people alone and let them grieve through
their loss. Many a well-meaning "comforter" has only succeeded in making
matters worse by attempting to talk friends out of their grief with good
intentioned, but nevertheless; tiresome philosophical platitudes.

And people who stifle their grief are only forestalling the inevitable. One day,
possibly when they least expect it, and quite possibly inconveniently, it will
catch up to them.

● Gen 37:36 . .The Midianites, meanwhile, sold him in Egypt to
Potiphar, a courtier of Pharaoh, and his chief steward.

Although slavery normally isn't regarded a blessing, in this case Joseph
couldn't have been sold into a better situation. Potiphar was well-connected
instead of just another plantation owner who would work Joseph to the
bone; undernourished, inadequately housed, and poorly clothed.

Courtiers were typically royalty's personal assistants and performed a
variety of duties. Potiphar was "chief steward". The Hebrew words means
boss of the butchers; an ambiguous term which implies not just slaughtering
and/or cooking animals for food, but also supervising capital punishments,
and/or supervising Pharaoh's personal bodyguards along with the oversight
of his own private jails; especially jails for political prisoners.
_

Kicking Off With Genesis

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads