Kicking Off With Genesis

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 30:40-43

● Gen 30:40a . . And Jacob culled the lambs, and made the flocks
face toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban;

That trick was expected to have the same effect as looking at striped rods.

● Gen 30:40b-43 . . and he put his own herds apart, and did not put
them with Laban's flock. Moreover, it came about whenever the
stronger of the flock were mating, that Jacob would place the rods in
the sight of the flock in the water troughs, so that they might mate
by the rods; but when the flock was feeble, he did not put them in;
so the feebler were Laban's and the stronger Jacob's. So the man
became exceedingly prosperous, and had large flocks and female
and male servants and camels and donkeys.

Jacob's second strategy was to divide Laban's herd into two groups: the best
ones by themselves, and the inferior ones by themselves, so that he had
better control over the breeding process to his own advantage. Normally,
Jacob's husbandry tricks would have worked more to Laban's advantage
than Jacob's because statistically, the majority of the lambs born would have
been Laban's had not God intervened.

Apparently Jacob's strategy was so successful that he was able to invest in
other kinds of capital too; viz: slaves, camels, and donkeys. You know what?
Jacob's troupe was beginning to look like that of a sheik; and before long;
he's going to start acting like one too. The worm is beginning to turn.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:1-13

● Gen 31:1 . . Now he heard the things that Laban's sons were
saying: Jacob has taken all that was our father's, and from that
which was our father's he has built up all this wealth.

People have a habit of using the "all" word just a little to the extreme. Jacob
certainly didn't take all of Laban's flock; only the lambs that were born
multicolored. However, what had seemed like a good bargain at the time
their dad made it, took a most unexpected, and distressing downturn.

Somehow Jacob's flock of cross-breeds was increasing at an alarming rate
and Laban's boys were seeing money on the hoof going to an outsider that
should have been theirs. Laban, who before was pleased as punch when
Jacob agreed to stay on, must now be wishing with all his heart that he
would leave. But the old boy couldn't get out of the contract without losing
face.

● Gen 31:2 . . Jacob also saw that Laban's manner toward him was
not as it had been in the past.

You can usually tell when people hate your guts. Often they speak away, in
another direction, while you stand there talking to the side of their face, and
sometimes even to the back of their head. They are so overcome with malice
that they cannot even stand to look directly at you. And when they do look,
it's with narrowed, beady eyes; squinting, as if into the sun.

● Gen 31:3 . .Then the Lord said to Jacob: Return to the land of your
fathers where you were born, and I will be with you.

Some people interpret that to read: And I will be waiting for you. They see it
that way because they insist that Jews can't be blessed when they're out of
the place of blessing; viz: out of Eretz Israel. But that's nonsense in Jacob's
case. God promised He to be with him and protect him wherever he went.
(Gen 28:15)

Time to go; and the timing couldn't be better. Laban really loathed Jacob by
now and I'm sure he didn't want his nephew working on the ranch any
longer. A falling out isn't necessarily a bad thing. I often take one as a
nudge that God wants me elsewhere. Sometimes you have to burn one
bridge before crossing another.

● Gen 31:4 . . Jacob had Rachel and Leah called to the field, where
his flock was,

This next conversation was for the sisters' ears only so Jacob sprung an
unannounced briefing out in the pastures where no one would overhear and
go tattle to Laban. Jacob wants his wives' support for his next move; and he
needs to find out how they feel about their dad and if they are ready to
leave home and go out on their own. Rachel and Leah had never been away
from Haran, nor away from their dad's influence before now; nor has anyone
till now given them a say in their destiny.

● Gen 31:5-7 . . and said to them: I see that your father's manner
toward me is not as it has been in the past. But the God of my father
has been with me. As you know, I have served your father with all
my might; but your father has cheated me, changing my wages time
and again. God, however, would not let him do me harm.

No matter what Laban did in his nefarious efforts to thwart Jacob's
prosperity, God would turn it to Jacob's advantage. He was indeed bullet
proof and it must have frustrated his father-in-law to no end.

● Gen 31:8-9 . . If he said thus "The speckled shall be your wages"
then all the flocks would drop speckled young. And if he said thus:
"The streaked shall be your wages" then all the flocks would drop
streaked young. God has taken away your father's livestock and
given it to me.

Laban's blatant lack of scruples is beyond belief. He and Jacob had agreed
that all the multicolored animals would be Jacob's. But whenever the
purebred flock began producing too much of a certain strain-- say, the
streaked ones --then Laban would change his mind and say that Jacob could
only keep the spotted ones.

Well, then God made the herd produce more spotted ones. And when Laban
would change the arrangement yet again and say that Jacob couldn't have
any more spotted ones and could only have the ones that were striped; then
God would see to it that striped babies were born. So, no matter which way
Laban went, Jacob always won.

● Gen 31:10-12 . . Once, at the mating time of the flocks, I had a
dream in which I saw that the he-goats mating with the flock were
streaked, speckled, and mottled. And in the dream an angel of God
said to me: Jacob! Here; I answered. And he said: Note well that all
the he-goats which are mating with the flock are streaked, speckled,
and mottled; for I have noted all that Laban has been doing to you.

There weren't really any streaked or speckled or mottled rams mating with
the ewes because Laban's animals were all blue ribbon. But people in those
days didn't know about recessive genes like we know about them today. So
God showed Jacob, in a way that he could understand, that the animals
doing the mating were the heterozygous ones. God, who can see past
outside colors, and deep into genetic code, made sure the right ones were
mating so Jacob's herd would increase to his advantage in spite of Laban's
interference. (chuckle) Talk about a stacked deck!

● Gen 31:13 . . I am the God of Beth-el, where you anointed a pillar
and where you made a vow to me. Now, arise and leave this land
and return to your native land.

I wonder if Jacob could have used that as an excuse to depart; viz: tell
Laban that God appeared and ordered him to return to Canaan and make
good on his vow? Moses tried something like that with Pharaoh (Ex 3:18).
But Pharaoh still wouldn't let them go, so God had to destroy Egypt to make
him comply.

I seriously doubt that Laban would've ever let Jacob go on religious grounds.
It's possible that's why Jacob sneaked away: to avoid a violent confrontation
with his father-in-law that could lead to Laban's death. Leah and Rachel
might have trouble dealing with that.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:14-21

● Gen 31:14-15 . .Then Rachel and Leah replied and said to him:
Have we then still a share and an inheritance in our father's house?
Are we not considered by him as strangers? For he has sold us and
even totally consumed our money!

Now the truth comes out. All along the girls had resented the calculating,
business-like way that their dad sold them into marriage; like they were
commodities: not even caring how they might feel about living with Jacob;
and especially how the sisters might feel about sharing the same husband.

And what an incredible louse! The girls were each supposed to get a dowry,
but Laban kept it back and then, of all things, spent their dowries on
himself; or, worse yet, on himself and on the girls' brothers. Weasel! That
reminds me of one of my favorite bumper stickers:

MEN ARE NOT PIGS!
Pigs are gentle, sensitive, intelligent animals.

Laban was obviously some sort of maladjusted sociopath with one of those
"borderline" personality disorders. I don't know what happened to him in life
to make him that way, but something was very wrong with that man. The
attitude he displayed toward his little girls was absolutely abnormal. It was
just as abnormal as any of the psycho dads in the news from time to time
who get prosecuted for abusing their own little flesh and blood daughters.

● Gen 31:16 . .Truly, all the wealth that God has taken away from our
father belongs to us and to our children. Now then, do just as God
has told you.

Yaaaaaay! (cheering section activity) That's it! We're out of here. The girls
are grown women with kids now and have to be thinking about their future.
Leah and Rachel are ready to leave home and kiss Haran good-bye forever.

Thank God that Rachel, Leah, and Dinah knew a man like Jacob or they
might have been poisoned on men all their lives. He wasn't perfect, yes that
is true. But Jacob was an excellent family man. For twenty years Rachel and
Leah observed and compared their brothers and their dad to Jacob. And
guess what. They much preferred to live with Jacob. He was fair, sensitive,
caring, accommodating, and always looking out for their best interests and
letting them have their own way whenever possible.

You know, Jacob didn't have to sleep with the maids. He could have put his
foot down and refused. But he did it to soothe his wives. I'm sure he was
aware of their rivalry amongst themselves and tried to help keep the peace
as best as he could. Life wasn't easy for Jacob; having to live with two
miserable women.

But he was willing to go the extra mile; and even let the girls have a say in
big decisions effecting the family's future. In the culture of that day, he
really didn't have to. Do you think Laban or his boys would have been
concerned about how the girls might feel about moving away to a new land?
No way. Their dad and brothers were nothing like that. They would have just
simply marched in and barked an announcement: Okay everybody; start
packing! We leave for California in two days!

● Gen 31:17-18 . .Thereupon Jacob put his children and wives on
camels; and he drove off all his livestock and all the wealth that he
had amassed, the livestock in his possession that he had acquired in
Paddan-aram, to go to his father Isaac in the land of Canaan.

That must have been quite a sight. Camels and people and supplies, dust
billowing everywhere, with Jacob's drovers moving the herds, followed by a
remuda of burros bringing up the rear. It was a real old fashion trail drive,
kind of like an 1840's wagon train. The girls must have been very excited to
be making their very first long-distance trek away from home. Rueben and
his brothers of course saw it as one big adventure. Yahoooooo! Move 'em
out! Beer-sheba or bust!

● Gen 31:19 . . Meanwhile Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and
Rachel stole her father's household idols.

Labans's household gods may have corresponded to ilani-- family gods of
the Nuzi household, and to the Roman's penates --household gods who were
thought to protect food supplies and assure the general well-being of the
family.

Since Laban was known for divination, some have suggested that Rachel
may have stolen his gods in order to prevent him from discovering Jacob's
whereabouts. However, I think Rachel just wanted those gods for their
potential access to providence.

● Gen 31:20-21 . . Jacob kept Laban the Aramean in the dark, not
telling him that he was fleeing, and fled with all that he had. Soon he
was across the Euphrates and heading toward the hill country of
Gilead.

There's a note in the JPS Tanakh concerning the phrase: "Jacob kept Laban
the Aramean in the dark". The actual Hebrew says: he stole Laban's mind.
So Rachel ripped off Laban's religion, and Jacob took his brains.

The precise route Jacob took to go home is uncertain. It's hard to believe
that he came directly south through the Syrian Desert on the back side of
Mt. Hermon. Maybe he did, I don't really know; but it sure looks that way

The region of Gilead is on the east side of the Jordan Valley in between Yam
Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee) and the Dead Sea. Why Jacob didn't proceed
down through Lebanon and the West Bank I'm not sure; except maybe he
was in a very big hurry to get away from Laban and back on relatively safer
home turf. The Gilead route would eventually take him into the Jordan
Valley, one of the best sources of water and pasture for his animals. In
Abraham's day, the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere, like the
garden of God. It was probably still in pretty good shape yet in Jacob's.

Nowadays, usually all that travelers really need are gas stations and motels.
But in that day, the selection of a route was always dictated by the need of
water and pasture for the animals; not only the herds, but also the ones
people rode upon. The Jordan Valley was a relatively hazardous route
because lions lived in that area back in Jacob's day; so his drovers would
have to guard the livestock day and night to protect them from predators.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:22-29a

● Gen 31:22 . . On the third day, Laban was told that Jacob had fled.

Laban was off some distance from home shearing his sheep, which usually
included a festival of some sort. The messengers probably waited till the
shearing was done, and the party was over, before laying the bad news on
ol' Laban.

I'd imagine he must have been absolutely livid with rage; and probably got
so worked up he actually turned red and began perspiring. Defeat is one
thing. But to be beaten by kin, by a nephew no less, was unbearable.

● Gen 31:23 . . So he took his kinsmen with him and pursued him a
distance of seven days, catching up with him in the hill country of
Gilead.

It took Jacob ten days to go the same distance Laban covered in seven--
that is if Laban departed right away without delay; which he probably didn't.
It would take at least a day or two to round up all his relatives and prepare
for the journey. Laban's contingent had an advantage though. They weren't
encumbered by herds and women and children, so they could cover a whole
lot more ground in one day than Jacob's troupe.

● Gen 31:24 . . But God appeared to Laban the Aramean in a dream
by night and said to him: Beware of attempting anything with Jacob,
good or bad.

The Stone Tanach reads: Beware lest you speak with Jacob either good or
bad.

But if God meant for Laban to stay completely away from Jacob and not say
a single word to him, Laban would have gone home right then and there
because he knew better than to mess with Jacob's god. Maybe Laban didn't
worship Yhvh, but did at least fear Him. The book of Revelation tells of
people who are absolutely terrified of God, but yet still refuse to submit.
(Rev 6:12-17, Rev 16:10-11)

● Gen 31:25 . . Laban overtook Jacob. Jacob had pitched his tent on
the Height, and Laban with his kinsmen encamped in the hill country
of Gilead.

Once Laban's scouts located Jacob's troupe, his contingent made camp for
the night and moved on up the next day; probably very early before Jacob's
caravan could get up and moving again.

What a chore that must have been. First everyone had to be fed breakfast,
which meant a whole lot of cooking. Somebody had to round up firewood for
the portable ovens. Then the women prepared the meals, which must have
been work itself since no one had packaged foods in those days. Then they
had to do the dishes, repack, dismantle the tents, and load everything back
on to the camels and donkeys. Meanwhile the drovers were out tightening
up the herds and rounding up strays.

Into this busy scene rode MadDog Laban and his trigger-happy posse.

● Gen 31:26-27a . . And Laban said to Jacob: What did you mean by
keeping me in the dark and carrying off my daughters like captives
of the sword? Why did you flee in secrecy and mislead me and not
tell me?

Duh. Like he really didn't know? Laban's kind are all alike. In my 70+ years,
I've seen enough of them to know. Jerks like him are never in the wrong
about anything; ever. And they always attempt to throw suspicion off
themselves by trumping up a hollow charge against the very people they
wronged. One of their favorite demands is: What's the matter with you; why
are you acting like that? They are so aggravating with their perpetual habit
of feigning a pious ignorance of their own self-generated bad circumstances.

Like captives of the sword? What does that imply-- that Jacob kidnapped
Rachel and Leah and made slaves out of them? What utter nonsense! They
were his wives as Laban very well knew!

And did he insinuate that Jacob dragged the girls (excuse me; the full-grown
married women) away from Haran against their will? Laban himself was
likely wont to drag a spouse around the whole world regardless of how she
might feel about it. Why would it be wrong for Jacob to do it but not wrong
for Laban? And that is another of his kind's traits. They are so quick to take
the high moral ground and make the rules for everyone else to follow while
at the same time fully exempting themselves from the very same standards.

NOTE: It's very interesting that Laban never even dreamed that Jacob
consulted with Rachel and Leah first prior to departing for Isaac's turf. No
doubt because that was something he would never do himself.

● Gen 31:27b . . I would have sent you off with festive music, with
timbrel and lyre.

What a bare-faced lie. The only music Laban would have arranged for is
some to accompany himself while he danced on Jacob's grave.

● Gen 31:28a . .You did not even let me kiss my sons and daughters
good-bye!

The word for "sons" is ben (bane) which means a son (as a builder of the
family name), in literal and figurative relationships, including grandson,
subject, nation, quality or condition. Ben isn't always used to denote a
specific gender, nor always used in genetic applications. In Gen 6:2 it simply
refers to pious men rather than God's biological progeny. The New
Testament equivalent of ben is huios (hwee-os') which means a child of
either gender; e.g. Gal 4:6, 1John 3:1-2

Laban probably never kissed them before anyway, so why should Jacob
think he would want to do it now? Didn't it ever occur to Laban's enormous
conceit that maybe his offspring might all be glad to be rid of him?

● Gen 31:28b-29a . . It was a foolish thing for you to do. I have it in
my power to do you harm;

Jacob's uncle is the king of meddlers. In Laban's imperialistic mind, Jacob
deserved punishment for failing to consult with His Lordship before pulling
up stakes and heading south. But Jacob has done nothing truly
reprehensible. He's a grown man with a right to his own destiny. Jacob owes
his uncle nothing; not even an explanation because the man is nothing less
than a demon's seed; and on top of that a thoughtless bully and a
stupendous bigot.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:29b-32

● Gen 31:29b . . but the God of your father

The "god of your father" is all the same as saying your family's god. There a
humorous difference between Jacob's family god and Laban's family gods.
Jacob's family god can't be kidnapped and carried around in a saddle bag.

● Gen 31:29c . . said to me last night: Beware of attempting anything
with Jacob, good or bad.

That was a no idle threat and I think the man knew it. If Laban tried to
persuade Jacob to return to Paddan-aram; he would die. If he harmed
Jacob; he would die. If he attempted to take the girls, the grandkids, and all
the flocks; he would die.

In other words, God told that man not to interfere with Jacob's life in any
way at all or He would give him good reason to regret it. From now on,
Jacob, and all that pertained to him, was off limits-- including Laban's ex
daughters, who were both married women; old enough to be on their own,
and completely out their dad's jurisdiction. When they were girls living at
home under their father's roof; then their dad could rule them. But married
women are ruled by their husbands.

"your husband . . . he will rule over you." (Gen 3:16)

● Gen 31:30a . .Very well, you had to leave because you were
longing for your father's house.

Wrong! Jacob had to leave because God issued him marching orders. And
Jacob really needed to go anyway. Life with uncle Laban was unbearable. It
was humiliating, and it was suffocating. Jacob could never achieve his
greatest potential with a man like that always interfering and controlling his
destiny.

Leaving Laban's ranch was in truth, an act of self defense; not just for
Jacob, but for Leah and Rachel too. Their dad ruled them from the day they
were born. That's okay for minor children, but it is not an okay thing for
married women. Married women need to be royalty in a home of their own,
and be allowed to do their own thinking and to make their own decisions--
Princesses Of Quite A Lot, and Queens Of Everything.

I've heard it said that no one is truly a failure when they can always serve as
a bad example. (chuckle) Sort of like ex drunks, smokers, and drug addicts.
Well . . a man like Laban is a perfect example of a parent from hell. He's
probably the worst case scenario there is. Hopefully most of us will never
have to deal with an in-law like him.

But there are only two ways to deal with parents and in-laws from hell: 1)
stand up for your rights, and 2) get as far away as possible where their
meddling tendrils can't mess up your life. Jacob and the girls did both; and
Yhvh's providence was right there on hand to make sure they succeeded.

● Gen 31:30 . . but why did you steal my gods?

Laban accused Jacob of taking the gods without even first inquiring if he
actually did. In the American system of criminal justice, a person is assumed
innocent until proven guilty; and the burden of proof is upon the accuser.
Not only is that a very good principle of civic government, but it is also an
excellent social skill and will go a long way towards nurturing friendships.

● Gen 31:31 . . Jacob answered Laban, saying: I was afraid because I
thought you would take your daughters from me by force.

Jacob was probably right about that. He worked for Laban twenty years and
suspected the old boy would never let Jacob take the girls away from
Paddan-aram. Laban was definitely one of those over-my-dead-body kinds
of people. With them; it's not a matter of doing what's right and fair all
around; it's always a matter of who's going to win. But it's doubtful Laban
would've traveled all that way just to retrieve his daughters or his gods: I've
no doubt that what he really wanted was Jacob's livestock.

● Gen 31:32 . . But anyone with whom you find your gods shall not
remain alive! In the presence of our kinsmen, point out what I have
of yours and take it. Jacob, of course, did not know that Rachel had
stolen them.

It might appear that Jacob spoke rashly. But in that day, the code of
Hammurabi stipulated that the theft of temple gods was a death offense.
Apparently, it was truly a very serious crime in the culture of that day to
steal household gods as well.

NOTE: The Code of Hammurabi dates back to about 1772 BC. Precisely
when Jacob was born has not yet been accurately established. Some feel his
birth took place sometime between 2000 and 1700 BC.

Anyway; if Laban had been disposed to honor Hammurabi's code, then he
wouldn't have been so quick to condemn Jacob. But the man was a code
unto himself; which has been pretty obvious all along.

/

 

[Jay Ross]

NOTE: The Code of Hammurabi dates back to about 1772 BC. Precisely
when Jacob was born has not yet been accurately established. Some feel his
birth took place sometime between 2000 and 1700 BC.

My understanding is that
Isaac was born around the year 2052 BC.
Jacob was born 60 years later in 1992 BC.
When Jacob was around 40 years old he received Isaac's blessing around the year 1952 BC
Probably within 2 years, Isaac sent Jacob packing to Laban's household to find a wife for himself, probably around the year 1950 BC
40 years later Jacob begins his return journey to the Land of Canaan probably around the year 1910 BC

Attached is a table which shows a suggested timeline for the births of Jacob's sons and daughter Dinah.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:33-41

● Gen 31:33-35 . . So Laban went into Jacob's tent and Leah's tent
and the tents of the two maidservants; but he did not find them.
Leaving Leah's tent, he entered Rachel's tent.

. . . Rachel, meanwhile, had taken the idols and placed them in the
camel cushion and sat on them; and Laban rummaged through the
tent without finding them. For she said to her father: Let not my lord
take it amiss that I cannot rise before you, for the period of women
is upon me. Thus he searched, but could not find the household
idols.

Camel cushions were a saddle and basket assembly upon which passengers
rode the beasts. Rachel feigned menstrual difficulties to throw her dad off
track. (She may indeed have actually been in her period at the time. If not,
then Jacob himself would have suspected she was concealing something.)
You've got to hand it to Rachel. Considering the stakes, she was one cool
lady under fire. Well; that was indeed one time that what some women
deem "the curse" came in very handy.

● Gen 31:36-37 . . Now Jacob became incensed and took up his
grievance with Laban. Jacob spoke up and said to Laban: What is my
crime, what is my guilt that you should pursue me? You rummaged
through all my things; what have you found of all your household
objects? Set it here, before my kin and yours, and let them decide
between us two.

It's a pity Jacob didn't have a force of armed men at his disposal like
grandpa Abraham did at one time. Jacob and his ranch hands were pastoral
men, totally untrained for war, and certainly not prepared to deal with a
bully like Laban. When people are unarmed, and unskilled in warfare, they
are easy prey, and might just as well kiss their human rights good-bye.
There are those who yearn for peace at any price. But freedom is not free.
In this evil world; freedom is a priceless treasure retained only by those with
enough mettle to defend for it.

Jacob endured countless indignities at the hands of his father-in-law, which
he suffered in silence for many years. All the pent up emotion which he
restrained for so long finally poured out in an unfettered tirade. Jacob
demanded, in the witness of the kin they both had in common, to justify
such a hot pursuit to catch him before he reached home with what was, in
every way, rightfully his own private property. Laban could only maintain an
embarrassed silence as Jacob spoke.

● Gen 31:38a . .These twenty years I have spent in your service,
your ewes and she-goats never miscarried,

That is an incredible record. A certain number of still births are to be
expected in any herd. But they never occurred because Jacob was gentle: he
never whipped the animals, nor drove and fatigued Laban's herds like some
overly zealous, insensitive shepherds might do; especially with flocks that
belong to someone else and are not their own. And plus, Laban knew very
well himself from divination, that Jacob's god ever watched over the
pregnant animals so Laban could prosper under Jacob's care.

● Gen 31:38b . . nor did I feast on rams from your flock.

It was a shepherd's right to feed himself with meat from a flock he was hired
to tend. But Jacob never exercised that right.

● Gen 31:39 . .That which was torn by beasts I never brought to you;
I myself made good the loss; you exacted it of me, whether snatched
by day or snatched by night.

If Jacob had but brought the remains in to show Laban, it would have would
cleared him of any suspicion of negligence in guarding the herds from
predators. But by not bringing them in, he automatically took the blame for
their loss and paid for them out of his own pocket rather than make Laban
absorb the loss. Why Jacob did that I don't know because he sure didn't
have to. All he had to do to prove to Laban that he was there on the job
guarding the herd from predators, was to demonstrate that he drove them
away before they could finish eating their prey. Only a man truly looking out
for the best interests of his master would ever do what Jacob did.

● Gen 31:40 . . Often, scorching heat ravaged me by day and frost by
night; and sleep fled from my eyes.

Pastoral life takes its toll on men. Just look at some who have been ranching
and farming for a number of years. They are old way before their time. The
sun and the elements give them shoe leather faces lined with deep creases.
Jacob, by the way, was at least 95 at this time and probably looked 150
after all those years out on the range with his father Isaac's herds, and
later; his uncle Laban's.

● Gen 31:41 . . Of the twenty years that I spent in your household, I
served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for
your flocks; and you changed my wages time and again.

Jacob reminded Laban of his service of twenty years, fourteen of which had
been simply for the privilege of marrying his daughters. He didn't mention
Laban's deception (probably for Leah's sake), which had doubled the length
of his service in return for a woman he didn't want in the first place.

In spite of all the good, of all his conscientious service, and of all the charity
that Jacob had lavished undeserving upon Laban, the man revised his
agreement with Jacob ten times in an evil-minded attempt to garner all the
gains for himself and to prevent his own nephew from prospering. The man
sure knew how to repay loyalty. Yeah-- right in the teeth. And in the end, he
fully intended to send his nephew away totally empty handed-- if indeed he
would even spare Jacob's life.

It would require a college degree in criminal psychology to understand what
makes a man like Laban tick. He was really too messed up to comprehend.
But it's obvious that Laban so hated Jacob that he couldn't stand letting him
keep a single thing that once belonged to himself. You know, even if there
were no hell, one would have to be constructed to quarantine people like
Laban because there is nowhere else for them to go. The kingdom of God is
a place of peace and kindness. If certain undesirables like Laban were
allowed in the kingdom of God; in short order they'd turn it into another
kingdom of men.

/

 

[Jay Ross]

Camel cushions were a saddle and basket assembly upon which passengers
rode the beasts. Rachel feigned menstrual difficulties to throw her dad off
track. (She may indeed have actually been in her period at the time. If not,
then Jacob himself would have suspected she was concealing something.)
You've got to hand it to Rachel. Considering the stakes, she was one cool
lady under fire. Well; that was indeed one time that what some women
deem "the curse" came in very handy.

Why is it that the expression found here: -

Genesis 31:35: - 35 And she said to her father, "Let it not displease my lord that I cannot rise before you, for the manner of women is with me." And he searched but did not find the household idols.

assumed to be a reference to menstrual difficulties. Rachel was heavily pregnant with her second child, Benjamin, who was born a short time later, i.e. within a month or two of this incident. That was why her father did not ask her to move so that he could search the area where she was sitting.

Pastoral life takes its toll on men. Just look at some who have been ranching and farming for a number of years. They are old way before their time. The sun and the elements give them shoe leather faces lined with deep creases. Jacob, by the way, was at least 95 at this time and probably looked 150 after all those years out on the range with his father Isaac's herds, and
later; his uncle Laban's.

Again you are making/repeating assumptions based on very poor scholarly studies of the story of Jacob and his descendants. Jacob was no more that around 80 or so years old at this time. He was around 40 years old when his father used the excuse to sent him off to get a wife for himself from his mothers family, because Esau wanted to harm him. Jacob then worked around 40 years for Laban before he left to return back to his father in the Land of Canaan, which means that he was 80+ years old at this time, allowing, around 50 years before Jacob sets off for Egypt, for another two or so generation of his descendants to be born during this interval of time. Remember Judah waited around 12 years after their return to Canaan before we went and found for himself a wife from among the people in the land. He then has 3 sons, before marrying of his eldest son to Tamar, but then God became displeased with him and slew him, so Jacob married his second son off to Tamar, but he too died and Jacob held off marrying his third son to Tamar. Because Jacob did not have his third son marry Tamar, when he was of age, she took matters into her own hands and slept with Jacob resulting in twins being born. Then one of the twins, Perez, had two sons who were born before Jacob left to go down to Egypt. Is 38 years enough time, as is being suggested in the previous post, for the above mentioned births to happen in? It is my view that another 10 or so years is required for the above example given.

Jacob reminded Laban of his service of twenty years, fourteen of which had been simply for the privilege of marrying his daughters. He didn't mention Laban's deception (probably for Leah's sake), which had doubled the length of his service in return for a woman he didn't want in the first place.

Again, poor scholarly examination of the required period of time that Jacob spent with Laban is being repeated in the quoted post above. In my last post in this thread I attached a PDF file which sets out the time period for Jacob's sons to be born during his years with Laban. This study provides evidence that in all probability, Jacob worked for Laban for 40 years before he left to return home and not the 20 years which most commentaries tend to insist on.

It is a pity that such fine posts and comments are spoiled by repeating poor scholarship and comments.

Shalom

 

[Webers_Home]

-

for the manner of women is with me." And he searched but did not find
the household idols.

Well; I tend to think that if Rachel was strong enough to travel across
country on the back of a jostling camel, then she was certainly strong
enough to stand for a moment or two.

I also rather tend to think that Rachel's choice of words indicated to her dad
that she had better sense than to plunk her derriere down on something as
sacred as the household gods where there would be a chance of desecrating
them with menstrual discharge; especially in a day when the sciences of feminine
hygiene and sanitation weren't all that advanced.

poor scholarly examination . . . repeating poor scholarship and comments

You really ought to be a little more thoughtful with your remarks lest the hapless day
arrive that you are forced to eat your words.

/

 

[Jay Ross]

-

Well; I tend to think that if Rachel was strong enough to travel across
country on the back of a jostling camel, then she was certainly strong
enough to stand for a moment or two.

I also rather tend to think that Rachel's choice of words indicated to her dad
that she had better sense than to plunk her derriere down on something as
sacred as the household gods where there would be a chance of desecrating
them with menstrual discharge; especially in a day when the sciences of feminine
hygiene and sanitation weren't all that advanced.

Again, you repeat the same tired miss understanding that Rachel was referring to her menstrual difficulties whereas, if you do a time line study of the events you would understand that she was very pregnant. That was why Laban did not ask her to move from where she was. Rachel's statement that she was in the way for women certainly covers the case of her being very pregnant, and with her being in her 60's, as a best guess, her ability to stand would not have been as easy as if she was simply menstruating. Sadly Rachel died in childbirth within a few months of this incident when she bore Benjamin.

-

You really ought to be a little more thoughtful with your remarks lest the hapless day
arrive that you are forced to eat your words.

/

To me it seems that you have read a few commentaries and are simply regurgitating what you have read without giving any thoughtful consideration to the actual story contained within the scriptures. But then, it seems to me, that you hold to the tradition of these errors.

Now I have no problems with eating my own words, and, I welcomes it, when people provide constructive comments which demonstrate that I have actually err in my posts. I apologise, thank the poster who has actually pointed out an error in my post, and then move on having learnt something worth while for them.

Now, I have been consistently pointing out your errors in this thread and this is the first time, from memory, that you have actual acknowledged what I have posted and responded.

I know that it is important to provide a well founded commentary on what is recorded in the scriptures, but you continue to put forward your own understanding whether or not they are factual.

Shalom

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:42-49

● Gen 31:42 . . Had not the God of my father, the God of Abraham
and the Fear of Isaac, been with me, you would have sent me away
empty-handed. But God took notice of my plight and the toil of my
hands, and He gave judgment last night.

Anyone there that day, who had the slightest conscience at all, must have
looked upon Laban as one would look upon the most crooked, and upon the
most dishonest, unscrupulous, and unthankful of men with utter disgust.
Jacob told it like it was, and no one objected; and no one stood up to speak
in Laban's defense.

● Gen 31:43a . .Then Laban spoke up and said to Jacob: The
daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, and the
flocks are my flocks; all that you see is mine.

Oh, give it up already!! Someone really needed to teach that communistic
crumb some principles related to the transfer of property. The girls were no
longer his daughters. They were married women: one flesh with a man who
worked very hard to both earn them and deserve them. The children were
fathered by Jacob, not by Laban. And the flocks were Jacob's by right, not by
loan nor by theft, nor by gift, nor by fraud. They were his honest
compensation; the very wages that Laban himself had agreed upon.

Everything on that mountain pertaining to Jacob was personal property and
Laban had no right to lay claim to any of it. He was just very lucky that
Jacob was not of the kind to show him the business end of a shotgun and
point him north, back the way he came.

When Laban finally had an opportunity to respond to Jacob's outburst, he
couldn't say anything at all by way of denial to Jacob's claims and charges.
Instead; he tried to divert attention away from the embarrassing facts by
changing the subject. Though even himself knew very well he was in the
wrong; a conceited man like Laban just can't bring himself to make public
acknowledgement of his guilt. People like him typically try whatever means
they can muster to shift the blame away from themselves; or at least shift
the attention away from their own culpability to whatever real or imagined
grievances they can find in others.

● Gen 31:43b . .Yet what can I do now about my daughters or the
children they have borne?

His question was just a smoke screen. Laban as much as said: It would be
contrary to all human sensibilities to do anything to bring grief to my own
flesh and blood. How could you possibly think I am capable of such a thing?

Laban's lack of integrity is almost beyond belief. He followed Jacob for seven
days and at least three hundred miles for the specific purpose of murdering
him and taking all the herds and all the people back to Paddan-aram. That
wouldn't have caused his kin grief? --to murder his grandkids' dad, and to
murder Leah's and Rachel's husband?

● Gen 31:44 . . Come, then, let us make a pact, you and I, that there
may be a witness between you and me.

Instead of ending Jacob's life, which was no doubt his original intent, Laban
now proposes a very noble settlement-- a gentleman's non-aggression pact
between himself and Jacob.

● Gen 31:45-46 . .Thereupon Jacob took a stone and set it up as a
pillar. And Jacob said to his kinsmen: Gather stones. So they took
stones and made a mound; and they partook of a meal there by the
mound.

Pillars were common in those days as watchers --gods who intervene in the
affairs of men. (cf. Gen 28:22, Dan 4:17)

● Gen 31:47a . . Laban named it Yegar-sahadutha,

Yegar-sahadutha is Aramaic, Laban's tongue, and means: heap of the
testimony, or cairn of witness.

● Gen 31:47b . . but Jacob named it Gal-ed.

Gal-ed is Hebrew and means pretty much the same thing.

● Gen 31:48-49 . . And Laban declared: This mound is a witness
between you and me this day. That is why it was named Gal-ed; And
[it was called] Mizpah, because he said: May the Lord watch
between you and me, when we are out of sight of each other.

Mizpah means watchtower. Laban wasn't the one who called it Mizpah. It
went on to become known as that because of his pronouncement.

Did Laban mean to imply that Jacob needed watching? For those twenty
years in Laban's employ, what had Jacob ever done on the sly to harm
Laban? Doesn't Jacob's sterling twenty-year employment record count for
anything? But Laban just can't stop himself from denigrating his son-in-law
right up to the bitter end of their association.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:50

● Gen 31:50 . . If you ill-treat my daughters or take other wives
besides my daughters-- though no one else be about, remember,
God Himself will be witness between you and me.

Had Jacob ever ill treated Rachel and Leah all those years in Laban's
employ? When had the girls ever complained to their dad about Jacob's3
behavior? Was it really reasonable to assume he would ever abuse them
some day? No it wasn't. Jacob had always treated the girls with kindness
and consideration, and Laban had neither cause nor reason to think Jacob
would ever do otherwise. And since when did Laban really care about Rachel
and Leah anyway? He sold them like livestock, and spent their dowry on
himself.

Marry other women? Jacob wasn't a womanizer; nor had he ever been a
womanizer. He had only wanted just one in the first place; but was tricked
by Laban himself into a bigamous marriage with two sisters that Israel's
covenanted law would later forbid. But still, as a grown man, in the culture
of that day, Jacob had every right to a harem while Laban had no right
whatsoever to impose limits on the size and/or the nature of Jacob's family
relations.

Laban intended for the stone pile to be a boundary between himself and
Jacob so that Jacob would not come past it later on for revenge after God
made him strong enough to whup Laban. But that was another evidence of
his poor judgment of Jacob's character.

Jacob was definitely not a war-faring man; anybody could see that. He was
just like his dad Isaac; who was also a peaceable man, satisfied to simply
stop the strife between himself and his enemies. No way would Jacob ever
seek revenge. It just wasn't in his nature to do that. But Laban had a wicked
conscience. It wasn't beyond him to project his own base motives upon
others and assume they would do the very same things he himself would do
in their place.

In return, Laban would promise to not come past the monument to cause
Jacob any harm; which he no doubt would if God hadn't intervened to
prevent it. What a hollow covenant. All Laban did that day was put up an
appearance of nobility and try his best to save face in an otherwise very
embarrassing situation. And the meanwhile heaping additional indignities
upon Jacob, and slurring the reputation of a very decent man.

NOTE: Bethuel's blood produced three really good women: Rebecca, Leah,
and Rachel. You gotta wonder what happened to the men. Why were they all
such misfires? Families like that are a genetic mystery. Just look at Cain and
Abel-- two brothers from the very same parents; yet one was a good man
and the other not. Go figure.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 31:51-54

● Gen 31:51 . . And Laban said to Jacob: Here is this mound and here
the pillar which I have set up between you and me:

Laban didn't set up anything. He only participated in dedicating the pillar.
Jacob and his sons set it up with their own hands. And it was all their own
idea, not Laban's.

Laban likely reasoned that seeing as how he outranked his son-in-law in the
social order, then whatever they did together should be reckoned to Laban's
credit; sort of like the Pharaohs taking credit for their pyramids when it was
others who did the actual construction. (cf. Dan 4:30)

● Gen 31:52 . . this mound shall be witness and this pillar shall be
witness that I am not to cross to you past this mound, and that you
are not to cross to me past this mound and this pillar, with hostile
intent.

I think Laban was beginning to become just a little bit nervous because
there was something different about Jacob. He wasn't acting like the quiet,
humble, hard working hired hand Laban knew up in Paddan-aram. Jacob was
acting more like a sheik. And I think Laban was just a little unraveled by
that. He wasn't accustomed to that kind of a Jacob. And he knew it would be
impossible to defeat Jacob while Jacob's god watched over him. And I think
he was afraid that if Jacob ever did come up against him, Yhvh would make
sure he won.

● Gen 31:53a . . May the God of Abraham and the god of Nahor--
their ancestral deities --judge between us.

Laban equated Abraham's God with Nahor's gods. Big mistake. Not all gods
are equal. But to a man like Laban, one is as good as another.

● Gen 31:53b . . And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.

No way was Jacob going to honor Nahor's gods with an oath. And speaking
of that:

Here in America, the US Constitution protects religious liberty. However, the
Constitution does not require American citizens to respect all religions
equally. In our mind's eye, burning a holy book such as the Koran is no
more destructive than burning yesterday's newspaper; and the First
Amendment grants us the right to say so.

The US Government accommodates Arab feelings about Islam and the Koran
because it is in the USA's national interests to do so. But I'm not a politician,
nor do I desire to be one if it means compromising Christ's feelings about
religions that teach things different than his. (cf. 1Cor 10:25-31, 1Cor
16:22, and Gal 1:8-9)

Anyway, that ended the meeting and Laban went back to his own camp for
the night.

● Gen 31:54 . . Jacob then offered up a sacrifice on the Height, and
invited his kinsmen to partake of the meal. After the meal, they
spent the night on the Height.

Jacob's sacrifice wasn't an 'olah (o-law') which is incinerated to ashes. It was
a zebach (zeh'-bakh); which more resembles Passover, where the lamb is
both an offering and a meal. So then, a biblical sacrifice isn't eo ipso
something given up or destroyed, but essentially pertains to something
dedicated; in this case: a festive dinner in Yhvh's honor.

You can bet that was a very happy occasion. Jacob's family was finally going
to be rid of ol' MadDog Laban once and for all; and without violence too.
Since a good part of the day was wrecked already, they stayed and planned
on leaving the next day after an impromptu Thanksgiving dinner. Next
hurtle: Big Red, a.k.a. Mr. Esau ben Isaac.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 32:1-3

● Gen 32:1 . . Early in the morning, Laban kissed his sons and
daughters and bade them good-bye; then Laban left on his journey
homeward.

Apparently nobody wanted to kiss Laban back, nor bid him a good-bye.

The old boy didn't altogether lack at least some affection for his family. But
he surely realized they must have come to deeply resent him by now; and
he was probably beginning to regret some of his actions. But Laban still
couldn't bring himself to apologize to Jacob. That would have been just too
humiliating, especially in front of all his kin; him being their paterfamilias
and all.

No further mention is made of Laban nor his sons in the Bible. He has the
distinction of being one of Scripture's most outstanding examples of a
worldly, covetous man; grossly infected with an acute case of unbridled
avarice, and completely void of genuine faith in the one true god. He knew
about Yhvh, and he was certainly given a thorough enough witness up at his
ranch, and in his dreams. He had seen the reality of Yhvh in Jacob's life,
along with the power of Yhvh in His blessings and protections of Jacob all
those years. Laban himself had, as a consequence of associating with Jacob,
enjoyed Yhvh's providence, and became wealthy on account of having
Yhvh's man working for him on his ranch.

Nevertheless, Rebecca's brother remained a hard-core idolater/capitalist;
seeking material gain for himself to the exclusion of all other considerations.
Rather than seeking to follow only Yhvh, and gain the light of life, he merely
envied, and resented, the blessings that God bestowed upon his son-in-law.
Laban finally ended up with neither light nor blessings. Thus, Jacob and his
community remained in association with The Light, while Laban and his clan
melted into the darkness.

● Gen 32:2 . . Jacob went on his way, and angels of God encountered
him.

Since the angels had nothing to say to Jacob, they obviously weren't there
as messengers. I believe the angels came for an "effect". Here's what I
mean.

Jacob's primary concern during his trip back to Canaan wasn't really his
father-in-law's pursuit. His real concern was the inevitable confrontation with
his brother Esau. The appearance of those angels very likely boosted Jacob's
courage, and assured him God was still in the area and still looking out for
his safety and making good on the promise at Gen 28:15.

Today, in our time, it's very unlikely to see angels. But the messages we
hear in church or in synagogue can do the job of boosting courage just the
same if we but hear those messages through an ear of faith. Here's a good
example.

In the third chapter of Isaiah, God predicted, through preaching, that terrible
things were in store for Jerusalem. I mean really terrible things that would
give you a bad case of butterflies in your stomach. You can imagine the
effect that had on those who heeded what the prophet was saying. Well, God
didn't want His believing followers worrying themselves that the impending
doom was evident that God had tossed them aside, so this is what He said
to them; through the preacher:

"Hail the just man, for he shall fare well; he shall eat the fruit of his works."
(Isa 3:10)

God wanted His believing followers to know that although they would have
to live through all those horrible judgments, it didn't mean they had lost His
favor; they would just be collateral damage, so to speak. Well, Jacob can't
escape his brother, but regardless of how it turned out; God would still be on
his side.

Webster's defines "courage" as: mental or moral strength to venture,
persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty. Courage is an excellent
virtue; and it's interesting who has it and who doesn't.

Fearless people aren't courageous. Scaredy cats facing their fears are the
ones with courage. Fearless people are too often reckless and take foolish
chances; whereas scaredy cats tread lightly. They're the ones with true
valor; which Webster's defines as strength of mind or spirit that enables a
person to encounter danger with firmness; viz: personal bravery.

Fearless people haven't a clue what bravery is. They wade into life afraid of
nothing. Fearless people have nerves of steel; whereas those who face life
with bravery, courage, and valor possess a different kind of mettle. They
don't have nerves of steel; instead: they have resolve.

Well, Jacob was very nervous about meeting with his brother. His next
adventure would take all the courage, and the valor, and the bravery he
could muster. The appearance of those angels must have gone a long way
towards beefing up his resolve to see it through.

● Gen 32:3 . .When he saw them, Jacob said: This is God's camp. So
he named that place Mahanaim.

The word "Mahanaim" is from Machanayim (makh-an-ah'-yim) which means:
double camp and/or two camps. One camp was Jacob's and the other was
God's. Man and God, in friendly proximity, united in a common purpose. Too
cool.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 32:4-13

● Gen 32:4 . . Jacob sent messengers ahead to his brother Esau in
the land of Seir, the country of Edom,

The Hebrew word for "messengers" is the same word often used for angels.
Since that word has such wide application, some have proposed that Jacob
dispatched the holy angels on ahead to meet with Esau for him. Well, I think
that might be stretching the imagination just a little too far. Jacob was in
charge of his own camp, not God's, and there's no textual evidence to
suggest otherwise.

Jacob had learned where Esau lived, and could have avoided contact with
him if he wanted to. Esau's land was pretty far out of the way. His haunts
were way down in Seir, a mountainous tract which runs along the eastern
side of the Araba, once occupied by the ancient cave dwelling Horites.

If you have a map handy, it's in between the southern end of the Dead Sea
and the northern tip of the Gulf of Aqaba. Jacob's destination was Shechem,
in the vicinity of modern day Nabulus, up in the West Bank about 80 miles
northwest of the tip of the Red Sea; as the crow flies.

● Gen 32:5a . . and instructed them as follows: Thus shall you say to
my lord Esau: Thus says your servant Jacob:

Jacob instructed his servants to acknowledge Esau as Jacob's superior. It's
true the patriarchy passed to Jacob, but he must have felt it was expedient
to set that aside for now and approach his brother from the standpoint of
their natural birth rank. Jacob never really desired to lord it over his brother,
and there was certainly no reason to assert his patriarchal rank at this time[
most especially for the purpose of this particular reunion; which was to
make amends for past grievances and to set the stage for Jacob's peaceable
return to the neighborhood.

This show-down was a necessity. Jacob couldn't very well be looking over his
shoulder all the time, wondering if Esau was around somewhere nearby
drawing a bead on him. They had to get their differences smoothed out now
before Jacob settled his family in Canaan. And this meeting was going to be
difficult enough without invoking the prerogatives of royalty. No; it was
better that Jacob met with Esau as his younger brother, and then go from
there and see what happens.

● Gen 32:5b-6 . . I stayed with Laban and remained until now; I have
acquired cattle, donkeys, sheep, and male and female slaves; and I
send this message to my lord in the hope of gaining your favor.

The delegation's mission was merely to inform Esau that Jacob was back in
town; and to make sure Esau knew that Jacob was not here for a fight. He
was in fact inclined to seek Esau's good graces. Esau's initial reaction was
probably an instinctive posture of self defense. Since it was predicted that
the younger would rule the older, it may have appeared to Esau that Jacob
was returning from Paddan-aram with a large body of fighting men to claim
the covenanted boundaries, and to subjugate Esau under patriarchal rule as
predicted in Gen 25:23.

● Gen 32:7-9 . .The messengers returned to Jacob, saying: We came
to your brother Esau; he himself is coming to meet you, and there
are four hundred men with him. Jacob was greatly frightened; in his
anxiety, he divided the people with him, and the flocks and herds
and camels, into two camps, thinking: If Esau comes to the one
camp and attacks it, the other camp may yet escape.

Jacob quite naturally jumped to the conclusion that Esau still sought his
death. From all appearances, it sure looked that way. So he followed a
typical caravan tactic of dividing his troupe so that if Esau should attack the
lead group, the one following would have a chance to escape while Esau was
busy with the first. It would have been wiser to take up positions and wait
for Esau to come to Jacob. But apparently, the local terrain wouldn't permit
Jacob's assembly to scatter all over the place and thereby make it difficult
for Esau to attack everyone at once.

● Gen 32:10 . .Then Jacob said: O God of my father Abraham and God
of my father Isaac, O Lord, who said to me; Return to your native
land and I will deal bountifully with you!

One can't help but admire Jacob's praying style. It's so practical-- no
bombast, no pious rhetoric, no platitudes, no rote, and no siddur --just down
to business, and right from the heart.

But what I really love most about his style is the appeal he makes to certain
promises that God made to him. Jacob came to the point in his walk of faith
where he realized that if God planned to make good on those promises, then
He has to keep Jacob alive to do it; just like Abraham reasoned that God had
to raise Isaac from the dead in order to keep the promises he made
concerning him (cf. Heb 11:17-19) promises which, in reality, made Jacob
just as bullet proof as they had made Abraham and Isaac.

● Gen 32:11-13 . . I am unworthy of all the kindness that You have
so steadfastly shown Your servant: with my staff alone I crossed
this Jordan, and now I have become two camps. Deliver me, I pray,
from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau; else, I fear, he
may come and strike me down, mothers and children alike. Yet You
have said; I will deal bountifully with you and make your offspring
as the sands of the sea, which are too numerous to count.

Jacob was given a promise, and he held God to it. It takes real spiritual
fortitude to do that. In court, we commonly make people take an oath to tell
the truth and then hold them to their word. And we notarize our legal
documents so they become binding and carry some weight. So why don't we
do the very same thing with God? Would He be insulted? No way! If only
more people would hold God to his word like Jacob did. There's absolutely
nothing wrong with that. As the writer of the book of Hebrews said; reliance
upon God's testimony provides one with encouragement, and an anchor for
the soul. (Heb 6:16-19)

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 32:14-24a

● Gen 32:14a . . After spending the night there,

No one knows yet just exactly where Mahanaim was located. According to a
Jordanian tourism web site, it was north of the river W. Zarqa (N. Yaboq) up
in some elevated ground a few miles east of Deir Alla. If your map doesn't
show Deir Alla; then from 'Amman Jordan look northward to the W. Zarqa
river and follow it west to its junction with the Jordan River. Deir 'Alla is
about 3 or 4 miles northwest of the point where the W. Zarqa river meets
the Jordan.

● Gen 32:14b-16 . . he selected from what was at hand these
presents for his brother Esau: 200 she-goats and 20 he-goats; 200
ewes and 20 rams; 30 milch camels with their colts; 40 cows and 10
bulls; 20 jenny donkeys and 10 jack donkeys.

That's a total of 580 animals altogether. I don't know what each of those
species are worth on the hoof at today's prices, but all combined; it has to
be a heck of a lot of money. Especially for the camels. In Birqash Egypt,
prices for camels vary from 100 to 1,200 US dollars. Jacob sent Esau 30
females with their calves. Even in the median price range, that's about
16,500 US dollars worth of dromedaries.

NOTE: Milch camels are the equivalent of dairy cows. Camel's milk is much
more nutritious than that from a cow. It's lower in fat and lactose, and
higher in potassium, iron and Vitamin C. It's normally drunk fresh, and the
warm frothy liquid, heavy and sweet, is usually an acquired taste for the
Western palate. Most Saudi Arabian camels are females reared for their milk
in dairy herds.

● Gen 32:17-21a . .These he put in the charge of his servants, drove
by drove, and he told his servants: Go on ahead, and keep a distance
between droves. He instructed the one in front as follows: When my
brother Esau meets you and asks "Whose man are you? Where are
you going? And whose [animals] are these ahead of you?" you shall
answer: Your servant Jacob's; they are a gift sent to my lord Esau;
and [Jacob] himself is right behind us.

. . . He gave similar instructions to the second one, and the third, and
all the others who followed the droves, namely: Thus and so shall
you say to Esau when you reach him. And you shall add: And your
servant Jacob himself is right behind us.

Some people have proposed that Jacob's tactic was an evidence of a lack of
faith in God's providence. I don't accept that theory for one second! Here's a
better way to look at it.

Supposing you were a university student with poor grades. So one night, in
desperation, you pray and ask God to help you pass the finals. After prayers,
you go to bed with all the confidence in the world that God will somehow
pack all the information you need to pass the test into your brain cells while
you're asleep. Next day you fail the test. You know why? Duh! You didn't
prepare for it.

When men praise the Lord in battle, they should also pass the ammunition;
and when a farmer prays for a good crop, he should say amen with a hoe;
and when people pray for a safe trip to grandma's house, they should put
gas in the tank and check the oil, the water, and the tires, and fasten all the
seat belts.

Never pray for success without taking some initiative to make all the
sensible preparations in your power that are necessary to get it. If you do
your part to the best of your ability; the odds are in your favor that God will
do His part too; i.e. if He feels like it. Please don't ever take God for
granted; that's just plain bad manners.

● Gen 32:21b-22 . . For he reasoned: If I propitiate him with
presents in advance, and then face him, perhaps he will show me
favor. And so the gift went on ahead, while he remained in camp
that night.

The phrase "propitiate him" is from kaphar (kaw-far') which means: to cover
(specifically with bitumen); figuratively, to expiate or condone, to placate or
cancel. That is a very common word for atonement, and that is exactly what
Jacob had in mind: to show his brother that he wished to reconcile their
differences. (cf. 1John 2:2)

● Gen 32:23 . .That same night he arose, and taking his two wives,
his two maidservants, and his eleven children, he crossed the ford of
the Jabbok.

The Jabbok is in the country of Jordan and is a very loopy stream. It's path
traces out a huge fish hook beginning in the hills near Amman; then goes
about 7½ miles northeast to Az Zarqa. From there it goes about 6½ miles
north to As Sukhnah, then about 7¼ miles northwest; passing by Al
Qunayyah. From there it goes sort of west, drawing a pair of camel humps
for about 10½ miles to a lake near Jarash. From there it goes dead west for
about 11 miles before turning southwest for ten miles to its junction with the
Jordan River.[/b]

I'm sure Jacob's decision was mostly a security measure. If he waited till
daylight to get his family across, Esau might show up unexpected while they
were crossing and have the camp at a disadvantage. It was to Jacob's credit
that he distanced himself from the women and children. If Esau and his men
were coming for Jacob's blood, the mothers and their children would very
likely get hurt in the fracas if Jacob were among them.

● Gen 32:24a . . After taking them across the stream, he sent across
all his possessions. Jacob was left alone.

After helping his family to cross over, Jacob took some help and returned to
the other side to gather up all their stuff. He stayed while they went on back
over with everything and underwent a very strange close encounter of a
third kind.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 32:24b

● Gen 32:24b . . And a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn.

There's been some speculation regarding not only the identity of this man
but also his species. Some say it was the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ. Some
say it was Esau's evil angel. Some say it was one of God's holy angels. And
some say it was God himself in a human form. Hosea can help settle this.

"The Lord once indicted Judah, and punished Jacob for his conduct, requited
him for his deeds. In the womb he tried to supplant his brother; grown to
manhood, he strove with a divine being, he strove with an angel and
prevailed-- the other had to weep and implore him. At Bethel [Jacob] would
meet him, there to commune with him." (Hos 12:3-5)

There can be no doubt who Jacob communed with at Bethel. Jacob met Yhvh
there on his way north when he left home. And he met Yhvh there again in
Bethel after returning. The man that Jacob wrestled with that night was no
evil angel, that's for sure; and Jacob very well knew it too.

How it is possible for Yhvh to appear in a human form? I don't know but He
did it again in Moses' day. (Ex 24:9-11)

Their conflict shouldn't be construed as some sort of combat or an athletic
event. It wasn't that at all. When Jacob perceived that the man was actually
divine, he clutched and hung on; refusing to let Yhvh depart until He blessed
him.

When my boy was little, sometimes he would cling to my ankles like a little
boa constrictor and I would have to drag him around the room for a while
before he'd let go. Well, that's what Jacob did. No one since has ever been
so dogged determined with God like that. The angel was reluctant to bless
Jacob for good reason: so Bible students could see just how much Jacob
really valued spiritual things. Some people extol David's love for God, but I
prefer to extol Jacob for his stubborn refusal to let go. It's easy to see now
why God wanted the patriarchy for him instead of his brother Esau.

Juxtapose Jacob with Cain; the man who walked out on God. Well; not only
did Jacob not walk out on God, but he refused to let God walk out on him.
Jacob was a pretty amazing guy.

There is a really good story about a Gentile woman in the New Testament
who was persistent with God like Jacob. Not quite as physical as he, but, in
her own way, just as persistent nonetheless. (Matt 15:21-18)

Some people lose heart, and give up on God way too soon. It's not that He's
stubborn and doesn't really want to bless, or that we have to somehow
overcome His reluctance. No, that's not it. For some reason God is very
pleased when we cling and show Him we mean business. Dogged prayer,
like tough love, gets results and shows God we mean business and that we
won't take "no" for an answer. Is God annoyed by that? Far from it.
Compare the "persistence" parables at Luke 11:5-10 and Luke 18:2-8.

Many years prior to where we are now in Genesis, Jacob had a dream. He
saw a staircase with Yhvh standing at the top. At the time, Jacob just
gawked in awe; but were he to have that same dream at this point in his
life, Jacob would have run up those stairs and tackled The Lord before He
could get away. The man coming back down from the north isn't the same
man that ran away from home. He's different.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 32:25-32

● Gen 32:25 . .When he saw that he had not prevailed against him,
he wrenched Jacob's hip at its socket, so that the socket of his hip
was strained as he wrestled with him.

In spite of the injury, Jacob still hung on and refused to let go. The injury
served a purpose. It wasn't to make Jacob let go; after all, the angel could
just as easily broken both of Jacob's arms. The injury served to handicap
Jacob, and force him to depend even more upon God's providence; and less
upon himself.

● Gen 32:26a . .Then he said: Let me go, for dawn is breaking.

Time is of the essence for Jacob to get ready for his brother. Dawn wasn't a
problem for the angel. His carriage wasn't going to turn back into a pumpkin
or anything like that nor was he going to burn up in the sunlight like a
vampire.

● Gen 32:26b . . But he answered: I will not let you go, unless you
bless me.

Jacob risked giving Esau the advantage by staying too long with Yhvh; but
this is one guy not to squander an opportunity with God.

● Gen 32:27a . . Said the other: What is your name?

Like he didn't know already? Of course he knew it. But the angel's question
is a type of question we call a leading question. You could restate it like this:
And what *strategic pause* is your name?

● Gen 32:27b . . He replied: Jacob.

His name was actually Ya'aqob (yah-ak-obe') which means: heel-catcher
(i.e. supplanter). But that is all over now. From this point on; it won't be
necessary for Jacob to supplant somebody in order to gain the advantage.

● Gen 32:28a . . Said he: Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but
Israel

"Israel" is from Yisra'el (yis-raw-ale') which means: he will rule as God. We
might call Jacob's new name his spiritual name and it's very curious. It
doesn't mean rule like God; but rather: as God.

NOTE: If we take Jacob's new name literally (I think we can) then what
we're looking at is 110% prophetic of a reality. (cf. Ps 110:1 and Ps 45:6-7)

Although Jacob was a patriarch, and a great sheik, he was never a
conqueror. There's a huge difference between ruling as God and ruling as a
conqueror. Conquerors typically rule for their own profit, making slaves out
of their subjects and exacting taxes and tributes. But God always rules for
man's benefit; helping him achieve his greatest potential from within a
peaceful environment.

Through the ages, God has used Jacob's spiritual name to identify the nation
that sprang from him. True, Jacob's progeny has not always ruled as God.
But his ultimate progeny, Messiah, certainly will. No question about it.

"In that day, the Lord will shield the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and the
feeblest of them shall be in that day like David, and the House of David like
a divine being-- like an angel of the Lord-- at their head." (Zech 12:8)

● Gen 32:28b . . for you have striven with beings divine and human,
and have prevailed.

If ever any human being came close to becoming a god, it was Jacob. Lots of
men have grappled with men. And some have even grappled with beasts.
But not many have grappled with Yhvh the way Jacob did-- one on one; up
close and personal. Moses never even got to do that.

The word for "prevailed" is from yokel (yaw-kole') which means: to be able,
literally (can, could) or morally (may, might). In other words: he was up to
the challenge; and able to see it through. Jacob was indeed a very
remarkable man.

● Gen 32:29a . .Then Jacob inquired, and he said: Divulge, if you
please, your name. And he said: Why then do you inquire of my
name?

In other words: Do you really have to ask? No; Jacob knew very well who he
was grappling with. But sometimes we just want things stated for the
record.

● Gen 32:29b . . and he blessed him there.

I sure wish we had the wording of that blessing Jacob worked so hard to
obtain.

● Gen 32:30 . . So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel-- For I
have seen the Divine face to face, yet my life was spared.

I really like the Stone Tanach's version. Jacob believed the angel was not
just a divine, but "the" Divine. Yes, he knew exactly who grappled with him.
It's true he didn't actually see The Almighty God in his true form; but what
he saw and touched was pretty close enough. (cf. 1John 1:1-3)

Jacob was ready for anything after that experience. Esau would be small
potatoes what with The Almighty God and a host of His holy angels in the
vicinity looking out for Jacob's safety.

● Gen 32:31-32 . .The sun rose upon him as he passed Penuel,
limping on his hip. That is why the children of Israel to this day do
not eat the thigh muscle that is on the socket of the hip, since
Jacob's hip socket was wrenched at the thigh muscle.

God didn't command such a practice; it became a man-made tradition;
which doesn't make it eo ipso bad. I mean; wine with Passover dinner is a
rabbinical invention, but Jesus went along with it at his last supper. The Lord
was sometimes a bit peeved with the Jews' traditions; but not always since
they were his heritage too.

But Jacob's experience does indicate the importance of the event in the
minds of the Jews. Some people think Jacob is some sort of a squeaky little
gerbil when it comes to ranking the saints' mettle. But The Almighty was
very impressed with him. That has to count for something.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 33:1-4

● Gen 33:1-2 . . Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, accompanied by
four hundred men. He divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and
the two maids, putting the maids and their children first, Leah and
her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last.

Whether Rachel was expecting Benjamin at this time is difficult to ascertain;
but if she was; then that would help explain why Jacob put her last in the
caravan.

● Gen 33:3a . . He himself went on ahead

Good move. Still keeping himself at a distance from his family just in case
violence should break out. If Esau was spoiling for a fight, hopefully it would
be with Jacob alone, and not with his family right in the middle of it.

● Gen 33:3b . . and bowed low to the ground seven times until he
was near his brother.

The Tell El Amarna tablets record that when approaching a king, the
approacher always bowed seven times. So, as was customary in those days,
Jacob bowed low before Esau as he came near as a token of respect and
recognition of Esau as ruler of the region. He may not have actually been
living down in Seir yet at this time, but had already subdued the indigenous
peoples so that the area was his domain; and under his control.

● Gen 33:4 . . Esau ran to greet him. He embraced him and, falling on
his neck, he kissed him; and they wept.

Imagine Jacob's utter surprise (and relief) when, expecting violence from his
brother, he was kissed instead and Esau became emotional and started
blubbering all over the place! This scene may have played out a whole lot
differently if God hadn't taken a role in it.

"When the Lord is pleased with a man's conduct, He may turn even his
enemies into allies." (Prv 16:7)

But what about those angels, the ones that camped nearby Jacob's camp?
What part did they play in all this?

According to Jewish folklore, four bands of angels went to Esau's camp the
previous night and beat him and his men savagely. When Esau realized that
Jacob had men with him who could knock his teeth out, it changed his
attitude and developed a respect for his brother that he didn't have before.
Because of that, a saying came about that if you want an "Esau" to treat you
with respect, you should beat him up because that's the only thing he
understands.

Well; that's very imaginative, and somewhat amusing too. But I believe
those angels served another purpose altogether, and they fought with a
totally different foe too.

Invisible to the unaided eye are dark, unholy creatures in our world who go
around influencing human thoughts, and manipulating people to evil ends.
They would have surely interfered in Jacob's homecoming had not the holy
angels restrained them. That's part of their job-- holding back the invisible
forces of evil in the world of men. They don't always do that though; usually
only when God has a special purpose to accomplish; for example Dan 10:10
14.

In the unseen world; sinister beings are operating covertly: manipulating the
destiny of persons, and nations. (cf. Eph 2:1-2)

No wonder the world is plagued with monsters like Muammar Qaddafi, Pol
Pot, Kim Jong Ill, Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden;
and predatory lenders; and unscrupulous investment banks the likes of Bear
Sterns, Lehman Bros, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley;
and dishonest securities rating firms the likes of Standard & Poor, Moody's,
and Fitch.

People like that are human allies to the forces of evil; the mortal marionettes
of invisible masterminds-- evil intelligences who secretly run world affairs
undetected by natural means. The beauty of their system is that it is just too
incredible to comprehend. Very few modern, intellectual sophisticates
believe in spirits. Since hardly anyone believes in them, they have the
advantage of stealth-- and their unsuspecting victims just go on about their
business as usual, oblivious to their presence; and easy prey to powerful
psychological suggestions and manipulations.

The dark spirits can easily cause the ruin of perfectly good marriages,
friendships, and businesses; and they can control an entire nation's
economy and it's politics. Take a look at the country of Israel today. Does it
really look as though God is running it? No way. It is only too obvious who
has control of it now. And the dark angels will stay in control until such a
time as Messiah commands the holy angels to purge them out.

Dark mists could've made things go very badly between Jacob and Esau. But
God foreknew their evil intentions and stepped in to thwart them by sending
a detachment of His own forces to hold the mists in check while the two
brothers kissed and made up; and settled their differences.

NOTE: Not too long ago I ran across an op-ed in the local paper in regards
to the mental faculties of today's movers and shakers in government and big
business. The op-ed's observation was that events of the last decade
suggest that the patients are running the sanitarium. America's government,
and America's financial institutions, seem to have taken leave of their senses
and behaving as men and women with mental illness.

/

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Genesis 33:5-11

● Gen 33:5 . . Looking about, he saw the women and the children.
Who, he asked: are these with you? He answered: The children with
whom God has favored your servant.

Because Jacob's response drew Esau's attention to the lads rather than the
women, Jewish folklore proposes that Jacob did that so as to take Esau's
mind off the wives. What an ugly thing to say. It implies that Esau was a
barbaric cave man who stole wives from their husbands; yet there is not one
single incident in the entire Old Testament recording something like that
about him. So that remark is unfounded, and totally uncalled for. It's highly
unlikely that Esau's mind would be off the women anyway while they were
standing right there in front of him; and subsequently introduced one by
one.

● Gen 33:6-7 . .Then the maids, with their children, came forward
and bowed low; next Leah, with her children, came forward and
bowed low; and last, Joseph and Rachel came forward and bowed
low;

The Hebrew word for "bowed low" is from shachah (shaw-khaw') which
means: to depress, i.e. prostrate. At Gen 22:5, and also in many, many
other places in the Old Testament, shachah is translated "worship".

I think the scene went something like this: First Esau asked about the
women and children. Then Jacob, by way of introduction, like a master of
ceremonies on a variety show, moved to the side, raised his arm, gestured
towards his family, and presenting them for Esau's review, proudly
announced; Voila! My offspring, with whom God has favored your servant.

Why not introduce the wives first? Well; in that day, wives, were a dime a
dozen. But offspring! Oh yes; offspring were to brag about. Men regarded
their offspring as gold and precious stones in value.

"Sons are the provision of the Lord; the fruit of the womb, His reward. Like
arrows in the hand of a warrior are sons born to a man in his youth. Happy
is the man who fills his quiver with them; they shall not be put to shame
when they contend with the enemy in the gate." (Ps 127:3-5)

First up were Bilhah with Dan and Naphtali, then Zilpah with Gad and Asher.
Then came Leah with Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and
Dinah. Then, last of all, Rachel and Joseph.

Everybody did obeisance to Esau. I tell you the humility of Jacob's family is
astounding. Nobody, not one among them, Jacob included, harbored the
unbearable "chosen-people" mentality that is so prevalent today among
modern Jews.

Esau has been given a very bad rap in Jewish folklore. Yet, not one single
time does the Old Testament portray him as a murderer, a liar, a thief, or an
adulterer. Those allegations have all been smirched upon his reputation by
people with evil minds; prejudiced against him for no good reason at all but
merely because his Jewish detractors can't bear to accept him either as a
brother, nor as an equal. Jacob's progeny has been guilty of all the crimes
and sins of which they accuse Esau, and more too; yet many Jews count
their own people superior to Esau in every way imaginable.

The only reason Jacob's progeny continues to exist is because of the oath
and the promises that God gave their ancestor Abraham. If not for that early
covenant, they would be just as extinct today as the Edomites, and for the
very same reasons.

"Fair Zion is left like a booth in a vineyard, like a hut in a cucumber field, like
a city beleaguered. Had not the Lord of Hosts left us some survivors, we
should be like Sodom-- another Gomorrah." (Isa 1:8-9)

● Gen 33:8 . . And he asked: What do you mean by all this company
which I have met? He answered" To gain my lord's favor. Esau said:
I have enough, my brother; let what you have remain yours.

No doubt uncle Laban would have judged Esau a fool because Rachel's dad,
badly infected with a serious case of unbridled avarice, would have certainly
snapped up Jacob's offer immediately. But Esau's repertoire of vices
apparently didn't include greed. He was actually a very simple kind of guy,
and easy to satisfy.

● Gen 33:10-11 . . But Jacob said: No, I pray you; if you would do me
this favor, accept from me this gift; for to see your face is like seeing
the face of God, and you have received me favorably. Please accept
my present which has been brought to you, for God has favored me
and I have plenty. And when he urged him, he accepted.

In accordance with oriental customs, which have continued to be practiced
for thousands of years, the most certain way for one who desires
reconciliation to be assured of it is to have his proffered gift accepted by the
one whose favor he seeks. In any case, it would be considered a great
personal favor if Esau would accept Jacob's gift, even though Jacob knew
that his brother didn't really need it in any material sense.

Jacob's diplomacy was irresistible. The men used different adverbs to
describe their prosperity. Esau said; "I have enough". Enough is from rab
(rab) which means: abundant (in quantity, size, age, number, rank, quality)
But Jacob said; "I have plenty". Plenty is from kol (kole) and/or kowl (kole)
which means: the whole; hence, all. So Esau, through his own industry, had
garnered for himself all that he would ever need. But Jacob, through the
providence of God, had everything. So I think he was implying that he really
had too much to manage and would consider it a personal favor if Esau
would take some off his hands.

Here in American culture, we typically feel indebted by accepting a gift from
a friend. That mind-set spoils good will, so that a present-- which should
have, in all respects, represented someone's heart felt happy thoughts
towards us --is typically regarded as a trap, and robs an occasion of the
good feelings it was intended to generate.

Fortunately there are numerous occasions when we have implied consent to
lavish gifts upon friends and loved ones without arousing suspicions of evil
intent; e.g. birthdays, anniversaries, Xmas, Easter, promotions, retirements,
graduations; and whatever else we can appropriate to express our affections
for others. I think that too many of us have become Grinches out of fear of
obligation. It just shouldn't be that way.

Esau, realizing the sincerity of Jacob's motives, and also himself desiring
that there be no question he himself also earnestly desired full reconciliation
with his brother, finally agreed to accept Jacob's gifts.

Something is strangely missing from the brothers' reunion. Wouldn't you
think that Jacob would be asking about his mom and dad? Were they still
alive? In good health? Stuff like that. Well; I think Jacob already knew. After
all, he knew exactly where to find Esau.

So Jacob may have stayed current all those twenty years via caravans and
messengers; which in that day were pretty much the equivalent of today's
FedEx and UPS services. Somewhere along the line, Rebecca's personal
nurse Deborah had joined Jacob. So there's a pretty good chance Jacob
already knew all about his mom and dad before returning to Canaan.
However, since Rebecca's personal nurse Deborah had already joined Jacob,
and since there's no record that Jacob ever saw Rebecca alive after leaving
home, his mom may have been deceased at this point.

/