Section 2 - Jacob and His Sons
***************************************************************************
CHAPTER 1 - GOD FORGOTTEN AT SHECHEM FOR RAPE AND PILLAGE
CHAPTER 2 - BETHEL - GOD’S PLACE - BUT NOT FOR LONG
CHAPTER 3 - INCEST - ANOTHER SORDID TALE
CHAPTER 4 - JOSEPH - JACOB’S FAVOURITE CHILD
CHAPTER 5 - JOSEPH - A COAT AND SOME DREAMS
CHAPTER 6 - JOSEPH’S PIT OF DEATH - OR LIFE
CHAPTER 7 - A TERRIBLE SECRET AND GRIEF FOR MORE LOST LOVE
CHAPTER 8 - JUDAH’S SIN AND MISERY
***************************************************************************
CHAPTER 1
GOD FORGOTTEN AT SHECHEM FOR RAPE AND PILLAGE
And Jacob said, “Ye have troubled me, to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land”, Genesis 34:30.
FOCUS:
The setting for Genesis 34 is described to us in the verses immediately preceding this chapter, and it is here we begin this story. Well function is disabled if it is not maintained, and dysfunction will surely follow. The distressing events in this detailed and lengthy text indicate the result of neglect in this God loved family.
1. JACOB MOVES HIS FAMILY TO SHECHEM
When Jacob left Esau, and after he had recovered from his clicky hip, he came to Shalem, in Shechem, and pitched his tent. In his feeling well again he enjoyed a sense of well being, and forgot the implied message from God about his destination, Bethel, when it was the God of Bethel who asked him to move from Haran, Genesis 31:3 and 13. Jacob had told Leah and Rachel that the God of Bethel, where he had anointed the pillar and where he vowed a vow, had told him to move from Haran. It is assumed that the two sisters thought that Jacob meant to return to the sacred Bethel. The later message from God, after the trouble here at Shechem, defined Bethel as the Jacob family destination, Genesis 35:1.
Well function turned quickly to dysfunction again. He bought the parcel of land on which he spread the tent, from the children of Hamor and built an altar. When Jacob built the altar to God in Shechem he advertised to the surrounding peoples his love for God, his faith in YHWH, and his wish to espouse the teachings of that Deity. Missioning with love and respect for those about him, should have been uppermost in his mind. However that was not to be, and his expectation of staying there in peace was not realised. Perhaps Jacob did not ask God to sanction his pause at Shechem. God used a mighty and traumatic experience to remind Jacob to move.
2. THE FAMILY FIRM IS MISSIONING FOR GOD
The firm that he began to establish Jacob and Sons - Shepherds, Sheep and Sheep Products was a moveable, nomadic business. As Jacob was a wealthy man with many sons, with credibility amongst the surrounding peoples, this business began to prosper. We need to remember that this thriving portable business was the means of Jacob fulfilling the missioning mandate that came with the promises to Abram in the first instance in Ur, “that in thee all nations will be blessed”. Travelling salesmen they were, ideal for God’s purpose to spread His name. Not only was Jacob concerned for his own reputation in Canaan, but also for God’s reputation. He wanted to preach true worship of God to partake in His blessings.
3. SHECHEM - NOW AND THEN
In the land of the Canaanites, Shechem was called Sichem at the time Abraham paused there and built the first altar. It became Shechem after Jacob built his altar probably after the man Shechem who had lived there when history played out a story with that man’s family. The spelling was modified from Sichem to Shechem to suit the history. The present town of Nablus is probably the old Shechem, but the recent exact identification of Shechem has been questioned, and so archaeologists are now not quite so sure where it was.
However, Jacob’s well, of John 4:5, is said to be the well in the vicinity of this place, and that location is fairly accurate. The evidence of the narrative in Genesis 33:18, is that the well is found at the foot of Mount Gerazim, John 4:20, and is about a mile south east of Nablus. It is near to the fork of the road which comes from Jerusalem and branches to Samaria and Tirzah respectively. It still has a clear and cool water supply fed by above ground rainwater, and underground sources of great depth. All traditions, Jewish, Samaritan, Christian and Muslim support this as the authentic site of Jacob’s well.
Joseph’ embalmed body was buried near this place, when the children of Israel, under Moses, came up out of Egypt, and entered the Promised Land, nearly 300 years after this story. They brought his bones, (and those of his brothers also), into Canaan (Acts 7:16), and buried them in this parcel of ground that Jacob bought from the Shechemites, and later gave to his son, Joseph, in his death blessings, John 4:5, 6. Abraham had bought the Cave of Machpelah from the Hittites, in Hebron. There is some confusion, because Stephen in Acts 7:16 implies that Jacob was buried at Shechem “in the tomb that Abraham bought”. “Our fathers”, Joseph (and perhaps his brothers), though, not “Jacob”, of verse 15, are the ones buried there.
At this time, in the patriarchal history of Jacob, as they came to Shechem, that son Joseph, that favourite little son, was nine years old, and together with his much loved mother, was secure in the love that Jacob had for them. Joseph was old enough to understand, the dynamics in this family, and how his step brother and sister, Zebulan and Dinah, were his age.
Comment:
We will allow that Shechem is now Nablus, (or Salim, or Shalem - a little east of Nablus). It’s a big town with veiled women, suspicious men, and resentful teenagers - with an Israeli, military presence, for it is part of the occupied territories. Palestinians, angry that Israel will not recognise their “legitimate” right to the land of their forefathers Abraham and Ishmael, throw stones and cause trouble.
Nablus is beautiful still, where it lies between the mountains. It is a verdant place in a parched land. It is the most beautiful spot in central Israel. Shade, is not of the mighty oaks, but the olive trees that grow round about. The women in the groves still beat the trees, and so collect the fallen fruit on mats. They pull their veils around their faces and wave their hands: “No photos”. Pity, it is such an old world scene. But we are sensitive to their feelings and understand. The children beg, and are scandalised at the small change.
No wilderness, no wild thickets, but verdure. No mountain torrents, yet there is copious water, and the watery droplets in the air create a blue/grey mist. The Vale of Shechem is a narrow valley of a few hundred feet wide in some parts and there the vapours condense. Twenty seven springs are known to water the valley - information from Stanley’s “Sinai & Palestine” page 234.
********************
No wonder Jacob was tempted to stop at Shechem after his long and eventful journey. He stayed five years. When Jacob was ninety nine years and still in Haran he had three more children, and, added to those he had earlier, his recorded children now numbered twelve. When those three children, (from two different wives), were six years old, Jacob took his family and left Haran, came to Succoth, and then to Shechem. Shechem’s comforting verdure, and the security Jacob felt there, led to his decision to stay at least five years. There is a Chinese proverb, “chunwang chihan”, “when the lips are gone, the teeth are cold”, which means one thing is always the result of another. So here, the comfort of Shechem led to a sad circumstance, which was very hard to overcome.
And there was a festival at Shechem, and Dinah wanted to go. Her girlish curiosity overrode her caution and she went probably with few companions and was enticed by the young man, Shechem.
4. A HORROR STORY PLAYED OUT IN SHECHEM
Zebulun and Dinah, probably twins (for twins were in the genetic structure of the family), were the children of Leah. They were now fourteen years old. The other child, Joseph, also fourteen, was a loved child of Jacob’s best loved wife, Rachel. They were the youngest of Jacob’s children. Dinah is the only named daughter, for the purpose of this story. There may have been other daughters, and for many reasons, none of the children so well loved as the son, Joseph.
This is a story, (Genesis 34) sandwiched between two momentous occasions in Jacob’s life when God spoke to Jacob and caused him to erect altars to Him.
The sandwiched story is one of horror for Jacob - (as it would be for any of us). It tumbles from incident to incident, “out of control”. God used this horror, to move Jacob and his family to Bethel. God has used horror, and terror, to move peoples all down history. We know that horror was the catalyst for Jews moving back to the land of Israel, in our own day, when they were so loathe to leave their present day “Egypt”. And it moved Jacob at this time, for he packed up, frightened that the Canaanites and the Perizzites, now the inhabitants of the land, would gather themselves against him, and that they would all be slain, for what happened to the Hivites.
“Ye have troubled me to stink among the inhabitants of the land”, said Jacob to his sons. It was only later that Jacob was morally outraged (Genesis 49). As well, he neglects to mention the demeaning influence this incident would have on the reputation of God, for they were supposed to be showing forth His glory, that is, the missioning mandate that went with the covenant.
5. LEAH’S GREAT TRIAL
Dinah was raped. She was 14 years old. It is a cause of great concern to the family that she was violated, but for that to happen they must have left her vulnerable.
“Leah’s Great Trial” it has been called.
Leah has been tried and tried and tried (with her anxiety to make Jacob love her) and for her (only mentioned) daughter to be violated, so that no other man would love her or have her, must have been almost more than Leah could bear. It goes to show that one cannot make anyone love anyone else. One can hope and pray, but it might be a “no” from God. There are many women today in arranged marriages, who hope that, with constancy, love will grow. We do recognise the deficiencies in a loveless marriage and today we hope for something better for young people as they set out on their married life. In the west, women may say, “Who I love, I will marry”, but in the east women say, “Who I marry, I will love”, and it is often a shame for them to marry for love.
In this patriarchal society arranged marriages were the norm, but Dinah’s future after her violation, was destroyed, and Leah would have considered that a great trial. Jacob could never offer Dinah for marriage now.
“Wasted” Dinah is now!
The brothers of the Song of Songs 8:8-10, who protected, and cared for, and looked after their “little sister”, making sure that she was a “wall”, and not a “door”, verse 9, for they encased her “in silver”. She remained virginal ready for her marriage. There was no neglect in that story, as there is in this one. They did not have to have their sister “boarded up”. This sister, Dinah, was a “door”, and is now “boarded up”, in the sense that she is forsaken according to these Hebrew metaphors.
6. SO WHERE WERE THEY ALL ON THAT DAY IN SHECHEM?
Dinah was not a latch key kid - there were too many in her family for her to be alone, locked out. She was not the product of a single parent family, or even a nuclear family. There were nurses and servants around. We know that Deborah, Rebekah’s old nurse was with this family, though we know not how or when she left Isaac’s household, and came to live with this family. Her death, while with this family, is recorded in Genesis 35:8, a year, or so, later.
At the beginning of the discussion, it is worth considering whether it was rape, or whether Dinah was somewhere complicit in it, to gain the acceptance of her father to such a union. If it was considered a shame then to marry for love, it could easily have been a ruse.
If a sexual relationship began between an unmarried man and woman, it was obligatory that they marry. If that was the plan, it went awry, because Dinah’s maids, and Jacob, and her brothers interpreted it as rape. This discussion will proceed, assuming it was rape.
Consider:
* Were they all in and out of the house of Hamor next door?
* Was it familiarity that made access to Dinah so easy?
* Why did Shechem consider he could violate the one (recorded) daughter of this large family, without incurring the wrath of her eleven brothers?
* Did he think the whole episode would be worth it?
* Did he think it would force the family to allow a marriage with an alien family?
* Did he know of Jacob’s father’s advice “Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan”?
* If he did, did he think it would apply?
* Or didn’t he think at all?
* Just sexually developed at 14, everyone knows 14 year old girls need to be protected and cared for, - or, do they know that?
* Did they know that?
* Or was the cultural relativity so different, we cannot understand the circumstances?
* What is the lesson for us about compromise?
********************
At least we know that, as the word “rape” appears to be in the story, it means to imply, in the current meaning of the word, that she did not consent to sexual intercourse with this neighbour.
Today, the story would take a prize. The literary supplements of our newspapers would write glowingly - or alternately, it would make a good film - a money spinner.
But it is a record in Holy Writ for our learning.
We need to keep Jacob’s life in perspective. The mighty incidents are recorded and the years in between are hopefully full of contentment. Like our life’s pattern, we experience mountains, valleys, and plenty of plains. The perspective is so like ours. Jacob working towards the ideal in his name, “Jacob”, still experiences the life pattern.
It’s how we deal with the life pattern that is important that shapes our character and moulds us into His children (or not).
If the family had only just arrived, this incident may have been born out of Dinah’s curiosity about her surroundings, but the family had been in Shechem a comparatively long time, five years. However more likely, it was born out of familiarity. It may be that she had gone next door to meet friends, Shechem’s sisters (a lesson here). Or perhaps she went (with them) to a festival in the town (as some commentators suggest) and the act happened there, rather than in Hamor’s house.
Well, someone told Jacob.
It was probably the maidservants who had accompanied her on the excursion.
And, Shechem still wanted her for his wife,
This is unlike the Tamar incident of 2 Samuel 13, where David's son Amnon, forced his sister and despised her immediately afterwards. Of course, the incest there was an added factor to the rape.
Shechem spoke tenderly to Dinah and she stayed in his house with him (verse 26). He spoke to his father, Hamor, the Hivite, and asked him to get Dinah’s family to agree to their marriage. Hamor “honoured Shechem more than anyone else in his household” (verse 19) - a favourite son, spoilt, used to having the best in a wealthy household, probably.
7. JACOB DEALS WITH A FAMILY PROBLEM - BUT WHERE IS GOD?
Now Jacob decided to call a family conference on the matter. He had hitherto made family decisions and carried them out without reference to God. Yet, he had, not long ago, been in a position of complete reliability on God. So now we would expect Jacob to consult God in this matter. He will need to call a family conference, for his sons are mature and responsible teenagers in the family firm. We expect they will ask God for guidance in such a serious offence against the family that would affect them all. Sadly, it seems they did not include God in their deliberations, or their decisions.
Jacob waited, until his sons, hearing there had been trouble, came in from the fields, to see what the problem was. And then the family conference began.
- They were sorry for their sister,
- And very angry with their neighbours next door.
- It was a disgrace on their family.
Ranting and raving they probably were, and indignant.
- As brothers, they had the right to uphold their sister's honour.
Comment:
A common reaction in families - we think of how we appear to others in a family dysfunction, when we should bend the energy towards solving the problem.
If we need to solve a problem, we can be sure that God will see a clear path, and show that to us. The unresolved problem, with its anxiety and resentment and blame apportioning, can destroy us if we allow it. To “let go, and let God”, can only refresh our outlook, so that the clarity of direction is revealed and we see the vision clearly.
The early map makers, when the known track wore out, filled that space with demon pictures. It need not be so, though when our faith falters, the vision ahead does seem full of that demon fear. We need to tread safely in the unknown way, and there is only one way to do so. Some of us, as impressed children, may remember England’s George VI's Christmas message, coming from the wireless cabinet, when he quoted: “I said to the man who stood at the gate of the year, ‘Give me a light that I may tread safely into the unknown’ and he said to me, ‘Go out into the darkness and put your hand into the hand of God, - that shall be better than a light and safer than a known way.’” Jacob had, by now, put his hand into the hand of God, but he allowed his sons to decide “the way”.
********************
Many instances so far in this story have attempted to destroy the seed line that God had set up for His promises. The say you are my sister incidents were attempts when God intervened, in extraordinary circumstances, to keep the seed line. This may be another thwarted incident, for the rape did not produce a child, as far as is recorded, and Dinah was not married into this Canaanite family, who would have liked to absorb Israel - both their wealth and their offspring. Now Israel faced that absorption - or hostility. The incidents that followed caused not a little hostility.
The violation incident itself does not warrant too much comment. Suffice it to say the laws of this land, Australia, and social comment in the 90’s, does not lay blame on the woman automatically, and we should not in this case in Scripture either. We don’t know enough of the story. The 14 year old should have been under some sort of protection and advice and going out “to visit the women of the land” is not enough for us to say “she caused it all” and “brought the disgrace”. The description of the incident does not allow consent, or even defiance of guidance. She was in her unmarried state in the wrong place at the wrong time. She is not condemned in the story, though Jacob condemns the actions of his sons, at the end of his life in Genesis 49:5-7, when he curses the anger of Simeon and Levi. In his poem, often called the “Blessings of Jacob”, he says:
“Simeon and Levi are brothers,
Their swords are weapons of violence.
Let me not enter their council,
Let me not join their assembly,
For they have killed men in their anger,
And hamstrung oxen as they pleased.
Cursed be their anger so fierce
And their fury so cruel!
I will scatter them in Jacob
And disperse them in Israel”, (NIV).
History shows, (Numbers 25), that indeed Simeon continuing in base behaviour, is corrected by Levi, and therefore they are divided.
8. THE SONS’DECEITFUL DISCUSSION WITH THE SHECHEMITES
Jacob must have looked back at this time, and wished he had the wisdom to stop the deceit that his sons carried in these intervening years, beginning with this treachery. Certainly it was culturally correct for brothers (sons of Leah), to uphold a sister’ honour, and perhaps that’s why Jacob let them have their way.
In was a fact, that
1. It was more important to uphold the honour of a sister, than a wife, that is,
2. A dishonoured sister was far worse than a dishonoured wife.
3. A sister could never be disowned, that is divorced (Eastern custom), like a wife could be.
4. One could never change the status of a sister, whereas another wife could easily be procured.
If Dinah was 14 years old, and Zebulun and Joseph also 14, then Asher and Issachar were 15, Gad 16, Judah and Naphtali 17, Levi and Dan 18, Simeon 19 and Reuben 20 years old. Benjamin was not yet born (Companion Bible, “Chronological Chart, and Appendix 50”). It seems that Jacob left the dealing of a terrible family disgrace with eleven teenagers, who possessed very little maturity.
With a consideration of any cultural maturity that may have existed among the brothers, they had been in the land a comparatively short time, but long enough to understand the milieu of the people. They were keeping apart culturally, as God had asked them to do, otherwise the brothers would not have been offended so much by Shechem, but not apart enough, for Shechem felt he could win them to his point of view. Perhaps the time they had been in Canaan was not enough time, with their life experiences, to equip them to deal wisely with such a situation without sound guidance from Jacob.
Yet as Hamor was discussing -
a. How his family and Jacob’s family could be blended together,
b. How Jacob would cease his Bedouin ways and settle together with them in Shechem,
c. How rich they would become from blended stock and trading,
d. How each could benefit from this marriage contract, for a generous price would be paid for the bride,
e. How the union would raise them to a high rank among the petty states of Canaan,
Jacob’s family listened to these plausible arguments - and planned treachery.
They said to Shechem,
“We cannot give our sister to the uncircumcised for that would be another disgrace. If you wish us to settle amongst you, and become one people with you, you must be circumcised like us then we will give ‘our daughter’ and take your daughters for our wives”.
(It is hard to know what is meant here, - multiple wives, or none of them married yet),
“If you do not agree to be circumcised we will take our sister and go”.
Innocently Jacob may have thought his sons meant, as we sometimes do on such occasions, “convert and marry”. We can allow him that readily enough. That may have been an acceptable solution to the problem.
The argument about settling in the land was not feasible, for the portable life of the family had been a blessing and would be so in the future, in the outreach mission mandate, that the family had on the commission from the covenant, to be a blessing for all nations.
There was a sacred covenant rite - circumcision. It was the sign of God’s holy covenant with Israel, and had been commanded of Abraham by God. These young men did not, or could not, understand the great significance of this holy thing, or they would not have behaved in the way that they did. In New Testament times the Jews were discouraged from insisting on circumcision in the new order, but now it was a reasonable request for proselytes, under the old covenant. These brothers though planned to use the rite to bring about the demise of Hamor, Shechem, and all that they owned. They planned to use the debilitation caused by the rite of the taking of their foreskins, and while they were debilitated, to kill all the men, and take all that they owned.
Hitler promised these Jews a washing, that is, a shower, in the concentration camps in the 1940’s, and gave them gas instead, killing them.
And “Heaven looked on, and would not take their part” (the Jews then, nor the Shechemites in this story), Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, Act IV, Scene 3. God would not want to be any part of this story.
No true believer would use the sacred rite of baptism
- A covenant between a believer and God, for men as well as women, (now replacing the covenant of circumcision in the Christian era), and
- Use it as an instrument of violence.
But Jacob's sons used a sacred rite for an instrument of violence.
Comment:
Recently, in a third world prison baptism, it was thought suspiciously by the prison officials, that the candidate may use the occasion for a suicide, so an aware guard performed the rite. Of course, it was a true baptism “by whomsoever”. Baptism is open to evil intent as circumcision is here, in Jacob’s house.
********************
A believer, being baptised, could easily be eliminated if a baptiser were so disposed. The thought is unthinkable, yet Jacob’s sons used that vulnerability, and debilitation to kill Hamor, and his son, Shechem, and every male in Shechem.
So this family of God carried out their despicable plans with impunity on the third day after the circumcisions, when the men were at their most debilitated.
They took Dinah home, carried off all the wealth of Shechem, and their animals. They plundered the “city” and took all the women and children.
With fear and horror, Jacob chastises them: “Ye have troubled me to make me stink among the inhabitants of the land”. We wonder at what stage Jacob’s moral outrage entered into the condemnation? If it is a fact that he stayed in Shechem hoping to emulate his grandfather Abraham’ moral perspective, as he moved into the Promised Land, he is now far from that mark. Abraham moved circumspectly, Jacob’s sons had caused havoc.
“I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me, and I shall be destroyed, I and my house”, verse 30. Jacob was rightly fearful for their lives. The commentator, Matthew Henry, adds another comment from the mind of Jacob, “If the Shechemites must be destroyed for the offence of one, why not all the Israelites for the offence of two?” (of Jacob’s sons).
Arrogantly the boys, defending their actions, say: “Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?”
This is equivocation for their actions, for they used enormous and immoral power to destroy, and punish, and exact revenge, that is, extensive retaliation.
Not only were they a disgrace to Jacob,
- But they were a disgrace to the requirement of circumcision and
- To the meaning of circumcision, and
- To the Godly mandate to mission to the surrounding peoples.
The example was appalling.
Everyone thought, “What’s in it for me?” The Hivite and his son may have thought, not only of a bride, but of a dowry and wealth. Protection with this God of Israel, may have led them to allow themselves to be circumcised. We cannot ever, though we may sometimes suspect, speculate on a baptismal candidate’s motives.
Motives are suspect here in some of these verses, but surely this is overkill, for the violation of their sister. Rape - the sin was acknowledged and dealt with in the Law that came later, but it was never retribution like this. We don’t hear of Dinah’s wishes in this story.
The plan of circumcising so many men, needed organization, so a retinue of servants would have been needed. The whole firm and family would have been rallied to help. It is hard to believe that Jacob knew nothing of the plan to annihilate the Shechemites. Assuming Jacob did know, and also knowing that his sons were not mature enough to handle such a situation, Jacob was at fault for not advising them of another course, and being firmly in control of the situation.
Jacob had cause to regret the plan of his sons, and Leah, waiting for her daughter, damaged goods now, would hardly care, for her grief would be overwhelming. Leah had come so far, and been so troubled. Her daughter is never heard of again in Scripture. Here family dysfunction is handled so badly. There is -
One father,
Four women,
All of them wives or concubines,
Thirteen children,
By different partners,
All mothers.
Great wisdom would have been required to rule this family. It’s no wonder there were hiccups occasionally. This is no small hiccup.
(See end chapter note for Digression)
9. THE SURROUNDING TRIBAL INFLUENCES ON THE ISRAELITES
Leah’s sons, Simeon and Levi activated a spirit of revenge, and are the main characters in the action. They are the only named perpetrators, but they must have all had knowledge, at least, of the plan for the huge destruction. The other sons seem excluded from the action, though many strong men would have been necessary. So many servants, for such a huge task, would have been commanded by more that two brothers, one would think. Reuben was perhaps seen as feeble, and opposed to bloodshed, and Judah was felt by the others to be too honourable. Joseph, we would care to excuse from the debacle, being just a new teenager, and Benjamin, not yet born. That leaves six others to consider. Perhaps these other were less passive in the incident, we don’t really know. There could be other reasons unknown to us, why Simeon and Levi acted so disgracefully, and led the destruction.
In any case the family name now “stinketh” and the firm of Jacob and Sons - Shepherds, Sheep and Sheep Products did not now enjoy such a good reputation anymore amongst their hosts, for they were still “gerim” guests really. Perhaps some of the sons enjoyed the “ruthless” reputation. Well, they had the reputation at the expense of the Godly reputation, though perhaps those same sons did not care about that either.
There were important surrounding tribes who practised circumcision - the Ishmaelites and, the Hittites and the Edomites, a rite brought to them through Ishmael and Esau - so the rite would have been known by the Shechemites. It may have meant that the Shechemites were willing to accept with it, the worship of the God of Abraham. Jacob, probably, would have been pleased with the proselytes, if this had been the honourable outcome. However he would not have been so pleased if they added God worship to the worship of their other gods, which would be the more probable outcome.
Later tribal vengeance could not be activated when all the males were killed and the women taken off, so it may have been felt, that wholesale slaughter was necessary and therefore justified, to protect them from Hivite vengeance. The concept, that God Himself deals with the matter of revenge, not us, was as yet unknown to them.
It showed the nations about -
- How the Israelites could care for themselves,
- How they vindicated family outrage,
- How they must be respected,
- How they could create wealth, for any poverty incurred by the gift to Esau would now have been reversed, with their famous good business and farming techniques, and the addition of Hamor’s cattle.
It did not show the nations about -
- A Godly people, which was the specific purpose of God for His outreach to the nations.
Compromise with this pagan community resulted in multiple tragedy in this family, but again God comes to the rescue, and advises Jacob to go to Bethel. Jacob was nevertheless fearful of the surrounding tribesmen and did wish to move on quietly. This would be a big ask for so many people, with so many possessions, and the howling women of Shechem with them.
Later, in the list of persons going down into Egypt, Shaul, the son of the Canaanitish woman, is mentioned. It’s generally accepted that he was not a child of Dinah, but a child of one of the women plundered as slaves this day. Hopefully, exposed infanticide practised at this time for population control, would not have been used by Jacob, for a child of Dinah, if she did have one as the result of the violation. Other similar liaisons that appear later in our story, resulting in a child, have not caused the elimination of a child in this way, for example, Lot’s children, nor Judah’s children, a later family dysfunction.
Moses, relating this story, at a later stage in history, states that Jacob’s sons are angry because Shechem “wrought folly in Israel ... which thing ought not to be done”. These words would not be those of Jacob’s sons, for the generic term “Israel” is not yet in general use. Moses, therefore, has faithfully recorded the incident, and under inspiration, included a comment to condemn the incident of rape.
In 2 Samuel 13:12 almost the same words are quoted by Tamar to her brother Amnon, pleading for her safety before he raped her, “for no such thing should be done in Israel”. She was another woman who could never be given in marriage, and now damaged goods, “desolate” (NIV).
Esau despised the birthright in the previous generation. It appears the covenant of circumcision is degraded again in this generation. Surely lack of education, and being too long among an alien people, who exert too much influence, could be causes for under estimating God’s wise provision for their preservation. If circumcision was used by other tribes, perhaps the significance and the importance of it, for Jacob’s children was forgotten. Reason, but not excuse, once more.
So God commands them to go to Bethel.
Here begins a God advised enforced separation from the Canaanites that has lasted 3,000 years. They are hated and despised for their separateness but it was the God provided way for their preservation and certainly necessary at this time.
10. JACOB ORDERS A GREAT PURIFICATION
Before they leave Shechem, Jacob wants to correct a family dysfunction. He commands his family and all his servants to cleanse themselves and their garments. Many washings were part of the evolving religious services, which eventually led into the one great washing, baptism, that is required of all God’s servants. They were also to cleanse themselves of strange gods. They gave up their gods and their “earrings”, probably talismans or idolatrous phylacteries, or amulets. We know that “they” later made the golden calf out of earrings, and worshipped it, in a place of YHWH, much to the horror of Moses.
So the Israelites have once more been preserved from their sinning to work out their own chastisement. Jacob knows that leaving Shechem was a cementing of the way to God and that the cleansing process would never be complete with idol worship among his family members.
We know that Rachel’s teraphim (from her father) were still in the compound. Rachel was Jacob’s most loved wife. It is impossible to think that Jacob did not know about her idols, and so because of his love for Rachel, he had been tardy in cleansing the household from the perniciousness of the semi heathen worship that was going on in his house. We assume that there were more gods now plundered from Shechem to add to the collection.
Idolatry practised by some members of the family, and God worship practised by others, bring out all the problems of a mixed marriage, add to that polygamy, and there is a recipe for disaster. The sacred historian Moses does not spare the history which is written for our benefit. May we take the obvious lessons.
So Jacob took the idols and earrings that were in his compound and dug a pit and buried them. This does seem to be an ineffectual destruction for the heathen gods, for buried “treasure” can always be retrieved. After all, it was THE OAK in Shechem. Moses calls it “the great tree” (at Shechem) in Genesis 12:6, and it is a well known place.
Comment:
Moses found a better way - he ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water and made the Israelites drink it. Then it could never be retrieved. God had commanded them, in Exodus 20:23: “Do not make any gods alongside me”. Yet they had forgotten.
Joshua brought them into the land of Canaan, and died at Shechem, after the exodus from Egypt. They had come to Shechem to bury Joseph, whose bones they had carried from Egypt, in this same plot of land Joseph’s father, Jacob, had bought. This plot had been preserved down the years for this occasion. That established the centre of the tribes of Joseph’s two sons Ephraim and Manasseh. Joshua says, as Jacob did before him: “Throw away the foreign gods that are among you”, Joshua 24:23. As many times that they forgot, we forget also, so there is no need for our smugness.
It is remarkable that the worship of gods and God went hand in hand. We need hardly make the point that worship of anything apart from God, is pernicious. All of us are in need of purification, like these people constantly were, for we substitute destructive influences as well. Dysfunctional worship should never be present in our communities, or in our personal lives.
********************
CONCLUSION:
Alas, the web we weave, intending to deceive, makes a fabric that will never function as a garment of righteousness.
Digression:
With the terrible affliction just made known to Karen Blixen in “Out of Africa” (syphilis, inflicted on her by her husband - she is barren now), she observes that the earth was made round so that we may not see too far down the track - a quaint way of saying, it’s best that our life is not known to us before we experience it. Quite so!
CHAPTER 2
BETHEL - GOD’S PLACE - BUT NOT FOR LONG
“God said to Jacob, ‘Arise, go up to Bethel, and dwell there’”, Genesis 35:1.
FOCUS:
These sons of Jacob are murderous Bedouins. They are without the mark of Cain. They relied on their own great strength to save the family. There are no distinguishing marks on the foreheads of these people of God. Ungodly they were. Now God has rescued His family from this terrible murderous conflict and they are moving towards His place at Bethel, Genesis 35:1-20.
1. JACOB AND HIS FAMILY ARRIVE AT BETHEL - AT LAST
God inspired fear into the tribes around about, so that Jacob was left in peace to travel to Bethel, and we are relieved to see the family move along in safety. Nomads do travel along leisurely, capable of great effort if necessary, but generally with no rush or bustle. There was a constant need to find pasture, and cattle had to be given the time to graze. Perhaps God caused the peoples to leave post harvest stubble. This was normal procedure. It nourished newly harvested land, and was considered as extending hospitality to the flocks of Bedouin tribes’ people. On the other hand, they may have been frightened of these ruthless tribes’ people because of their Shechem reputation, and they might have offered them safe passage, and food, and provender, as a means of protection. This is far removed from the Godly missioning Jacob’s family was supposed to be about.
So they reached Bethel at last. Jacob must now feel that he has come home. God has preserved them from their enemies, for “the terror of God”, was upon them, so that those enemies did not pursue them.
Momentous events occur in this chapter, Genesis 35, and we brace ourselves for trauma again. We do so want it to be peaceful for this God blessed family, but it is not to be.
When Jacob had passed by this way, on the journey to Haran, he had heard an encouraging message from God. He raised a stone pillar, and poured oil on it. Now, here again, God asked Jacob to build an altar for Him. At this point in his life, Jacob must have been encouraged to hear the great promises from God again. This would be balm to his soul, and balm he would need in the coming time. Perhaps he felt God’s great mercy would be extended once more, in spite of everything that happened at Shechem.
Rebekah’s nurse, Deborah, died here. She must have been of great age (160 years) if she (wet) nursed baby Rebekah. She had come with Rebekah, who was a bride for Isaac. Abraham’s servant, probably Eliezer, had brought them to Abraham. She may have come to Jacob, after Rebekah’s death, being very special to the Jacob family also. They buried her here, in this sacred place under an oak tree near Bethel. So this link with Jacob’s much loved mother was finally broken.
After three years they move again. They leave Bethel, so it’s not “home”.
Consider:
* Is this the oak tree mentioned in 1 Samuel 10:3, where Samuel gives the newly anointed Saul a direction that three messengers, probably angels, will meet him at the great tree of Tabor, near Bethel, that is Rachel’s tomb?
Saul is to be assured of God’s purpose with him by meeting these men at the tree. They will give him two loaves of bread. A precious place this, a significant oak tree. “The oak of weeping”, it is called. Jacob’s weeping - but not for Deborah.
* Are we too suspicious in thinking that Simeon and Levi may have been the cause of a hasty departure from Bethel, as they were from Shechem?
* Was there some reason why Jacob decided to leave Bethel?
* Or was Bethel only a stop over on the way to Isaac, who is now at Hebron, or on the way to Beersheba?
* Or was Jacob summoned?
* Was Isaac ill, or near death, or in danger?
*********************
In fact, Jacob lived near Isaac for the next 16 years of Jacob’s mourning, until Isaac died, through the sale of Joseph at age 18, until Joseph, in Egypt, was 29 years old.
Their nomadic life style is difficult for us to understand apart from the mission mandate of Abraham, but their movement through the land in this fashion must have been recorded, at least in the oral history of the surrounding peoples. When they returned, a great people under Joshua, the Canaanites, at least, would have records of their comings and goings over the previous centuries. May the times in Bethel have been refreshing! Now that we know the end from the beginning of this incident, we can only hope that it was indeed a time of refreshment
2. RACHEL, BELOVED RACHEL - IS DEAD
It is close, so close to Rachel’s “time”, for her to be delivered of a second precious child. She is the loved wife of Jacob, and about to deliver to him another great treasure. He must have been full of joy about the coming event, for his youngest children were fourteen years old. Something entices Jacob to move, to move his whole compound from the God filled Bethel. We cannot conclude what that might be.
The caravan, after packing up at Bethel, is suddenly halted and a great tragedy is played out. The Jews say “it is a mile from Ephrath”, (or Bethlehem), and indeed that is where her supposed tomb can be viewed today. The dearly loved Rachel dies giving birth to her second son, Benjamin. Oh, the pathos of this, for she had said to Jacob, so long ago, “Give me children, or I’ll die”. These were prophetic words, born of envy. No longing for a child is sinful, but jealousy and envy, directed at another, are destructive.
Rachel dies a painful death, and
Jacob’s increased joy is dashed with grief.
The pain of it,
“Rachel,
The pain will soon be o’er,
Try Rachel, try, try -
It’s nearly finished,
The baby is nearly here,
Don’t be afraid,
Rachel, Oh Rachel,
You have another son.
Benoni,
You want him to be called Benoni,
Son of sorrow, no, no, not yet,
Yes, it’s difficult Rachel,
But don’t give up.
Breathe,
Breathe,
Breathe Rachel,
Oh don’t give up.
Rachel,
Rachel,
RACHEL.
Quick,
Tell Jacob,
It’s too late,
IT’S TOO LATE.
Rachel is no more.
RACHEL IS DEAD.”
The midwives, knowing Rachel’s situation, must have been pained with this consequence. They would mix earth and water, and dust themselves and beat their foreheads, and bare their breasts, singing lamentations to the tune of the flute. Perhaps it was a breach birth, as these midwives could tell Rachel the sex of her partly born child. Mothers often died with a breach birth. Jacob tells Pharaoh later, that his years have been difficult - “full of sorrow”. And this is one of his great sorrows.
However, there were, out of this terrible tragedy for Jacob, some blessings, for Rachel never saw her beloved Joseph sold into Egypt, and presumed dead. There were evil days ahead and great sadness - she was spared this, at least. However she never saw the “home” to which she was being brought. It is two days easy march to Hebron, and Jacob had been away for more than 40 years.
In her death she bestowed a blessing (Benjamin) on Jacob, though he would hardly think of it as a blessing at the time, and may have even felt antipathy to the one who caused the death of his loved wife. It is a possible, though immature reaction. He was her “son of sorrow”. “Benoni”, Rachel said, knowing her death was coming) and “son of my right hand”, (“Benjamin”, Jacob said - as indeed Joseph was, but which Benjamin became after the “death” of Joseph).
Comment:
Jacob would command some silk to be brought from the pack, in which to wrap her body. Special worms were used in India, to manufacture special silk, but common silk came as far away as China, along the road that later became known as “The Silk Road”. We will know soon of a trading company that plied its trade up and down this route, some distant relations of this family. Trading companies of all descriptions were big business.
Jacob’s firm would have earlier traded the silk from one of these companies, for some of their own sheep goods from Jacob and Sons - Shepherds, Sheep and Sheep Products. This was a fledgling company yet, but had a big potential, if only they could get themselves a good reputation for responsible practices. It had been founded by Jacob’s grandfather, who divided it with his nephew, and therefore lost that half. It was only limited then, though it thrived, especially under his son, Isaac, more of a sedentary fellow, who encouraged the pasturing of sheep, with a more settled existence, until his son, the grandson of the founder took over. This grandson brought a thriving flock from Haran, though he suffered a loss, when he paid a big insurance to his brother, for his safe passage from the north. Jacob, now recovered, and about to join with his father’s flocks, the whole herd prospered, until a drought that drove them into Egypt. The firm became more firmly pastoralists, when they eventually settled in the west in Goshen, but that was far into the future. At the moment the firm had some internal difficulties, and certain family troubles which affected business. The Midianite/Ishmaelite Trading Company with whom they often dealt was a very old family firm, dealing in goods and slaves, and well known for their honesty and compassionate approach to the slave trade. The leader of the firm was a wise old man and knew many things. He knew how to get ordinary silk or special silk. Perhaps Rachel’s shroud was special silk. There is further information about trade, and trade routes, and silk, in the next section that deals with favourites and the sale of Joseph. Trade and sales are an integral part of the story of Jacob and his sons, with the mission mandate that accompanied the blessings, so that all nations would be blessed.
********************
In the great grief that enveloped this tented site, and Jacob in his great sadness, would command a stone to be hewn, to mark the grave spot, and there where she died, a grave would be dug. So Jacob buried Rachel probably in silk, in that tomb, near Bethlehem.
Jacob held Rachel in his arms
In a last embrace,
And kissed her in the coldness of death,
As he had warmly kissed her, in Haran.
Jacob rolled the stone over her grave,
And sealed her in,
As he rolled the stone from the well
At their first meeting.
Jacob wept aloud,
As he did,
When he first saw her,
Beside the well in Haran,
(The joyful kiss and the cry and the stone rolling there in Genesis 29:10, 11, are an antithesis of this Scriptural text).
His weeping now
Would be full of remembrance,
Great with sorrow,
And fearful of the lonely days ahead.
Mournfully, Jacob would say:
“Here (Bethel) it began -
(his wife search under God’s care)
And here it endeth”.
“I must go on without my love,
But with the child.”
But “How can I let go of my loved one?
How long will the pain last?
Will I ever laugh again?”
From our own experience we know how Jacob would be questioning himself.
Jacob is not thinking of the pain being “God’s megaphone”, as C. S. Lewis puts it. God “whispers” to us in our “pleasures”, He “speaks” to us in our “conscience”, but He “shouts” at us in our “pains”. The pain will worsen for Jacob, for he has forgotten the message from God that He is with him. His “A Grief Observed” is brim full of comforting messages for those in the passage of grief, when the arguing in one’s mind seems to be most fertile. He admits that the greatest danger, is not “Why hast thou forsaken me?” but “so this is what God is really like. Deceive yourself no longer”. That is, there is a danger that we will abandon God in our grief, page 8.
The text of Genesis 30:22 is appropriate to quote at this Rachel death time. For God did answer Rachel’s anguished prayer. He did hear her and God it was who overcame her sterility. It is not recorded, but when she said “God has taken away my reproach”, implicit in that, is her grateful thanks for His act of intervention in her life, her recognition of God and her wish to be like Him. It may not have worked out as she wished, and as we know, she was not buried at Machpelah, but God did hear her once, and gave her the blessing of a dear son, who she did enjoy for his childhood years. Our tears are tinged with the longing that it was indeed enough for her.
3. JACOB’S GRIEF
In this chapter, verses 19 and 20 reveal so little of the depression that would have set in, in Jacob’s mind. Jacob would have suffered from what has become known today as “The Widow’s Syndrome”, as that depression is called.
Comment:
Extreme sorrow or shock can stress a body into succumbing to a grave disease. Listlessness sets in, torpor, sloth, a snail’s withdrawal from the world at large, a castaway, for now the anchor has been swept away. Isolated we are, moving civilly, through a world that is scarcely impinged on the inner world - dreaming of a wonderful release, and never getting there.
Even when one has opened one’s heart and begun to recover, it still feels like the bottom of the ocean, with a mile high wall of water on top. Some are more resilient than others, some have a more profound reaction, but all stages are varied, and the density of feeling different, like blades of grass.
We stand about in tears, and try to keep up appearances, meanwhile the tears run down inside like acidic waterfalls, corroding our souls for years. We seem to drag our feet, for the lift in our step has gone, so it appears to us that our soles are corroded as well. It may last for years and years. We will never be the same again, for a loved half of us has gone.
The system short circuits with grief and sadness, the immune system becomes unstable and we are prone to illness. We are anxious and sleepless, and not good company. We are soporific, and inclined to doze, and don’t seem to care. The reactions seem inimitable, for they are so varied. We have choices about how we react to grief, but some of us do not want to make choices, at first. In time, we can force ourselves to make choices, and then to follow them through. Then we can feel we have moved along a little step, and to understand that we need to keep the forward motion going, if we possibly can.
With emotions that have furious intensity like grief, an unanalysable critical point is likely to be reached. It seems that the mind flips over and changes its set, and without the intervention of will or thought, we pursue a new direction. We think we have to do something and that we will be rewarded.
It is true, that to practise something, that you do not wish to do, will bring a satisfactory conclusion, eventually. Be brave even if you are not, you can pretend. Not many can tell the difference, and practice makes it easier. Now is the time to really pray for wisdom and courage and to be led out of the darkness. Every now and again God will provide a moment, or a shaft, or even a splash of light. Try to seize it so that you can glow in the light, just for a little time. It might help to make the glow a bit longer next time. God has promised us, that “whoever refreshes himself, will himself be refreshed”, so try, just a little, to refresh somebody else each day. Compliment three people a day, remember to say “please” and “thankyou”, polish your shoes, plant some flowers, watch the sunset, relish small pleasures, and think big thoughts, make yourself hum, then sing in the shower, try to smile, at least move the muscles in your face. It may all sound too hard. But try, just try.
Punishment for loving, living with one’s love, for letting something, or someone die, is not the answer. Neither is, “I didn’t love enough”, or “I should have said” or “done more”. Nor is “it seems like I did not love enough, if I do not grieve more”, or “I can prove my devotion, by profound mourning”, an unhealthy attitude, at best. Punishment of oneself in such a way is only self flagellation. Rigidity or polarisation is not an answer, but fluttering along all the emotions and values is better.
Examine the cause of the grief, the letting go, the detaching. One does not let go of the loving, of the good times, it does not mean indifference. It means that we have come to the realisation, that it all belonged to God, and is God’s treasure to bless, or withhold, at His pleasure, when somewhere along the way, we had forgotten that, thinking it was ours. Remember, “If you love something, set it free”. It is a hard, but necessary fact to remember, even in the good times, for we cannot possess people, we can only enjoy them, for a time. Forgive yourself, if you are regretting, focus on the dreams fulfilled and not the past regrets. Worry can immobilise us whereas action can liberate us. Try not to postpone joy. A little joy might go along way right now. Try it if you can.
It means that there should be no desire to possess things or persons, for in possessiveness lies the pain - the unbearable yearning. In this, we endure the flies that keep on biting - we need to be free of it. With a loss, we have a great need to climb to the top of the ladder, and being free of it all, fly off, alone. God knows the effort and strength that is needed to climb the ladder and will be with us every step of the way. Say, “Go your way”, to the object of your grief, - and wait for God’s grace. To Him say, “We can do no more together - thankyou, God, for all we had”.
To reach this point would be a great blessing. Maybe many of our loved friends have reached this point, what a blessing they are to those who are still trudging along the tortuous path.
We know that this strategy applies to all our severed relationships, not only in death. Sometimes we would prefer a death, for it would be more final, or bring with it more dignity. Herein is the lesson that we cannot decide which path we will tread, for God decides. Ruth Park’s “Fishing in the Styx” will provide lots more ideas on coping with grief.
********************
4. JACOB AND LEAH AND THEIR MARRIAGE
Of the children of the one forefather - Abraham and Sarah (Abraham’s half sister as well as his wife), Isaac and Rebekah; Rachel, Leah and Jacob - only the last two remain together.
We have no indication that Jacob loved Leah more, at the death of Rachel, or that he would now have turned to her. However, the fact that she was buried at the patriarchal grave at Machpelah, either before Jacob went down into Egypt, Genesis 49:13, or when her bones were transported here from her unknown death place, says more for family position, than for Jacob’s love. Both women, powerful in the family, were contending with one another. Women now given power, in this no sex discrimination world, can still wield it over other women, or over men. It is power domination, and is not exclusively a male trait. It is a non gender game, which anyone may play over another. It soon sours all relationships within its orbit. Certainly polygamy was/is a fruitful ground for souring relationships. The major factor in David’s troubling relationships with his sons can be traced back to his several wives. It only saddens us more to read in 2 Samuel 5:13 that “David took more concubines and wives when he came to Jerusalem”, and his son, Solomon, learning the lessons of his father, had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
Leah did not shut down her emotions. When people do, they shut down joyful experiences as well, and become depressed. With joy comes efficiency and enthusiasm, and meaning for life. Shut down, we cripple ourselves. Emotions are of a whole, and if one side is denied, another side soon follows, until emotions are all shut down and covered over. An unwelcome illness emerges, and we are emotionally disabled. Conversely, if we suppress unacceptable emotions and only show approval gaining emotions, we begin to believe self worth depends on other people, rather than ourselves. That is not to say we should expose unacceptable emotions in an unacceptable fashion. We can express them positively, so that people understand our feelings, without us giving offence. Leah did not shut down, but redirected her meaning for life. Rachel was good at exposing her emotions, also, except that she had the cultural attitude that her self worth depended on her producing children.
Rachel and Leah did let their disappointments and jealousies be known, for they are recorded by Moses, on several occasions. As long as these emotions ranged within acceptable limits, they would still have powerful positions within the family - only now Leah, with Rachel’s death, had no “rival”, (1 Samuel 1:6). She may have hoped her true worth would now be acknowledged, where she should have been with Jacob one flesh. “For male and female created he them” (in His own image) made “after the similitude of God”. As a bearer of God’s image with true worth, she would now be free from the envy sin, and she deserved the chance (if she loved Jacob still) of re inventing this marriage.
Comment:
We, at different stages in our lives, have the chance to re invent or renew relationships such as in marriage, and are given the blessed daily opportunity of reinventing our unions. We need to find the right person, and then be the right person as well, for from this one decision comes most of our happiness, - or misery. A good marriage does wonders for our children. If marriage does not last a lifetime, everyone suffers. Relationships are dynamic. The ebb and flow of life can/should bring flexibility and renewal. Good emotional health is learning to take responsibility for one’s own actions and faults, never blaming others, or letting others goad us into bad behaviour. We should never work for our security, by disadvantaging others. We need to leave everything a little better than we found it, and try to empathise with other people’s points of view. Focus on making things better, not bigger. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others, 1 Corinthians 10:24 is surely a marriage precept, and to learn easily identified coping mechanisms, can only enrich us.
********************
Consider:
The relationship between the two sisters and Jacob can only be guessed at.
* Did the contention between the two sisters spoil the love of Jacob for Rachel?
* Did he tire of the competition for his favour?
* Indeed, did the competition go on, or wane?
* How has Leah’s life gone, in the 24 years since the deceit on the wedding night?
* Some of us can look back over 24 years of marriage. What have we got left?
* Have we kept the sad lessons and thrown away the experiences?
* Or do we throw away the hurts?
* What did Leah have left?
We don’t really know what Leah had left.
*********************
CONCLUSION:
This patriarchal family moves on in great sadness and the pit of despair engulfs them all. The journey of a lifetime has turned into a journey of despondency and depression.
CHAPTER 3
INCEST - ANOTHER SORDID TALE
“Reuben ... lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine”, Genesis 35:22.
FOCUS:
As the caravan rolls on again, we read, that Jacob stops his family by the Tower of Edar, a watch tower for protection of the flocks from robbers and wild beasts, and a lookout for invaders, Genesis 35:21-29. Here a momentous incident occurs. Then in Genesis 36 the story of Esau is closed off.
1. THE DISGRACE OF REUBEN’S INCEST
Here Leah’s eldest son, Reuben, now 24 years old, commits another crime against his father. He loses his claim to the birthright by sleeping with his father’s concubine, a Syrian, Bilhah. She was old enough to be his mother, and was indeed his stepmother. She had been given to Rachel by Laban, at least 24 years ago. She had been Laban’s concubine, before she was Jacob’s concubine. She was the mother of Dan and Naphtali, his (step) brothers
This sordid tale brings with it, also, many questions.
Consider:
* Was Bilhah taking consolation from Reuben at her mistress’ death?
It wasn’t rape, so responsibility lies with both of them,
- One a servant,
- One a master,
- One older,
- One younger.
* Did the two conflicting family relationships soften responsibility, each to the other?
* Was Bilhah a household prostitute, although she was the mother of Dan and Naphtali?
* If polygamy was rife, were there household prostitutes as well?
If there were sexual relations between an unmarried man and woman, it was obligatory that they marry.
* Was Reuben unmarried?
* Is this obligation the reason why, earlier, Shechem pressed his claim in the manner he did (by rape, then by a request for marriage), because he knew of marriage prohibitions on Canaanites, even before the Law of Moses?
* Was Jacob so prostrate with grief over Rachel that the family lurched on, without his supervision?
********************
There is no reaction by Jacob recorded, at this time, except “that he heard of it”, in the AV, Massoretic text, though at his deathbed Jacob refers to this sin, and Reuben is reminded of his instability and that he will not excel. “Thou wentest up to thy father’s bed; then defiledst thou it: he went up to my couch”, Genesis 49:4.
The Septuagint Version records Jacob’s reaction at the time of the incident though, “Israel heard of it - and the thing appeared grievous before him”, Joseph brought an evil report to Jacob of his brothers, Genesis 37:2, presumably this was one of the incidents mentioned.
It was an arrogant act, and a premature claim to the rights of the first born at his father’s death, where he could inherit his father’s concubine, as concubines could be passed on like wealth and possessions. Reuben was probably jealous of the sons of Rachel, and sought to divert what he thought would be precedence, given by Jacob, to her sons. In Genesis 49:3-4 Reuben loses his legal status as first born, in the “Blessings of Jacob” at Jacob’s imminent death. Also he loses his status within the family, at this present time, for the effective leadership passes to Judah. “Arrogant incest” the NIV Study Bible calls it. In Amos 2:7 Israel is condemned for their sins, including, “father and son use the same girl, and so profane my holy name”.
Sexual relations by a father and a son with the same girl were strictly forbidden, for obvious reasons. Progeny would be unlawfully related, and so the relationships were deemed as incest.
H. A. Whittaker points us, in “Wrestling Jacob”, page 97,to David, 2 Samuel 12:18, taking Saul’s wives, and then there is Absalom in 2 Samuel 16:21, 22, and also Adonijah, in 1 Kings 2:17, taking, or attempting to take their father’s wives, without following the proper cultural pattern.
2. THE WHOLE FAMILY IN DISGRACE AGAIN
However, now, here is another disgrace - within the family, and affecting the family firm. Outsiders looking in must have felt that there was instability here. Of course everybody knew, for this was a family constantly in the spotlight with the business firms and traders round about, with whom they had daily contact. There is no witness here of the glory of God to the nations round about.
Consider:
As God promised “that He would never leave His people without testimony”, Acts 14:16, 17, and that “the gentiles show the requirements of the law written in their hearts”, Romans 2:14, 15, so, there is at this time a dearth of any Godly witness among the Jews. So,
* Where is the mission mandate at this time?
* Is this when people heard (like Job, or Jethro did) from God, about the way of salvation, and the way to worship Him?
In this patriarch’s life
* Why does this dysfunction keep occurring?
* Were there too many people to care for, so much journeying, so much wealth in sheep and cattle and servants?
* Is Jacob not able to cope?
* Does certain dysfunction run in families, unless strict care is taken to avoid it?
********************
Jacob’s disappointment and anger are spelled out at the end of his life, but that does not mean that he is not disappointed now, and with a continuing disappointment all through his life. Still we know it is God’s purpose that a great family needed to go into Egypt (70 souls) to be a million people when they returned. There had to be enough to form God’s nation and the land of Israel, and fulfil His promise.
God had blessed Jacob. But blessings need care, if they are to continue to be blessings. Jacob on his deathbed pronounced some of these blessings as curses.
Blessings they were,
And mismanaged,
They turned into curses.
3. THE JACOB FAMILY MOVES ON TO HEBRON
Eventually, lonely Jacob travels on to Isaac at Hebron. We cannot tell whether he has visited his father since his return from Haran. The only connection, about which we might know, is that somehow, sometime, Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse had come from Isaac, to live with Jacob’s family. It is 35 years since Jacob left Rebekah and Isaac, to go to Laban, to look for a wife. Isaac is “full of years”, and has been partially blind at least, for so long, if not blind, even before Jacob left. Isaac’s death at 180 years old, and burial at Machpelah, by Jacob and Esau, is recorded, misplaced in time sequence, in Genesis 35:29. The twins were 120 years old at the time of the burial, and Joseph, in Egypt, is interpreting the butler baker dreams. After the funeral, Esau went back to Seir where he had easily established territory for himself - the Edomites. The resulting division of property and servants, after Isaac’s burial, by Esau and Jacob would have enhanced Esau’s credibility amongst the people of Seir, far more so now. Like Abraham and Lot, Jacob and Esau were now, certainly, too numerous to remain together, and Esau does not renew his post Haran offer to Jacob, of being together, and gathers his possessions, and leaves this Promised Land. Genesis 36:6 tells us that he turned his face from Jacob, but the whole of the chapter really records the history of Esau’s family. At this new stage of the narrative, the genealogy of the other branch of the family, that is Esau, is completed. The chapter is Esau’s “toldoth” or history, the story of his wives and children, his genealogy.
(See end chapter note for Digression)
Chapters 37 to 50 comprise Jacob’s toldoth. It is the record of the removal of Jacob and his family, through the instrument of Joseph, from Canaan into Egypt, as a prerequisite for growing the nation.
If we follow the time line of Companion Bible, “Chronological Chart, Appendix 50”, Isaac dies ten years after the lost Joseph incident, which happened when Joseph was 18 years old. If so it would have been of great concern and sorrow to Isaac that this loved grandchild had disappeared. Sold into Egypt! Sold!
“Lost! Sold! How was he sold?” we like Isaac, question. The family was not poor. They had no need to sell anything. Jacob loved his son, Joseph, dearly. He would have been guarded, or, should have been guarded, and cared for, and cherished, and never lost. The lessons of Dinah were not well learned.
This family was specially blessed, and needed to stay together to enjoy the blessings. It would be wrong to divide it, we would think, not knowing the end from the beginning.
The reputation of God’s people amongst the neighbours of this family is tainted once again in the next story, and the mission purpose is again lost. Perhaps there is a greater purpose, a provision for later tough times in Canaan, and an established place in Egypt. We do know that answer, but still we wonder about the mission mandate at this time.
CONCLUSION:
Isaac’s cup of sorrow will fill more as he lives out his days amongst his grandchildren. Isaac’s life began in laughter and great joy, he married for ease and comfort at the death of his mother, and it ends in sadness over a special grandchild - and the suspicion of murder about the other Jacob grandchildren. His Esau grandchildren are far away.
Digression:
As Esau’s toldoth, or family history, in Genesis 36, does not concern us in this study, we will quickly pick out the main points, before we proceed with the patriarchal story.
+ In this chapter, Genesis 36, there is information about Esau’s family.
+ We read about the people of Edom, who lived amongst the reddish rock formations, primarily sandstone, located south and south east of the River Jordan.
+ We can see that there are their connections with their step cousins, the Ishmaelites.
+ Eliphas, a son of Esau, and his grandson, Teman may provide a connection with Job, who lived in the land of Uz, and whose friend was Eliphas from Teman, Job 2:11.
+ We learn about Esau’s wives and his concubines, and
+ The great wealth that he had.
+ There is information about Esau’s sons and grandsons.
+ There are the dukes and the kings, princes, and the subjects that are reigned over in this kingdom.
There are some problems in comparisons with other texts, but we will not deal with those here. The dates and ages of family members are not certain, although they may seem so in our story, and even birth positions are sometimes blurred. Here, in this chapter, some have been included or excluded for reasons unknown to us. There may be twelve princes, like Jacob’s family, but thirteen are mentioned here, and later nine. The explanation is difficult, see commentary by Ellicott, and not of much consequence to our story.
+ The text ends as it began - “Esau, the father of the Edomites”.
CHAPTER 4
JOSEPH - JACOB’S FAVOURITE CHILD
“Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children”, Genesis 37:3.
FOCUS:
After Esau’s toldoth is told, we move to Jacob’s toldoth. In Genesis 37:1-3, there is some small, but illuminating detail about Jacob and his family.
There is more grief and angst for Jacob, yet he thinks his cup is already overflowing with suffering. His dearly loved son, Joseph is now lost to him.
1. FAVOURITES IN FAMILIES
Some great purpose had to be achieved in this family. God’s all seeing eye perceived a jealousy among these brothers and a willingness to rid themselves of the spoiled child, Joseph. He was Jacob’s favourite child. “Favourite” that word again. Strong/weak family relationships become, once more, the vehicle of God’s will.
So we are introduced to Joseph, a noble character that takes up more space than any other, and with this valuable human biography, we are energised. A favourite son and hated brother, never resentful or carrying a grudge, never wanting to get even. The story holds every human passion and because of it, low level antagonism simmers daily in this family life, and kindness is not evident. It seems Jacob did nothing about the dysfunctions, the incest sex with Bilpah, the Shechem rape and pillage. At least it is not in the text, only in the end of life blessings. It really was time for a well function management practice, so the dysfunction in this family could be curtailed. The dysfunction could have been curtailed in Jacob’s worshipful practices, which we are not told about in any great detail, or it could have been in family conferences. But it was not curtailed, and so the stage was set for more family trouble. Joseph was an easy child to raise, and being so, was favoured by Jacob, that’s why he was an easy child.
Comment:
Children are loved in different ways for different things. So children in a family should never feel that one is loved more than another. God rightly divides (2 Timothy 2:15) as He asks us to do. He doesn’t equally divide amongst us. A famous black preacher said, “Black people must never say, ‘It’s not fair that my skin is black, why can’t I have a white skin and be as free as the white man’. God never equally divided anything in this world, He rightly divided it, and so everyone is different”. Children need to be assured on this point, as parents go about rightly dividing amongst their children.
We should make ourselves worthy of the privileges of life and love and joy, and manage them as well as we should our hate, for they are all gifts from God. Negative and positive feelings both have to be managed for emotional maturity.
********************
Moses tells us that Joseph was Jacob’s favourite child, and there was family dysfunction because this was so. It created more jealousy within this next generation - children model on their parent’s behaviour. Jacob learned that from his mother’s favouring behaviour of himself as a child, and now jealousy is present again.
It is interesting to note according to prevailing law that Jacob may have required payment from Laban for his years of service for Rachel, if she had not had children. For many reasons, then, it was fortuitous that Rachel did have a child, but the wonder of it made the child favoured in Jacob’s eyes.
For many reasons then, Joseph much wanted, fell into the position of favourite child, with Benjamin not far behind. The other ten sons of Leah, Zilpah and Bilhah had indeed recently caused Jacob much trouble and this also may have cemented a strengthening bond for Rachel’s children, especially as this much loved wife was now dead. However we need to consider that it was Leah’s children who caused Jacob trouble, so perhaps it was natural for Jacob to favour Rachel’s children. This is not however a mechanism for encouraging better behaviour from the boys, and only served to make it worse.
However reasons for favouritism do not excuse the angst caused on those who are less favoured. Each child needs to be treated differently, commensurate with age and maturity and personality. We need to differentiate between needs and desires, and try to fulfil all the needs, and some of the desires, if our family is to be healthy. The needs of the older boys of Jacob were quite different to the needs of these two motherless boys, and in fulfilling these needs Jacob’s actions need not have been as favouring one child above another. It may have been a matter of regret to Jacob that he did not manage the relationships within these siblings more effectively. We are not told.
The things that bring profound joy in our lives also bring responsibility and the risk of loss and grief. Jacob had learned that over Rachel, but he didn’t know that yet, for his much loved child, Joseph.
Certainly Jacob had cause for great sorrow over the loss of his dear child, Joseph. His habit of living his life with unresolved differences paid the toll of great unhappiness. For decades he lived with the unresolved anger of Esau (until the Jabbok). It was Laban who pursued him to resolve the difficulties that had been present in Haran, and so that resolution (initiated by Laban) was achieved at the Mispah. Now Jacob’s sons seek not to resolve the difficulty of the favourite child, causing disharmony in the family, in a reasonable, negotiating fashion, but by disposing of the “problem” person elsewhere. They certainly were old enough to negotiate about it, for good with Jacob, or for evil with whoever came along (the trade route). Reuben was twenty four years old.
Comment:
God would be more pleased with the management of our worshipping communities, if we reasonably negotiated with our “problem” members and used socially acceptable personal skills, bringing harmony amongst us rather than being relieved, even pleased, when a “problem” member moves on. Success in this area can bring great satisfaction. Dysfunction is the “in” word, but it has been the “in” condition of peoples, including in worshipping communities, for decades. Now that there is so much emphasis on behaviour skills and management, our interpersonal skills can only improve. What a joy to see these skills, together with our open Bibles, used for beneficial healing in the fragmentation that persists among people who say that they love God. The endemic condition of misbehaviour can with great strength be turned to well behaviour, by those committed to reform, if we will acknowledge that it is God’s way, that He will bless it, and we will learn how to do it.
********************
2. JACOB’S LIVELIHOOD IN CANAAN
Jacob would have practised the farming of ploughed land, sowing and reaping, half heartedly, as some evidence of permanency, but his true riches and substance lay in his teeming movable property - his flocks. He probably would have rented the fields for ploughing, sowing, reaping and animal grazing, from the indigenous people round about. He had no right to ownership of the land save for dwelling and burial. His grandfather, Abraham, had already bought a burial ground, the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, from the Hittite people, from the family of Heth, and so Jacob once more established himself there, where Isaac lived and died. Jacob also owned a dwelling ground at Shalem in Shechem. He felt unwelcome, as we know, at Shechem, and so when he came to Isaac, at Hebron, he stayed on. Still, he was “ger” or “guest” in this land, as his father Isaac, and grandfather Abraham, had been. God had not yet fulfilled the ownership inheritance promise, and there were some restrictions on Jacob’s ownership rights.
There are some unknown prevailing circumstances here, that is whether Isaac and Jacob actually lived together, or perhaps just in close proximity.
There would be a difficulty with the herds suddenly blending.
Also we wonder how they managed their new found father/son relationship.
3. JACOB ESTABLISHES HIS BUSINESS AT HEBRON
Jacob was no peasant, and different from the sunburnt tillers of the soil. He would have lived in tents beside the walls of Hebron, inside which the people lived in more permanent dwellings. He was no established citizen, or ruler of the ruling class, but his riches and apparent wisdom (God bestowed) gave him respect and dignity from his more than tolerant hosts. Outside the city, he made no threats, and caused them no expense in protection. He was a go between for any of the traders, and would be used as an insurance agent, recommending clients, or warning off undesirables. A highly valued “ger guest”, at that! His family firm of Jacob and Sons - Shepherds, Sheep and Sheep Products was consolidating the business interests, and had recovered from their difficulties. They had a good reputation for business, but some of Jacob’s sons were known to be hard men.
He exchanged what he was able to trade from his herds, for necessary corn, oil, figs, dates, pomegranates, honey, silver, and gold - and he had been known to buy silk to please the women - and these trading contracts gave him civic standing, despite the unusual nature of his existence. He did not want to be thought of as a vandal nomad moving amongst them, he needed fixed and friendly contracts for his need to support his growing family and servants. He traded with these people of Baal, businessmen, tradesmen, peasants, as well as the caravan traders. The town dwellers, but mostly the businessmen, prospered from the trade of the highway that came north and south through the land. Now missioning for God among them, Jacob feels that he has his business and his family under control. Sadly he was under a delusion.
4. ANCIENT HISTORY ABOUT TRADE ROUTES TO AND FROM, AROUND AND THROUGH THE LAND OF CANAAN
It is interesting to note here some details about old trade routes and the possibilities that were open to the plan that God had for this patriarchal family. It was at that time possible to travel north east and North West, as well as south. We marvel, therefore at the provision of a trading company that took Joseph to Egypt, and not one going north to India, or China or Russia.
(See end chapter note for Digression)
5. SLAVES, - AND THE IRONY OF MONEY
The town dwellers in places like Hebron grew rich, as traders do everywhere, and the peasants became their slaves. In their need for the necessities of life, slaves are made, because they borrow from the wealthy, and unable to repay, they eventually pay back with their children’s bodies, or their own, labour and/or sex. It happens even in our culture. They sell themselves. Borrowers and lenders flourish where there is trade.
Rich landowners were all part of God’s plan for this land. Their wealth was later used to make Egypt wealthy, under Joseph’s guiding hands, as the people here, were able to buy food in Egypt, at the time of the drought and famine.
A long way to go to buy food, but for a wondrous reason, Egypt had great warehouses of grain to sell. The silver or gold was willingly given for their bread (of life) and sometimes their children were given as slaves, and Egypt became a great power. Joseph’s wonderful economic plan, amassed for Egypt great wealth during the famine. However, the Egyptians later “lent” their silver and golden trinkets (and raiment) to God’s people to help them on their way out of Egypt. It is ironical that so much of it was used for the making of a golden calf to worship. “Money makes the world go round”, but it is sometimes a bumpy ride. Instead of worshipping the God who had brought them so many blessings, the Israelites began Egyptian animal worship (a calf), as opposed to this Baal nature worship here, from whence the silver and gold had come. However, these Semitic people from Ur, from Canaan, from Egypt brought a syncretic worship, a mixture of it all. Well may Joshua complain to them, and God be angry. Rachel’s gods were never fully eradicated from this people.
6. ELIEZER’S ROLE IN THE EDUCATION OF JACOB’S CHILDREN
Eliezer’s fame and honour was in the choosing of a wife for Isaac. He was head servant, house steward. Abraham was the “father” of Eliezer, and therefore Eliezer, being the companion of Isaac, was the “grandfather” of Joseph. He was probably bought from Damascus and that fact engenders doubt that he was actually a son of Abraham (of a slave/servant girl), as Ishmael was (of Hagar), but he was so close to Abraham, that Abraham offered him to God as his heir, as Sarah was childless. God refused the offer, but Eliezer’s privileged family position guaranteed that he well knew the siblings, Isaac and Ishmael, and their step siblings, the children of Keturah. However he would know best the children and the grandchildren of Isaac.
Consider:
* Bedouin chiefs, a whole series of Arabian progenitors and lords of the desert (see Esau’s family story, Genesis 36) came from this family. It was a mighty family full of wisdom,
and educated at that. If Eliezer was still alive with Jacob now, who better for a teacher for Joseph, than this wise old man?
* If Deborah, Rebekah’s (wet?) nurse, having only just died, had come with Rebekah from Ur, with Eliezer, (they were possibly of the same generation), was there a relationship between them?
* Were they both sent to Jacob and Rachel at some past time, and so have been together all along, since Jacob’s marriage?
* Or had Eliezer been alone with Isaac and now with Jacob’s journey to Hebron, to join Isaac, they were all together, except that Deborah had just died?
It depends on when Deborah joined Jacob. It is all worth considering.
********************
Isaac is still alive. He died 180 years old, years after Joseph’s disappearance, at the time of the butler baker dream interpretation. He is attached to Jacob now, so Isaac would have been pleased to see a role for this ageing faithful servant. Eliezer certainly would not be younger than Isaac, but he may not have been too much older - say 20 years.
Thomas Mann’s description, in “Joseph and His Brothers - Young Joseph”, pages 60-63, of life in Hebron, and his suggestion that Eliezer is Joseph’s mentor, helps us to comprehend the reality of it all, as this family lives out His will in their daily tasks.
7. ELIEZER'S WISDOM IN JACOB’S COMPOUND
Eliezer would be a wise old man, if indeed he was still alive - the prevailing Eastern wisdom would enhance Joseph’s education if he sat with him under the wisdom tree in Jacob’s compound. And Joseph, happy with his sums and his quills and his scripts and his books, would also know wisdom, and like “Ping”, (in our Digression), he would be sure that home was the best place to be.
Eastern wisdom is foreign to us - we’re brought up with Greek logic.
Eastern wisdom does not necessarily seem logical to us.
Eastern wisdom seems sits uncomfortably with us, for example,
God created man last,
- In case someone would say that man had helped God with the task of creation,
- So that man could humbly say, “the blowfly was born before me”,
- So that man might sit down, at once, to a meal, after his creation, as the guest for whom all things had been made ready.
Wisdom indeed!
Joseph must have had an excellent teacher to teach him the wisdom that led to his God given vocation, for he knew about the stars and their constellations, about mathematical matters of all sorts, about health, and safety, and how to make and preserve good relationships with people. His sibling relationships were tenuous, but he was immature still. He knew about languages, and reading, and writing. He knew the script of the people of Hebron, the traders, and the Egyptians. He had “read” the old fables, and learned the lessons of life, with its pitfalls. He would know the writings of God, for Jacob would command that this be so. However he would not know of the writings of Moses, for they were written 200 years later than this. And he did not know the destiny that God had planned for him.
The education Joseph received, at this time in his life, was critical for his development into the wise and wonderful ruler he in fact became. Joseph was eighteen years old when he was taken into Egypt.
Someone educated Joseph. He excelled in the learning of it, and it showed. He showed it. He became the object of a destructive hatred. This hatred was the reverse side of the universal adoration that was laid on him by Jacob. He was fair to look upon, with grace poured upon him, and as he grew, he found disfavour amongst his brethren. They played a great hardship upon him that led Joseph to the house of Potiphar, where the finest achievement of any individual in this story was played out.
8. JOSEPH’ ALONENESS SYNDROME
However much Jacob loved this first born of Rachel, he was not able to bestow the same love, on the children of his less loved wife Leah.
Comment:
Love is not like an apple to be divided in portions.
Love has a “magical” quality of increasing as it is used - like the cruise of oil, 1 Kings 17:14.
Love, like the cruise of oil, “never fails”, 1 Corinthians 13:8. Both English texts use the words “never fail”.
1. If it is apportioned out, or withheld, it debilitates the giver, as well as the receiver.
2. If it is abounding and generous, it returns many times over.
3. Love is learned in the home, it is difficult to learn it anywhere else.
4. To love and be loved is the greatest joy. The power of love cannot be overestimated.
5. If you love and care for others, happiness will find you.
6. In every encounter there is something left behind. A loving encounter can bring great joy, and it leaves behind it a Godly investment.
Children grow up to make the mistakes their parents made, unless educated otherwise. Some of us don’t provide a road map for them, and they are left to find their own path. Loveless children, abused, never learn to freely love, and if not corrected can become abusers themselves, it is a known fact. It is essential to break the cycle. Emotional attitudes are endemic, and often Trans generational. Here the favourite child syndrome is repeated, but the cycle of the aloneness syndrome within the family group is broken, as we shall see.
The favourite child, the abused child, the unloved child, the only child, each is unique, and, because of family situation, exhibit peculiarities that need careful handling.
a. They are not easily integrated into a group.
b. They immerse themselves in books, or fantasy, or unruly behaviour.
c. They often have an imaginary friend.
d. They mostly care only for their own company, and are limited socially.
None of these are harmful unless they are carried out to excess. Isaac, Jacob, Esau and Joseph were all lone children, and held remotely by one parent or the other.
********************
The only person that Joseph got to know was himself, for his brothers “could not speak peacefully to him”. He could have sobbed for longing and loneliness, for he would have seen real people, his real brothers, doing the real things in the warm lives they led, the things he pretended with himself, in the coldness of loneliness.
We remember that Joseph had no mother in his teens, and was probably brought up by Bilhah, his mother’s handmaid, who had her own children and grandchildren by Jacob. Perhaps there was some bonding between Bilhah and Joseph and Benjamin, in our terms, in a very difficult situation.
It is understandable that Joseph would bring the evil report of Reuben’s despicable behaviour with Bilhah, Genesis 35:22, to his father Jacob, (if indeed that was part of the evil report that Joseph brought, in Genesis 37:2). He would feel that his security with this mother figure was in jeopardy, and hardly understanding the sexual significance, would rightly overlay it in his mind with something evil. So he told Jacob. Jacob may have wondered how he could continue to cope, while his sons continued to break his heart. But this Joseph was Jacob’s looked for son, his longed for happiness with the woman he loved, Rachel, and he never broke Jacob’s heart.
Love is often born,
In terrible darkness,
And with a troubled face,
And the hope,
That is born with the love,
Soon is dead.
But love is often born again,
In the loneliest,
And most unlikely place.
If it is reborn,
Hope lives again,
And love prospers.
CONCLUSION:
At this time, the love that Jacob and Joseph had for one another, was entering into darkness, and had a terrible, and troubled, and deadly face.
The hope that was in this relationship soon was dead. It was to be a long time before the love and the hope, which these two had for one another, ever lived again in an unlikely place.
For a sliver of hope did emerge. And these two separately entered the unlikely place, and that love was reborn and prospered in Egypt.
Digression:
It is now certain that not only was there an overland route to China, but a sea route as well, trading in frankincense. There is the most amazing discovery that frankincense was exported to China in a special type of small sewn boat. There are patterns of such boats even today in the harbours of the Yemen, amid the ancient debris. Ancient Chinese imports into Yemen, especially pottery, can be picked up, such as broken bowls, and other utensils. It seems that the incense travelled down with the enslaved youths and girls captured or purchased by the Midianites and other Semetic tribes. They had to make the long journey to Mahra on foot and then they were used on the incense boats to China.
It now seems certain that this was a fabulously profitable ancient trade in frankincense, and it began in the Neolithic Age. First it was carried by slaves on their backs and later on donkeys, and finally by camels, for a whole web of trade routes and hostels and inns, we now know, was developed, over the centuries, in these areas. At the beautiful oasis of Sarif, a rich trading centre with accommodation for human porters and camel caravans, that was busy for more than four thousand years, has recently been discovered - information from The Caribbean Pioneer Magazine, for October 1998.
That is, we now know that this trade was operative in a time well before Abraham, (who lived around 2000 BC). This fact boosts our confidence about silk coming from as far away as China at the same time.
Frankincense is still sold in the Sana bazaars, in the capital of Yemen. The long desert road North West to the Mediterranean was called “The Incense Road”. Frankincense was a very expensive commodity, and few knew where it was grown, which was only in one place on earth, a few misty valleys inland from the Arabian Sea, 1120 terrible kilometres east of Aden, in Yemen. It would be interesting to know how the Israelites obtained incense for use in the rituals of the Tabernacle, in the wilderness, and later in the Temple in Jerusalem. The cost, in effort and purchase price, would be enormous. Jesus as a baby, and at his death, was associated with these spices.
The exhibition mounted by the British museum on Eastern culture, particularly about “Ur”, and conditions in that city, shows a highly developed mode of living with many modern conveniences. As well, we know of terrible trade routes from the deserts of Arabia, and “The Incense Road”, and that there was a sophisticated trade route system of hard and soft roads, that managed to traverse the then known world, from south in Africa to the borders of China, and, as well, north into Russia and Siberia. We know now, that a route to China, later known as “The Silk Road”, had been established before the time of Abraham. So it is understandable suggestion that Jacob would have buried his precious Rachel, in the valuable silk brought over the trade routes from India or China. There was traffic from the nearby coastal towns and seaports, and, as well, that traffic from far away in Egypt, was well established. Jacob’s grandfather, Abraham, had resided in Egypt for a time, so he knew of that great power to the south west, and the goods that came from thousands of kilometres south, from Africa. The road through Hebron, that linked the north, north east and North West, of the great Eurasian continent, to Ethiopia, Egypt, and south down the Nile, endured some competition because there was a north south parallel coastal road, which linked in as well. Joseph’s brothers later tell the Midianites/Ishmaelites to take the coast road, with Joseph, not the Hebron road. Hebron was the usual route, and so Hebron truly was a great trade centre.
It is also interesting that far away cultures, like Japan and China, have ancient myths and legends about a great flood. It is not inconceivable that these stories originated from the tales told by the traders, who transversed these routes, and took, for example, the story of Noah and the Great Flood with them. The Inuit of Alaska, have recently been given independence by Canada, and they claim 4,000 years of history in their land.
Warehousing, lading, conveying of goods were a business of the highways. Some traders may have travelled enormous distances, and hardly ever reached a “home” base. Perhaps for some, “home” was on the road. Others would have been small time traders, who moved only a short way from “home”. In any case the road to China, or other civilisations, would have frontiers, towers, guardhouses, and no trader could ever move along the whole length of the route, and only moved in sections. Imagine the opportunity for graft and corruption, as well as mislaid, or lost articles. The inconvenience of lost luggage, on the great airlines of today, pale into insignificance, when one thinks of lost articles on “The Silk Road” or “The Incense Road”. As well, cargo could be loaded in, and then loaded out, for only short distances, and then the traders like The Midianite/Ishmaelite Trading Company that we are just beginning to hear about, would be gone on out of reach, for maybe a year or more.
Those little fat silk worms gnawing away on the mulberry trees in China were never an import of the Romans, for they didn’t like silk materials. However, they were a blessing to the people in Egypt, because their silken thread, woven into beautiful materials, and often dyed in stunning patterns in Egypt, graced the fashion houses in On and Memphis.
In 3000 BC there were civilised peoples living in China. They had moved there from South East Asia and earlier from India. They produced a huge array of pots from clay, and they farmed rice very successfully in the Yangtze and Yellow River deltas, and reinforced their clay with rice husks for pottery of greater strength.
There is evidence that the villagers made silk, along with hemp, at that time. Archaeologists have found clay replicas of silkworms in the area and that suggests that the people raised the worms or caterpillars, which spun the cocoons that provided the shimmering fibres of silk, which they wove and then traded the silk material, information from “Time-Life History”, pages 129-147.
Although they were a war faring community the greatest battle was against their river, the Yellow River, which they called their “River of Sorrow”, on account of the number of lives it took. It was not until 2300 BC that Yu, the Great, tamed the river with a system of dykes, and their rice crops became more regular, and their lives more protected. They trained birds to catch fish in the river. They placed rings round the necks of the birds to stop them swallowing the fish. When they returned to the fisherman with the fish in their beaks, there was a tiny fish reward. We know about this from the children’s story of “Ping”, by Marjorie Flack, where, as well, the boatmen, on the Yangtze River in China, allowed their ducks off the boat each morning where they could swim and feed amongst the reeds, and along the dykes, and collected them each afternoon. Ping was always punished for being the last duck to respond to the “La la la lei” call. He hid one evening and spent the night in the reeds in great danger. The look on Ping’s face next day, when the boatmen came back, assures children everywhere, that whatever happened, home was always the best place to be.
The Chinese were beset, like every one else, with the barbarian and Mongol invasions around 2000 BC. Only the Chinese though maintained their sovereignty and their traditions in tact, and emerged from the tumultuous times unscathed. We know that in the other great civilisations, that we are concerned with,
- The Sumerians, where Abram dwelt in Ur, later fell foul of the Amorites, and then the Babylonians, and that
- Egypt, at the time of Joseph, was depleted by internal strife and alien armies and eventually fell to the Hyksos.
There was trade between all these civilization, especially in precious stones and metals, for the lure of silver, and the lust for gold was as real for them, as it is today. Gold came from Nubia, silver from Sumer, lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, and translucent carnelian from the Indus Valley, as early as 2500 BC. The Chinese were making tools out of the beautiful jade, and ivory and bones, but most of their tools and weapons were bronze, made from copper and tin. They obtained the tin from the near south. These South Eastern Asians, known in older history books as “Hither Asians”, in turn, were sending tin to Sumer, so the Sumerians, with their copper, could make bronze. The peoples of Asia Minor used silver as a common unit of exchange, and so it became currency for traded goods. The Midianite/Ishmaelite Trading Company bought Joseph from his brothers for twenty pieces of silver, and those brothers twenty years later, took silver to buy corn in Egypt. It is easy then to see how the long trade routes worked in Abram’s time, and how God used them to further His purpose.
The Chinese, being the end of the trade routes, and bound on their eastern border by the Yellow Sea, tried to limit their trading with the outside peoples, although they liked the gold and silver, and needed tin to make bronze. We know that their writing developed in a different way than the Middle East writing did, and so they were not influenced by the Sumerian or the Egyptian scrips. They reinforced the idea that they were a realm surrounded by unenlightened barbarians, and chose to think that they were an intellectual island of order, structure, and constancy, and that attitude pervaded their arts, politics and religion for millenniums. The Chinese had set up kingdoms by 1700 BC, and with this order they tried to stem the flow of those who stole their crops and herds. By the third century BC they had built a great wall, and tried to keep everybody out. This helped to educate their people that they were indeed the centre of the world, but that did not stop the smuggling of the tiny eggs of the silk moth inside a bamboo cane stem, to the Mediterranean countries, and by then China’s silk secret was out, and they lost the monopoly on the silk trade. As everyone knows, silkworms consume an enormous amount of mulberry leaves, in their thirty six day career, and a mulberry tree is always an asset for those who keep silkworms. (Any school children, who watch the wondrous production of silk in their classroom, do well if they grow a mulberry tree in the playground).
Tiny mulberry saplings, as well then, would be necessary on that illicit journey so long ago. The roads were dangerous, and the troublesome wayfarers and robbers made trading not an easy profession, so it really would be a good spy story to follow that secret journey of those little white grubs in their cocoons, in those late BC years. Now that they could manufacture silk, it must have been then, that the Arab carpet makers realised that silk oriental like carpets would indeed add allure to their already flourishing carpet trade.
CHAPTER 5
JOSEPH - A COAT AND SOME DREAMS
“Israel ... made him a coat of many colours”, Genesis 37:3.
FOCUS:
Now we have set the stage for the great trek into Egypt, and so the story proceeds with horrifying detail. It is a story of a beautiful coat and heavenly dreams, and it ends in jealousy, and a pit of death, Genesis 37:3-11.
1. JOSEPH’ BEAUTIFUL COAT OF MANY COLOURS
Jacob gave this loved Joseph a beautiful coat.
Some suggest
1. That it was his mother’s special coat, a treasure kept by Jacob. It may have been her wedding garment, as it had been Leah’s, and a gift from Laban, (see 2 Samuel 13:18, about a virginal daughter’s gown).
Other suggestions are -
2. That it was made of different coloured skins, a multi skin coat, for they had wonderfully different skinned animals from Haran, or
3. that it was made of dyed pieces of material and all woven together, a very expensive Midianite fashion, a specially purchased coat, from traders along the route when they came across each other, (Joseph will get to know those traders well, but they won’t see him wearing the coat), or
4. that it was a long pointy sleeved garment, two of which were in each Bedouin compound, one for the chief, and one for his appointed heir, or
5. That the coat was the priestly garment, and used in the family’s priestly functions. Now that Reuben and the older sons had disgraced themselves from that office, Jacob was happy to give it to his favoured son. The garment would have been a “passed down in the family” coat.
Consider:
We remember the “goodly raiment” that Rebekah brought from her tent to disguise Jacob as Esau.
* Was it now made to fit Joseph?
* Where had that “goodly raiment” been kept?
* Was it indeed the priestly garment, now causing trouble in this family as well, like it had in Isaac’s family?
It was a “long robe with sleeves”, RSV.
********************
Whatever it was, it was more than a garment for a favoured child, and its significance was not lost on his brothers. It represented the firstborn and heir, as you could safely say all these suggested garments could indicate.
Again whatever type of garment it was, the precious wedding garment, or a valuable garment of some sort, more so than the other brothers could possess, or a priestly garment, it would be an anathema to his brothers. If it was not skins, it may have been skilfully embroidered in metal thread, purple and white, olive green and rose colour, black with emblems of stars, doves, trees, beasts all lustrous against the bluish misty background colour. It would be wrist and ankle length with sleeves and would have been kept, preserved in the coffer in Jacob’s tent. The Hebrew word “passeem”, indicates the length, according to a contemporary Old Testament commentator, H. C. Leupold. In the storage trunk with it would have been other precious possessions, like bolts of silk and the precious toldoths, the Mizpah agreement, legal transactions of land acquisition, and other family historical details. There were still possibly the records of the stories of Noah and Shem handed down from Abraham, unless they were they still with Isaac. (Shem had died within Isaac’s lifetime, and the two might have known one another). Other less precious possessions would have been in another trunk, woollen things, mantles, covers, skirts, head cloths, smocks, leather skinned aprons, cloths and caps. A work garment had no sleeves and was short; this gift garment then was unsuitable to work in. The coat must have said to his brothers, “you don’t have to work like your brothers”.
If it was his mother’s garment, perhaps Jacob gave it to Joseph, when he beheld him looking so much like his mother, as he had first seen her at the well in Haran. It is interesting to speculate about the coat. It has caused many to speculate, and sing about it over the years.
Only Benjamin alone, a one year old, and still under the constant attending of women, would like to be with this older brother of his. He had yet to have the melancholy realisation that he was responsible for his mother’s death. This fact, unbeknown to him, and certainly not a blameworthy situation, would nevertheless place him second in his father’s affection and attention, and maybe a cause for antipathy. Perhaps he was never blamed, or taunted for his mother’s death, though the cruelty in this family often did manifest itself.
2. JOSEPH’S HEAVENLY DREAMS
We are brought to the phenomena of dreams again. God used the medium of dreams to instruct Abimelech, Jacob and Laban. Now here are some dreams where God does not speak, but He is tacitly accepted to be the author, though not by Joseph’s brothers. Joseph’s dream experiences both in his own dreams, and those that he interprets, come in pairs.
Joseph’s dreaming, a symptom of his lonely life, was to do with things agricultural, and things heavenly, terrestrial and celestial. Perhaps he readily dreamed on many occasions as an attempt to remedy his isolation within the family, but of course, as in many sibling rivalries, this attempt turned out badly for him. He had later to do with another two dreams, - in Egypt, of the butler, and of the baker, and another two, later, - Pharaoh’s two dreams. He was by then known as the dream interpreter.
Joseph’s dreams were of:
1. Sheaves bowing down, everyone bowing down to Joseph’s sheaf.
So Joseph knew about wheat growing, the family was obviously not entirely nomadic, but grew crops, agricultural as well as pastoral pursuits.
2. Sun, moon and eleven stars bowing down to Joseph
This would be confusing, to those who knew about celestial worship.
Consider:
* Sheaves - what does this mean?
* Are sheaves related to something about food?
* Is an “up” standing sheaf suggestive of an offered up sacrifice?
* Or is it indicative of stored “up” wheat?
* Or is “up” and “down” to do with status?
* Are the heavenly bodies something to do with Abraham’s multiplying, God promised seed?
* There are ranking orders in this dream of heavenly bodies, does that mean that even the important patriarchs (sun and moon), and their children, (the stars), will bow down, to another of the children?
* Are we entitled to thrust this dream prophecy down through the centuries to another child of Israel, who is a Saviour?
Joseph had witnessed the whole episode of the Jacob Esau meeting, when Jacob did much bowing down, so it was in his experience. Perhaps he thought, (and God used the thought), “One day they will do that to me, I will, after all, be important to them, then”.
* Or did God put the thoughts, (dreams), into his mind in the first place, without any outside stimulation?
* Did he really think of himself as an outcast one?
********************
Since Jacob knew that a significant dream was regarded as coming from outside the dreamer, it would have been unfair to rebuke him for the dream itself. So Jacob questioned Joseph, rebuking him for the parental disrespect that the dream expressed, though observing the telling of the heavenly dream “Will I, and your mother, bow down to you?”
The “mother” term that Jacob used must have meant Leah, as Rachel had died, or Bilhah. Then, Leah and/or Bilhah must have been part of the bowing down family that went down into Egypt. Leah was buried at Machpelah, so her bones would have had to have been brought back for burial at some stage, like Jacob’s bones, like Joseph’s bones, like the brothers’ bones were. If we are not meant to take this too literally, Genesis 49:31 may mean that Leah died before they went down into Egypt, at Hebron. This confusing detail need not mean that the dream is a nonsense.
Jacob has not thought of Joseph’s dream as a recollection of the traumatic incident between himself and Esau. He thinks of it as a prophecy. The rabbis, in the Babylonian Talmud, point out the absurdity in the story, because Rachel is already dead, and describe it as dream nonsense. Not so, as things turned out. It was not nonsense. It depends how literally we interpret it.
Another point of view is that the stories are out of sequence in the Genesis record, (as we have seen earlier about the death of Abraham, Genesis 25:11), that is, that Rachel died after this dream incident, but the incident is placed here because of the long narrative, that is better not interrupted with her death. Whatever stance we take, it is only a minor difficulty, and not faith shattering.
Joseph’s dream may have meant to him, not that the family would be in subjugation to him, like they were to Laban, or may have been to Esau at the meeting, but that he would unite them in a benign manner - as indeed he finally did. He may have yearned to heal the pain that had been gnawing at his family for so long. That moon “mother”, his own mother, waned in reality with her death, but she might have waxed strong in his imagination.
Consider:
* So, did the moon, to Joseph, mean his own mother?
* Was it only a rewriting of history where he yearned for his mother to be revered?
* Or, did it mean the other wife of Jacob, the present moon “mother”?
If it meant Leah, then her own ten sons from Jacob appeared not in the running to fulfil the family destiny, that Jacob knew lay ahead for one of his sons. Perhaps she understood that now.
* Did Jacob know now, that this destiny was Joseph’s?
* Or did Jacob think that Joseph was far too fanciful for his own good?
* What did Leah think, remembering the celestial worship in Haran?
********************
Only in his dreams could Rachel be exalted, for she was beyond his help in death. The family had passed on from the Rachel influence, and Leah was now the head wife and mother. However, we would not know the longing, the dreaming and the anguish of Joseph over the years of his childhood and teens, for his real mother, only that we know of other children’s turmoil when they are left motherless. Benjamin was motherless as well, and missed the first three essential bonding years with his own mother, but Joseph was made motherless at the very impressionable teenage years.
The older brothers called him the “dream expert”. “Will you rule over us?” “Will we indeed bow down to you to the earth?” they sarcastically queried him, hating him more.
Jacob’s favouritism, Joseph’s seeming arrogance, or self satisfaction, and his brothers’ envy, then, is all contributing factors to the events that follow.
This mocking has overtones, obvious to us all, of the life of Jesus, when people mocked his message from God. H. A. Whittaker likens Joseph to Jesus, and lists similarities at the end of every chapter in his “Joseph, the Saviour”, so that will not be dealt with here in any of these texts.
The Baal worshipping people round about Jacob and his dwelling were comfortable with the cult of epileptic prophesying, round singing, intemperate feasting, naked dancing, official unchastity with temple women. So Joseph’s tendency to see things in the stars may have worried Jacob. However this honourable message from God was not impure - Jacob himself had dreamed a dream (of a ladder to the heavens), and knew that it was a message from God. However this is the first recorded dream sequence in Scripture, that does not convey a message from God, or where God does not speak. So Jacob might have been understandably worried about Joseph’s dream, but he probably just kept the matter in mind, like we all do when we have a little niggling doubt about our children. Like Mary (about Jesus) kept all these things and pondered them in her heart. Still Jacob’s wildest dream had been modest, he probably felt, and justified his own dreams, while Joseph’s seemed far fetched.
God told Jacob that He would bless him and his family; He would enrich his family and bring him back from Haran in peace. Joseph’s dream interpretation meant that all the family would make supplication to him, Philippians 2:10, “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow” is an echo of this. In Genesis 27:29 Isaac’s blessing of his son Jacob, (whom he thought was Esau) is a foretaste of this - a blessing to come, not to the son, but to the grandson.
“Many nations will serve you and peoples will bow down to you. You will be lord over your brothers, and the sons of your mother will bow down to you.”
Instability was no qualification for the Godly charge of the preparation of Israel for the conquest of Canaan, and in the end there was only one brother that God looked on, and the instability that reigned in the lives of the other brothers, was their ruination, and disqualifying factor. It was the Irish poet, W. B. Yeats, who said, “I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams”. Joseph did spread his dreams, and those dreams were soon trampled on by his brothers.
However, Joseph’s dependence on God, ensured his prosperity, “a tree planted by the rivers of water that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper”, Psalm 1. Joseph must have delighted in the law of the Lord, and in that law meditated night and day, and that brought out the worst in his brothers and they became the ungodly, at least for a time, of this Psalm, and “the chaff that the wind driveth away”, for “the way of the ungodly shall perish”.
CONCLUSION:
This fruitful bough,
Flourishing on the tree,
Planted by the river,
And brought forth fruit.
His leaves did not wither,
And he prospered about Jacob's tents,
And became a favoured son,
And God’s blessed servant.
CHAPTER 6
JOSEPH'S PIT OF DEATH - OR LIFE
“Jacob said, ‘Joseph is indeed rent in pieces’”, Genesis 37:33.
FOCUS:
In Genesis 37:12-33, Jacob lives through the horror that parents feel over a lost child. It is a terrible incident in this family saga. Oh, the pain of it.
1. WHAT JACOB'S COMPOUND LOOKED LIKE
Thomas Mann, in “Joseph and His Brothers - Young Joseph”, page 86, gives us a wonderful description of what Jacob’s dwellings would look like. He suggests that Jacob’s tent would be one of many in the compound (for the three women would each have their own).
Comment:
It would be made of black goat’s hair stretched over nine stout poles and fastened by strong ropes and pegs driven into the ground. These types of tents can be seen in Israel today in the arid valleys where the Bedouins live. The tent would be divided into two rooms by a curtain attached to the middle pole. There would be a private storeroom or supply chamber filled with camel saddles and pockets, unused carpets, rolled and folded, separate trunks for clothing and materials, and other trunks for toldoths and family historical documents, precious and ordinary, yet again, other trunks for hand mills and other small domestic gear. There would be skins hung up full of grain, butter, drinking water and palm wine made of soaked dates. Jacob’s own chamber would be carpeted with felt, over which lay beautiful, coloured rugs with some hung on the walls. A cedar wood bedstead with bronze feet would stand in the background covered with cushions and covers. Earthen lamps, with ornamental bases and shallow bowls with short snouts for the wick, were always burning here. The poverty stricken may sleep without a light, but it was unfit for such a person as Jacob, to sleep in the dark. They were lighted in the daytime as well. There were coffers, carved and legged, stools, a brazier for warmth, a small incense burner for cinnamon, styrax and galbanum which produced a perfumed cloud. A false gold basin, on a dainty stand for ablutions, completes the picture.
It does help us if we understand how Jacob and his family lived.
********************
2. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOSEPH AND HIS BROTHERS
Joseph had Rachel’s power over Jacob, - Joseph did not steal it, and neither did he earn it. It was upon him, for he was her first child. Jacob looked into his face, and saw Rachel, Rachel’s eyes and her smile. It made him impotent with the grief that seemed never ending.
The bitterness and strife among the siblings should have warned Jacob of danger but he was unresponsive and seemed helpless about the situation. The shamelessness of Canaan in the Baal worship around the family would be enough worry.
Reuben had shamed him, (over Bilhah), Simeon and Levi had shamed him (at Shechem), so sibling jealousy seemed insignificant enough. Now he began to think of Judah, his fourth son, as the leader. If only he could be sure of Judah.
The large number of sheep could not be contained near Jacob’s tents, outside the city walls, and Jacob did not want the family firm to be in disrepute. They were probably causing too much obstruction to the city’s life, and so Jacob sent them to the plot at Shechem with his ten older sons. None of them were Rachel’s sons, and as Reuben had just forfeited his right to be the firstborn, they knew that they did not have that right any more within their family structures. The inheritance would be divided thirteen ways, but that double portion, obviously, in their mind, now going to Joseph, was not a huge inheritance, so perhaps they were not greatly troubled about that. They did not yet know of the double portion of land for the Joseph tribe later, after they left Egypt. But they hated the favouritism, so when Jacob asked them to mind the sheep so far away, they were happy to go away from his influence. Perhaps Jacob sent them rather than asked them to go.
Perhaps they decided themselves that it would be advantageous to go north. Maybe they had seen enough of Joseph and Benjamin, and saw a way of leaving home. They could have even demanded this solution. As usual, in families, the older boys would question why Joseph did not help with the sheep, yet they disliked him so, they were vexed with his presence, and would be glad he was not near them. They would question sarcastically whether he (as his father’s favourite) was “an overseer, or are you an assistant?”
Maybe they questioned his loyalty to them, as well, for perhaps it was Joseph, who told Jacob of Reuben’s sin of lying with his father’s concubine, Bilhah.
3. THE ARGUMENTS OF THE PASTORALISTS
If they had put the argument for Shechem to Jacob these sons would say, “They are a new people there now, because we took all the other Shechem dwellers away”, we can hear these sons, persuading Jacob.
“It will show the new Shechem dwellers that our strength has not diminished, in fact, it has increased. We will show them a display of force”, they would argue.
“We don’t have to live there, but we could run our cattle there. After all we own that land”, they would state.
Of Jacob’s fear of the past terrible incident, they would say, “The memories don’t hold any fear for us, we had the upper hand”.
We all know the force of argument that young people use to persuade adults. These were young adults, and it was ten against one. They did need the pasture, and they did own the land, for Jacob previously bought it “to spread his tent”, when he first arrived at Shechem. However there were some legitimate arguments against going so far from home. The family firm would be split and the field workers far from home, and in the place where the firm’s name stank. Still the pasture there was good.
Perhaps the boys thought of it as a good opportunity to retrieve the family treasures (gods) from under the oak tree. How different the two family groups were. The word “profane” may be a description that could be used of them also, like Esau.
The first born, Reuben, had committed a great folly, lying with his father’s concubine, Bilhah, which had cost him his favoured position, and the near youngest now has that position. Esau and Jacob role reversals repeated, again badly managed and causing dysfunction.
3. THE BROTHERS ARE FEEDING THE FLOCKS AT SHECHEM
So the sons of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah were happy enough and minding sheep back on the old Shechem patch about one hundred kilometres away. It was necessary to travel several days journey to get there. So the family, at this time, is physically divided from itself. For some reason, Jacob became concerned about his sons and their flocks at Shechem, consequently he asked Joseph to journey there, to see if all was well. So Joseph dutifully set out.
4. WHY SEND THE LOVED JOSEPH TO THE UNLOVING BROTHERS?
Along the way were locations Joseph knew well, Rachel’s, his mother’s grave stone, then another stone on which his father lay that night, in Bethel, so long ago, when God spoke to him, and the altar there. And in Shechem he would be in quite familiar territory.
Consider:
* But why did Jacob send this loved child, Joseph, on a five day journey to his brothers in Shechem to ascertain their welfare?
* What thoughts would he have as he travelled to Shechem?
* Why did he need to go rather than a servant?
* Was Jacob trying to bind up the failing sibling relationships?
* Jacob ran away from Esau. Did he want Joseph and his sons to tackle fraternal discord in a better fashion?
* Why did not Jacob practice anticipation, with his children?
* Why is passivity so damaging in a family?
********************
It was a badly judged decision, and Jacob never saw this child again. The passivity that was his enemy, and flamed the fuse, meant that a fire was about to reach the powder keg, and Jacob never anticipated it. He must have seen the wind, and he took no preventative action. So he reaped the whirlwind.
Comment:
Jealousy must be corrected. It must be countered with goodness, building up and praising positive attitudes. It is such a damaging passion, it is “as cruel as the grave”, Song of Solomon 8:6, and the coals of that fire, have a “most vehement flame”.
It was a wise and wonderful Egyptian ruler that this child became. He warmly welcomed his ageing father and cared for him in a land, far from this Hebron, twenty one years later. But the angst until then, was almost overpowering to both father and son. It was only God who saved them, and nurtured them and worked out His purpose for the nation of Israel, which they were to become.
********************
In Shechem, Joseph had to ask help to find his brothers. A remarkable guide found Joseph wandering in a field and set him on the right road. That messenger is someone to consider.
Joseph would be under God’s care, and so perhaps He sent His angel to guide Joseph’s steps. Joseph would be unaware of the clues that would have been around, for a pastoral man to find the family outpost that he was looking for. This stranger told Joseph that he had heard the brothers say they would go to Dothan. It was, even at that time, an ancient city. The people there were good for trade and would buy sinews, milk and wool from the shepherds. There was sweet pasture in the valley. It was 21 kilometres north of Shechem and entailed another day’s journey. Perhaps animosity, or lack of water, made them move to Dothan, which was a place of two wells.
They watched the dream expert approach and plotted to extinguish this thorn in the family. The fact that they hated him made them murderers, before they had the thought of murdering him, 1 John 3:15, until now.
Cruelty is everywhere, and we are all injured souls by it, some more than others. Some hearts are well stocked with wickedness. Sometimes this hostile environment produces feral children, untamed, and despised by all. Not Joseph though. Joseph was unwanted as a child by his brothers, and so they stocked up on hatred, and wickedness. They plotted a treachery that is second only to one other. Some were more guilty than others. Reuben the oldest, but now without authority, meant to save him some way, and at least prevailed upon the others to put him in a pit alive, rather than murder him outright first. It is thought by some, that Reuben thought he could ingratiate himself again with Jacob, if he delivered Joseph safely home to his father. To be generous though, we would need to consider it a genuine compassion, learned from his new humbling circumstances.
Joseph was wearing his precious coat, on his travels, (unless he carried it in his duffle bag), and when they saw him, they felt inflamed against him. Once they decided, it was easy to get rid of him. Of course, they saved the coat Joseph had been wearing.
“There is deceit in the hearts of those who plot evil”, Proverbs 12, and deceivers they were, as they imitate the deceit of their father, and their grandmother - they could hardly be ignorant of the story. They grabbed Joseph and lowered him, not too gently, into a nearby pit.
5. JOSEPH IS IN THE PIT
It is quite possible that there was a terrible fight, with the brothers venting their anger on Joseph, before they put him in the pit. The picture of Joseph may be that he was battered and broken in the pit. However, if he didn’t look so good they wouldn’t have made as much money on the sale of this now slave. Slaves are always body scrutinised for quality. If they did beat him they may have been sorry to spoil the quality. “Lay no hands upon him” may have meant “don’t murder him” as they had first decided.
It was Reuben who tried to divert the murder plot, and used these words. He reminds them of that fact, when they stand anxious in Egypt, before Pharaoh’s great servant, Genesis 42:22, “Didn’t I tell you not to sin against the boy? But you wouldn’t listen! Now we must give an accounting for his blood.” (Interesting that they thought of Joseph, when they were in trouble in Egypt, unknowing they were in his presence.)
But it was Judah who said “There’s no money in murder”. It may have been a callous remark, or he may have seen Reuben’s plan as a better idea and begun to feel compassionate, wondering what was best to do now. It could be something like - his father’s lamb was Joseph, and now, after all the recent events, his father regarded him, Judah, as the leader, and shepherd - which might have been his motivation.
They would remember the anger and anguish of their father over the Shechem incident. Their name would doubly stink more among the inhabitants of this land if they murdered, or otherwise disposed of, their own brother. They didn’t think of God’s charge to take His name to all the peoples of the world, they only thought of their own selfish desires. Glad they’d be that Jacob was far away. Although Jacob would doubt Reuben’s ability to accomplish anything honourable after the concubine incident, it does seem that he is the more honourable of the ten here. Joseph pleads, with an anguished soul, for his life, (explained later in Genesis 42:21), but they do not listen, and so they sit down to eat a meal, while Joseph lay in the pit.
It was a pit to catch water in winter - it was dry now in summer. It was impossible to escape from them for they were narrower at the top than the base. A lid fitted the top and so they could easily become a prison. “The pit was empty, there was no water in it” - is a Hebraism, a repeating of the obvious, for emphasis, a poetical structure common in Hebrew.
Joseph could only look up, for there was nothing else to see in the darkness of the pit, he looked up, past the jealousy and the malice and cruelty of his brothers, past these dark and mysterious events, to his Heavenly Father, his only comfort. His father had done the same in the Zor of the Jabbok. But this was a practice for Joseph’s approaching pit time in Egypt, “Look up, Joseph look up”, for there was nowhere else to look.
We need to remember to look up when things get hard.
He was not aware of any stirrings of compassion in any of his brothers. Because Simeon was cast into prison in Egypt (by Joseph) later in this story we might assume that he then may have been the prime mover.
The very clumsiness of the narrative, with so many questions left unanswered, leads us to assume the inspiration of the recorder, Moses, for a forger would have put in all the details. Reuben was absent at this time.
6. THE BROTHERS ARE DECEITFUL - AGAIN
Joseph in the pit, suffered humiliation, and awaited their decision. Some scholars care to say that he was in the pit three days, an inference taken from the three days these brothers were put in Joseph’s “pit” in Egypt, Genesis 42:17. We have to consider whether Joseph was in pay back mode in Egypt. However, noble minds care little for personal suffering, pain or humiliation, and leave revenge in God’s hands. Joseph by then had matured to the degree that he would not consider pay back. On Joseph depended the safety of Israel and its development, and he had been nurtured, and educated, and then sold, all for that purpose.
Only in Egypt, at this time, was the development of Israel possible. Egyptians never took part in the carrying trade, or in the navigation of the Red Sea. They had no maritime pursuits, yet they had great wealth and had accumulated great stores of corn and carpets, etc. The Arabs were the great trekkers up and down this land and many of them originated from within the forefathers of this family. Esau had married one of Ishmael’s daughters and so these relatives of Joseph were plying the trade routes in the land.
The brothers, except Reuben, who had moved off at this time, eating their meal and contemplating what to do with their imprisoned brother, Joseph, in the pit, looked, and there coming from Gilead, across the Jordan and going south to Egypt, were some Ishmaelites, a generic term for all the desert people, but they were specifically Midianites or Medanites - all interrelated, and all sons of Abraham by Hagar and Keturah, (Ishmael, and Medan and Midian, Genesis 25:2). They are differently named by the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Syriac and the Massoretic texts. So it could be safely said, that they were Ishmaelites by descent, Midianites by country, and Merchants by profession.
The Midianite/Ishmaelite Trading Company they were called. And this company met the field representatives of Jacob and Sons - Shepherds, Sheep and Sheep Products.
There were probably five or six camels in this caravan with a few pack animals. There would be an old man on the leading bell camel which would be led by a camel boy. His sons, sons in law, and nephews would all be part of this family business. It was no ostentatious multi camel caravan. The caravan was probably going to a fair at Dothan, or to do certain business there. The road through Dothan, that came from Babylon and went to Memphis, was the oldest road in the world, but of course, it extended much further than that, at this time - from China and Russia through to Nubia and beyond, in bits and pieces, some hard, some soft, some defined roads, some tracks, some desert, some lush and mountainous, some over ridges and some along the plains, - the telegraph lines of the world, or how the news travelled. They had taken linen, fine and coarse and glass trifles from Egypt, and had exchanged those for spices, balm and myrrh, sweet smelling, healing and beauty aids in Gilead. The frankincense would have been obtained from an Arab trader from the deep southern route, which came perilously from that spindly desert Arabian tree, since it only grew in the misty valley there. This honourable trading company might have been carrying some more of those bolts of silk, that had come down to them, from far away China, or India. Still nobody wanted to buy silk right now, they wanted to sell a body, a slave.
The traders may have bought honey, mustard, pistachios and almonds from this side of Jordan. An extra hand would help with these recently acquired goods, which they now added to everything else they carried. Buying and selling a man, was not unknown to them, sons and daughters often were, and it was the custom, so slaves they were. We need to remember that Laban sold two daughters for Jacob’s labour.
“Yes, we’ll sell Joseph and be rid of him”, they thought. The caravan leader looked in the pit. Joseph could have been dead in the pit, as they had first decided, but Joseph was alive in the pit, and for sale.
Joseph would travel with the spices, south past Shechem, Bethel and Hebron (yes, Hebron where his father was), to Egypt. He could have sent a message to his father, but he did not. Well, the brothers thought that he would send a message to Jacob, as well, as we shall see.
7. THE BROTHERS HAUL JOSEPH OUT OF THE PIT
The old man asked to examine the goods, and Joseph was hauled out of the pit. The shepherds were travellers too, for they wandered seeking pastures and wells. They were not like the settled sons of Baal in the cities, and the peasants that worked for them. These shepherds knew the art of bargaining.
Consider:
* What did they tell the Ishmaelites/Midianites about the boy?
* How was he their property to sell?
* Was he nobody’s son, was he a villain?
* Did he thieve, lie, and blaspheme?
* Did he heap up sin and have no virtue so that he was worthless to them?
* Was he a useless worker, a lay about?
********************
They had to have reasons to sell. “This man is disobedient”, or “he costs too much to keep”, or “he is not suitable for the type of work we do”. “Surplus slave stock really”. It is hard to think of what reasons they would give for the necessary sale. Joseph would not have said a word in his defence, “a lamb that before his shearers is dumb”, for the traders would have been too afraid to take him, if Joseph had told them who he was, especially as they had to pass Jacob country. The brothers would have hissed, “Don’t say a word”,
Shame on the sons of Jacob for they were “crying down” the merchandise, as they protested that “this man deserves to be taken down into Egypt”.
Jacob was a better businessman than that. Well then, they would then have to build up the worth of their merchandise.
Joseph’s skills and understanding would make him valuable. “He can keep property lists”. “He understands mathematics and astronomy”. “He can read and write”.
Eliezer had taught Joseph so much. From being near worthless, Joseph’s value goes up. With the haggling, bartering, boasting, lying, patronising, bowing, praising and great false manners, that is all part of the Eastern tradition. Joseph listens to his fate being decided between his brothers and his far off cousins. They ask his name. “Oh no, he has no name!”
What name indeed.
The price is decided - 20 shekels of silver. Two pieces each. This is price of a male of Joseph’s age who had been dedicated to the Lord, Leviticus 27:5 in Israel’s later history.
The Code of Hammurabi, of a king of Babylon 1792-1750 BC, states the price of a slave to be 20 pieces of silver. It was no accident that the agreed price, for this strong young man, Joseph, was 20 shekels, and because the code was well established at the time, it gives a basic historical reliability to the Biblical narrative of this story. The price rose to 30 pieces of silver in New Testament times.
Silver would be a load for the Midianites/Ishmaelites to carry so they would not have too much of it on their persons. They might give some to the brothers, and some knives, and some scented gums, and lamps perhaps.
At least whatever the brothers took for the sale, in whatever proportion, goods and/or silver it would have to be hidden from Jacob - so nothing big in size. Joseph was bundled up on a camel, “Above all”, the brothers said to the leader, “avoid going along the watershed, the roads have become rough, there are vagabonds there, go straight down to the sea and follow the coast. And most important don’t sell him until you get to Egypt”. “Rely on us for we know best”, and so they did - for that’s what God wanted for Joseph. “Good riddance”, they would hiss again in their teeth.
Reuben, meantime, had gone off with a plan to save Joseph out of the pit. He probably had a shopping list. He’d need a ladder, some rope, some food and some clothes for Joseph. He’d need transport to take himself and Joseph, quickly, back to Jacob. He would hope, not only for his own pardon, but a mutual pardon for everyone. He would hope that his action would soften the blow, of losing the sale, for his brothers, and they would eventually see his wisdom and be grateful. He could also ingratiate himself again with Jacob.
8. A TERRIBLE SECRET FOR TEN BROTHERS
Reuben finding the pit empty rent his clothes. It is so disappointing for him, after his preparations for Joseph’s deliverance, and now he is regarded by his brothers with great suspicion. Jacob would now get ten sons back in place of one. “He will be able to love us all once more. Don’t spoil that”, they would say. Because of the suspicion, because there were ten in on a terrible secret, the ten had to have some insurance that no one would tell anyone about this ghastly deed. The only insurance available was an oath.
So, they would swear a terrible oath of secrecy. With much hand piling on the earth, using the many names of God, and gods they knew. They would swear that none present would ever, ever, ever tell. How envious they would be of their other brother Benjamin, innocent, unknowing, beginning his life with their father Jacob - motherless maybe, but at least at the beginning of life, a two year old. Deceit may never be woven into the web of the life that he had just begun to spin for himself.
Reuben had limited knowledge and experience of the transaction so his blame was less than the other nine. He probably had planned to take Joseph when his brothers were engaged with their meal. Now he would have demanded and got the true explanation of events from his brothers. However he, with them, carried the coat home and allowed Jacob to think a wild animal had destroyed his young son. He kept the secret, as he swore he would. He was more afraid of his brothers about the sale, than he revered his father.
They slaughtered a kid (like Rebekah and Jacob did, to deceive Isaac so many years ago) and dipped the coat in its blood.
# So Jacob was deceived by the blood of a kid, as he had deceived his father with the skin of a goat.
Consider:
* What happened to the herd as they packed up and went home?
* Did some brothers go on ahead, and some bring the sheep?
* Did they each tell a piece to try to dissipate Jacob’s anger and sorrow?
The Hebrew implies that they sent a messenger with the coat. That would certainly ensure that they avoided the first burst of anger and sorrow.
********************
CONCLUSION:
The deal is done,
The blood is on the coat,
The coat is carried home,
The lies are in their mouths,
And deceit has once more
Worked dysfunction
In this Jacob family.
CHAPTER 7
A TERRIBLE SECRET AND GRIEF FOR MORE LOVE LOST
“And they brought it to their father; and said, ‘his have we found: know now whether it be thy son’s, coat or no’”, Genesis 37:32.
FOCUS:
The deception conversation, with Jacob, is ugly and dangerous. They lied in order to have refuge from their father’s anger over the treatment of his son. They pretended not to know with certainty, what they very well knew, Genesis 37:34-36.
1. JACOB’S TERRIBLE LOSS OF HIS FAVOURITE SON
Jacob tore his clothes when he saw the blood stained ornamental loved robe, guessing as he was meant to. He put on sackcloth and ashes and mourned for Joseph. He refused to be comforted by his sons and daughters (in law). It was hypocritical of these men to try to comfort their father.
Jacob was naked except for his tough loincloth. His grief, like Job’s, was very great. Eliezer and Isaac were also grieving, but not like Jacob. Eliezer would leave Jacob to that grief, but would sit with him through the days and nights, until he learned to cope with it. The Eastern mourning customs were, and are, excellent coping mechanisms. Eliezer would wipe Jacob's brow as the ash and the tears mingled on his head. Jacob was 109 years old. He was 77 when he deceived his father. Reuben is 24 years, and has the stirrings of conscience. But this deceit is superb in its irony on Jacob for it is 21 years before the deceit is uncovered - 21 lost years.
No one told, for they had sworn an oath, and Joseph was not there to tell.
Jacob hints at unspoken suspicion in Genesis 42:36, 38. So it must have simmered in his mind from this moment. The horror of the blood on the coat, and the evidence of the tearing, seems real enough, and in his deep depression, Jacob is almost overcome with misery.
Consider:
* How much did Dinah and the wives of these men know of the deed?
They all knew of the depth of Jacob’s love and his grief. Isaac was still alive but for many reasons not equal to the task of comforter.
* How many fathers wept for sons, Jacob for Joseph, Genesis 37:34, and Isaac for Jacob?
* Was it then Eliezer who sat with Jacob on the ash heap for seven days and seven nights, like Job, when no one spoke?
The horror of the episode was a secret, so the business was not affected in any way, just a great sadness, and sympathy proffered over the accidental loss of a son, to the business man, Jacob.
* If the business community had known that the Sons had sold one Son, what would they have thought of this firm now?
* Jacob has faced trials, and judgments, and grief, and disappointments before, but this cruel fate he can hardly believe, for now, how will those blessings continue in God’s purpose?
He does not think, like ever faithful Abraham, that his son could be restored to him, from his “death”. And yet Joseph was indeed restored to him.
* Does God hold Jacob in account for this lack of faith that his son would be restored?
* Why doesn’t Jacob link himself with Abraham, in the matter of lost sons?
* Has God asked too much of him, expecting him to keep looking forward, in the face of the death of his loved wife, and now his loved son?
* How much did he treasure Joseph, as a consolation for the death of Rachel?
* Can he now see any consolation in any thing, or any one else?
The wild beast theory could easily have been so, except there was a motive for murder, and Jacob knew that now.
* Where was the rest of Joseph’s gear, why didn’t they follow the beast to the den or lair, or otherwise try to find the boy, or his body?
********************
Had Jacob clung tenaciously, in faith, to God, for strength, he might have saved himself, not from grief, but from inflamed and painful angst.
We are asked to have “faith in faith”,
- The ultimate in faith, that is,
- The faith that you have before God seemingly answers your request, recognising that He has already answered it. It is not “faith by sight”
- But “faith by faith”.
We are reminded of Joshua’s message from God, as he sets out to take the land, in Joshua 1:3, “... I have given you” long before He had given it to them, and so it continues through the chapters. This is victory before the battle really, even before the instructions for the battle.
Comment:
Our faith is often endangered, because we don’t have faith in our faith. A man fell over a cliff, but managed to catch a tree and so saved his fall to the rocks below. He called out, “Is anyone there?” A voice came from the heavens, “Let go, there is a rock ledge just below your feet, and you can drop there safely”. But the man, in his faithlessness, called out, “Is anyone else there?”
********************
When Joseph is restored to him, Jacob will remember this time of inward looking grief, and as well, there may still be antipathy for Benjamin because of his birth circumstance. Jacob is depressed, and could easily hold, or manufacture resentment, and, as well, there is his suspicion of his sons, but he doesn’t know. The deceiver is now deceived by his sons. “The Great Deceit”, it is called.
Jacob argued with himself, with God, expostulated, and eventually adapted to his lifestyle, without Joseph. God had not crushed him, but he felt crushed. He resigned himself to this new circumstance. He had to, for he could not change it. But he did not consider that God would work it all out, even better than before. Jacob still had a way to go in the matter of faith, and in the matter of the consolations of God, His favour and His blessings. Jacob considered them insufficient for his needs.
Jacob’s sons had an enormous way to go in the matter of their faith and relationship to God. They were now ten “Cain heads” like their forefather Cain who murdered his brother. These Cain heads, in their intention, were murderers of their brother. It was later the nation that came from these brothers, who murdered their brother on the cross, so they continued in the wickedness that had been their choice from the time of the child of Adam and Eve. There are three murder my brother episodes of note, within the history of these people, one at the beginning, one at the final renewing of the covenant under the patriarchs and one at the end of their moral history. They may have destroyed God’s will, but because of His intervention, the course of history was changed.
- In the case of Cain, another son was born or “raised up”,
- In the case of the ten Cain heads, Joseph was “resurrected” in Egypt, and
- In the case of the crucifixion our Lord, by the Jewish Cain heads, he was raised again to be the Saviour of the world. The mission to the gentiles then began in earnest, and they were gathered in to be His loved people.
2. AND SO JOSEPH TRAVELS TO EGYPT
Meanwhile Joseph travelled onto Egypt, confined as a slave, and perhaps was sold to Potiphar for 30 pieces of silver. After all, the Ishmaelites had kept him, though he did work for his keep, but they had to make a profit from the 20 pieces they gave to the sons of Jacob.
Those brothers of Joseph thought that they had now confounded the dreamer and his dreams. They regarded the dreams as foolishness, out of consideration, and trampled on them. Their selling of him into slavery meant dream fulfilment for Joseph, and their only hope of survival twenty years later. He, later, continually told his brothers that they were not responsible, that God had sent him there (Genesis 45). By then, God had long answered the dream question for him.
Consider:
He would have questioned himself “how can I forgive the evil that has befallen me?” for he knew how sad his father would be.
* When did he forgive them?
* Why did he never send a message to Jacob, even when later he was a ruler, and not a servant, and had power to do so?
********************
Potiphar was a captain in Pharaoh’s guard, military duties and police work kept him away from home. He was married, probably an eunuch, and his wife was badly neglected, and sexually promiscuous. Joseph is poised in this land of opportunity.
Joseph would have decided that, if it was God’s will for him to be a slave, then he was determined to be content with nothing less than being the very best of slaves. (Often people put in terrible circumstances of prison, or affliction of some kind, think this way, as an antidote to despair.) Joseph decided that whatever his position required him to do, wherever he was, he would do with all his might and all his heart, as doing it “unto the Lord”. He would learn how to meet injustice, wrong, cruelty, inhuman humiliating treatment, abuse, temptation and misfortune so as to take no harm from them. He would learn how to keep his heart sweet and gentle, and kindness would be his virtue.
He would keep his mind pure and clean,
He would keep his spirit brave, and
He would be strong, and good, and
He would keep his faith in God bright and clear.
Right now though, Joseph is poor and loveless and lonely for his family, and homesick.
He will never know again that home was the place to be, for he will have no home until he becomes the Prime Minister of Egypt, twenty years later. The poverty and loneliness and lovelessness spilt over the wall like dampness and rust, and it ran in rivulets upon him, until he was made strong by God, and given great faith to face these cruel and harsh conditions. And so we watch the golden thread of faith begin to stalk the Genesis text now, and in the next 13 chapters, we see this unique son of Israel, live and die in faith, as few men have done in His name.
CONCLUSION:
We must leave this story now. It is hard to resist the urge to go on and record Joseph’s Egyptian experiences as most other commentators do. But there is another terrible story that needs some telling first.
CHAPTER 8
JUDAH’S SIN AND MISERY
“She has been more righteous than I”, Genesis 38:26.
FOCUS:
The lesson to be learned from this sordid story, in Genesis 38, is the fact that, although Judah acknowledged the sin, and ceased from his incest sin - “And he knew her again no more”, it did not take away the bitter taste in his mouth, nor did it take away the consequences. Oh, how he would have wished that he had never taken the path to the Canaanite’s house.
1. THE SAME STORY ALL OVER AGAIN FOR THE SAME REASON
In a former story, the story of Lot and his daughters, drunkenness and incest, is performed for the same reason as this incident. These two desperate attempts show the powerful urge of cultural relativity, in this case, the female's need for progeny. We are not told of Lot’s response to the sin, but we are told of Judah’s response.
Comment:
Sin is like that - Judah’s forgiveness, and his trying to right the wrong, does not make it much easier to forgive himself. The consequences of sin continue to remind us of our sin. However the point of family dysfunction in this family is that although this patriarchal family is forgiven by God, and is so God loved and blessed, they found it hard to forgive themselves. Later David’s sin over Bathsheba was forgiven, but he never forgave himself. That’s a lesson of life for us all. There would have been no censure from the surrounding people, for Judah’s sin, to them was no sin.
We need to remember that from Judah’s name came the term “Jews”, which is still in use today to refer to the Israelitish nation. Certainly the world calls them that, even if they do live in Israel. It was Jacob whose name came to mean Israel.
********************
2. A TERRIBLE STORY THAT NEEDS TO BE TOLD
Many commentaries ignore this story, but the verse by verse ones have of necessity to deal with it. There are so many stories that deal with sex, prostitution and incest within this family that perhaps some feel at saturation point. It is painful for us to consider it, but it is written in His Holy Book.
(See end chapter note for Digression 1)
3. JUDAH, SON OF JACOB, IGNORES THE NEEDS OF HIS DAUGHTER IN LAW
At the time of the family’s descent into Egypt, Reuben is 45 years old, so Judah is just over 40 years old. We know he is a grandfather. Jacob is 130 years old. Isaac had died 10 years previously at 180 years and Esau had come to help Jacob bury him. Some time before they went down into Egypt, the 38th chapter of Genesis is played out. The chapter is another insertion into the family saga, and like David’s sin with Bathsheba, and many other sordid tales, would not be in the canon of Scripture, if we had to do with the compilation.
The events of this chapter impress upon us all, that the danger that these people faced in this land, was enough to destroy the seed line. They needed a refuge where they could grow, and be strengthened, and that was provided for them in Goshen. Joseph was rewarded by Pharaoh for his skill on behalf of the Egyptians, and God’s people benefited by this reward. The Egyptians hated the Israelites and were glad they were confined to Goshen. Their identity was thus preserved.
However, incidents such as Abraham’s “marriage” with Hagar and with Keturah, and the resulting children, the say you are my sister incidents of Sarah and Rebekah, the great move back to idolatrous Canaan from Haran, the rape of Dinah, the incest of Reuben, and now the use of a prostitute by Judah, all illustrate the point that God needed to go to great lengths to preserve the promised line. He later strengthened Joseph’s moral integrity, to resist the introduction of an unsuitable Egyptian seed, and preserved the seed line once more. The story shows the utter hopelessness of God’s family trying to live in Canaan at this time. Abraham had managed at that time, (but Lot had found it difficult). Now idolatry overtakes his grandson’s family.
In this story, Judah voluntarily separated himself from his brothers, unlike Joseph who was torn away. We might think that there were no sons left at home, but we really cannot decide for sure who still lived in Jacob’s compound.
Judah went to Adullam, a town south west of where Jerusalem came to be. He stayed with Hirah and married a Canaanite woman named Shua (or daughter of Shua). She bore 3 sons to Judah, Er, Onan and Shelah.
The firstborn son, Er, married Tamar, maybe a Canaanite also. However Er was a wicked man and God arranged his death, Genesis 38:7.
Consider:
* The grandson of Jacob is so wicked that he cannot live?
* Would Jacob know of him?
* Would Jacob mourn his passing?
* Was Judah estranged from the family at this time?
********************
Judah said to his next son, Onan, “lie with Tamar and produce children for her”. But Onan unwilling “to raise up seed” for his brother, according to the custom, practised a form of birth control, and spilled his semen upon the ground. The custom of raising up seed, became a legal obligation, in the later Law of Moses, Deuteronomy 25:1-10, and remembering the story of Ruth, we can see that the nearest living relative of the dead husband, not always a brother, was expected to become the participating male, as long as the widow was of child bearing age, and had no children. Widows past child bearing age, without children, had no such protection.
However, Onan did not want to produce children who were not counted as his, and so practised this form of contraception. When Onan behaved as he did, God, also, killed him for his wickedness. It was a blessing for Tamar that she was a widow from these two ungodly men, though she did not realise it. Her name meant “palm tree” and she was resilient, and able to survive. She had strength and courage and determination, as we shall see.
4. WHAT NOW FOR TAMAR?
On the loss of two husbands, the third brother was not bound by law, to marry the widow. The deaths of two sons must have been a great anguish for Judah, for it would be a prime agony for one child to die before the parent, let alone in such circumstances. After the death of his first and second son, Judah then said to Tamar, “Wait for Shelah to grow up, and in the meantime go and live in your father’s house”. It seems Judah was afraid for the life of his third son, Genesis 38:11, and although he may not have blamed her for the deaths, he would know that widows of two husbands were often called murderesses. That was the suspicion that allowed the third son out of the bind.
Even if Judah did not blame Tamar for the deaths of his sons, he may have had other hopes for an alternative marriage for his third son. At the very least he wanted Shelah to escape the wickedness that had killed his other two older sons. So he hesitated and did not ever give Tamar to Shelah his son, and she became more and more distressed over this, as she waited over the years.
She lived in her father’s house with the terrible reputation of being a murderess. The later Levitical law, of Leviticus 22:13 recommended that the widowed daughter of a priest may return to her father’s house, and to his table. This has encouraged some to think that Tamar was of priestly descent, perhaps of the priest Melchizedek, “Tamar”, from “Women of the Bible”, by Lorna Fifield, page 49. It is highly likely that Tamar asked God for His blessing on her trial.
There was great wickedness abroad. No doubt it would have been related to the Baal worship round about. Prostitution and temple prostitution were all part of daily life amongst the Canaanites, and was the main problem in this story.
5. JUDAH SEEKS OUT A PROSTITUTE
After many years Judah’s wife died. Apparently he only had one wife, when polygamy was the custom. It seems Judah’s need for a prostitute, a fast solution to a particular urgent need, indicates that he only had one wife. The solution he sought to relieve his need, brought him sin and misery.
Judah had sheep from Jacob and had built up his own herds. One day Judah and Hirah, his friend, went up from Adullam, to the sheep shearers at Timnath. One would think that Judah’s family firm would have had been shearing sheep. Perhaps there was some rift with the family, or that Hirah’s sheep needed the shearers. It is possible that shaving and cutting instruments were very scarce, and not possessed by this family of Israelites at this time.
Tamar heard that Judah was going to Timnath, so she sat down on the pathway. Of course, Judah saw her, and because she was veiled, or covered like a prostitute of the Phoenician Venus Astarte (the female votary was required to perform this sexual vow once a year), he thought she was available as a prostitute, and offered a kid goat from his flock to be sacrificed to this pagan god.
Tamar, like so many others in this family, was distressed that she had no children. That was enough of a culturally unacceptable position for a woman to be in, let alone being a widow twice over. Tamar also wished to collect an inheritance, because of her former marriage to the firstborn, Er. She is prepared to go to great lengths to restore her position. However once again the seed line is protected, for Judah was saved from having intercourse with a regular temple prostitute.
The sons of Judah’s deceased wife, Shuah, a Canaanite woman, were also prevented from being part of the seed line, for Tamar was childless to those sons. So there must have been something special about Tamar, which God wanted.
But Judah unknowingly commits incest. This is later forbidden in The Law of Moses, (Leviticus 20), but this prostitute situation is hardly a more worthy course for Judah to take.
Tamar did conceive from this union, and through one of the twins that she bore, came the promised seed, our Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 1:3. It is not beyond God to use prostitutes in the progenitors of our Lord. We would not have chosen it. He does. He accommodates His will to the free will of wicked men and women. By doing that he does not condone wickedness, or dilute His moral law. He decides, and steps in when He wishes, either to prevent man’s course, or to promote it. He also uses the pure seed line when He deems fit, or not, as He decides.
Tamar was not worried about her payment (of the sacrificial goat, for, of course, she was not performing a pagan rite). She wanted recognition from Judah. As the goat was not readily available, which probably pleased her, she asked for a pledge. Judah asked the woman what she would propose as a pledge, and she suggested,
1. His signet, (a sign of authority - not always a ring, but sometimes something hung around the neck),
2. His bracelets, (armlets, or the neck cord for the signet),
3. His staff (probably of considerable value and his emblem of authority), three very important and valuable gifts, (or down payments). Judah agreed, and gave the tokens to Tamar, who was pretending to be a prostitute.
Then, having paid for the sexual favour, Judah lay with Tamar and she conceived. God does not condone the incest, but promotes the progenitor, as He has in other incidents. Tamar went back to her home and put on her widow’s garments once more, and waited. She is not consumed with guilt, for she deliberately planned it. She had decided, rightly or wrongly, that if Judah’s sons did not fulfil her right of children, then Judah should do so.
Judah remembered his promise to the prostitute and no doubt wanted to retrieve his valuable property, so he sent his friend Hirah with a goat suitable for the offering, to that place.
Hirah returned to Judah, and Judah is greatly shamed over the whole incident.
“I cannot find the woman”, Hirah said, “not only so, but the men of that place said that there had been no harlot there!”
“Oh well”, said Judah, “we won’t worry about it, otherwise we will become a laughing stock
in this place. After all, I did try to send her a goat, as I promised!”
He had tried to fulfil his promise, and prostitution was rife, so surely he had no need to be embarrassed. This was no breach of the law, or even the later Law of Moses, although no Jewish woman could become a prostitute, Deuteronomy 23: 17, 18, but prostitution was not forbidden Perhaps he had a flicker of guilt for indulging in a Canaanitish evil. He probably recognised prostitution as a matter of “lawful, but not expedient”.
However for us, God’s holy law assumes we know the value of one man one woman, (that is, complementary roles “in Christ”), He would not need to forbid prostitution. Logic and common sense would then tell us that it is forbidden.
Judah knew he would be judged by his contemporaries, so he kept the matter secret.
Three months later, when someone told Judah that Tamar had behaved like a prostitute, and was now pregnant; Judah righteously condemned her for her behaviour. This behaviour, later condemned in the Law of Moses, according to Judah, is adultery, and merits punishment - being burnt to death, according to The Code of Hammurabi, which was then in force throughout Canaan.
So Tamar then, had risked her life with her deception of Judah, in her desire for a child. Judah sends for Tamar, to come from her father’s house. When she is accused, by the messenger, she produces the tokens and sends them to Judah. She does nothing to bring about the downfall of Judah, only quietly sending the tokens, not creating a scene.
It may be that Tamar’s family was greatly disturbed by what had befallen their daughter, especially if they had a high standing in the community.
“By the owner of these tokens, am I with child!” Oh, the sin and the misery.
a. With no negotiation about her widowhood, or her childlessness, Tamar’s position seems hopeless, until she resorts to an age old trick.
b. With no acknowledgment of any problem, Judah falls into the trap.
c. Joseph never fell into the trap that Potiphar’s wife set for him,
d. Though he endured the punishment for it.
And so may we.
Being morally right does not guarantee immunity and peace, as Joseph later found.
Judah immediately recognises the tokens and is consumed with guilt, and assures Tamar that she is more righteous than he is. Tamar did not publicly disgrace Judah and had waited patiently for the birth. She did know that she would be accused of sin, but she was disgraced anyway, for having no child, and for being twice widowed, and considered a murderess. One disgrace, or the other, it mattered not to Tamar.
Judah had added to the disgrace, by not procuring a husband for her, indicating that she was damaged in some way, or that he agreed with the judgement of the community about her being a murderess. He knew now though, that he too was condemned for another sullied embrace within this family.
Consider:
Prostitution, concubinage, polygamy were all of a piece,
* Why separate one condition from another?
* Was it possible for women, who were used to being property and baggage, to make distinctions?
* Were they expected to make distinctions?
* Tamar would have heard the family dysfunction stories, did she learn from them as we can do?
********************
6. THE SIN OF JUDAH AND TAMAR IN THE ECCLESIA OF GOD HERE
The cause of her “sin” was Judah’s lack of justice towards her. That is not an excuse for Tamar, only a reason for her action. Judah is accused and accepts that, but does not accept her as his wife, “for he knew her again no more”.
It seems that Judah has left the “worshipping community”, or “ecclesia” that Jacob has set up, with the altar of YHWH, to go and form a group of his own called out ones. It was a shaky and shabby worship when he refused to deal with the inequity that Tamar felt over her progeny. Judah consequently condemned Tamar for prostitution when she tried to remedy the problem herself.
Tamar was banished to her father’s house, but remained faithful until she eventually forced Judah to recognise her righteousness, and she was received back into his fellowship (but not his bed), and the fellowship of the saints at that time.
7. TWINS AGAIN IN THIS PATRIARCHAL FAMILY
As Tamar’s time for the birth came near the midwives assured her that she would have twins. Again as in Rebekah’s case, the twins in her womb struggled to be born. A little hand emerged, and receded, but not before the midwife tied a scarlet thread around that tiny wrist. Perhaps this was a common practice with midwives, perhaps it is today.
When the hand was withdrawn, the other twin pushed out. He was called Pharez, or “breaking forth”. He became the head of the leading clan in Judah and the ancestor of David, Ruth 4:18-22. He is mentioned in Matthew 1:1-6 in the book of the generation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
After Pharez was born, Zarah, his twin was born. He it was with the scarlet thread on his wrist. Apparently a withdrawn hand appearance was enough to say “firstborn”.
Comment:
Certainly this birthing incident would cause discussion over who was really born first. It should not have caused confusion, but knowing the heart of man, first born rights were probably under contention, as they had been down the generations. Our country has trouble defining the rights of a child, or a foetus, in matters of abortion. Since the women in this story practised abortion in all sorts of ways, the contentions would not be the same as ours. Restrictions, if there were any, would be difficult to police. Contraception, or population control, were all in the realm of fantasy, witchcraft, and included insensitive practices like abandoning unwanted babies to the elements. The common practice of sacrificing children to Canaanitish gods also indicates a different attitude to ours.
********************
It is uncertain how much the family, or surrounding people knew of this episode, that he was father to his daughter in law’s twins. Hirah certainly knew about it. Judah had said to Hirah, to cease from searching for the prostitute for people would laugh at the searching. So certainly Judah’s falling into Tamar’s trap, would be a cause for mirth among those who wished ill of him.
We wonder whether Tamar ever called on Judah for favours for her twins. He certainly did not marry her, or have any sexual relation with her again.
Moses knew about the incident, and it is clearly stated in Ruth 4:18 and Matthew 1. Judah could easily have concocted some story to take away the rights of inheritance. To guess, we would have to have some facts about Shelah, who is not mentioned again. Tamar might just have lived with the fact that she was considered a prostitute, and a murderess. It was little enough, in the joy of her sons, and once more, she also felt, that the end justified the means. She went proudly down into Egypt with her twins, and would have counted Judah as family.
She may have loved Judah, or she could have been twisted with bitterness, we cannot tell. She may have lived in a new aura of peace, because she knew that God had blessed her, with something very special. She probably did not know that she had made a special contribution to God’s family.
It may have helped her if God had sent a message that her babies would be blessed later, in Egypt, (if indeed He did not tell her). She had to hide in the Goshen black tent curtains to hear Jacob’s last message blessing about Judah. Then her pleasure and blessing basket, “bound in the bundle of life”, 1 Samuel 25:29, would, at last, have been filled.
(See end chapter note for Digression 2)
Comment:
There are so many questions about this story, and so few answers. We wonder if we would have the wisdom and experience to handle these lifestyle circumstances of Jacob’s family, for they are hardly in our experience. However coping with stress put upon us by outside factors, often replicates the stress that the children of Jacob presented to him.
Some of us manage well, some fold up and collapse. “Honourably Wounded - Stress Among Christian Missionary Workers” by Marjory F. Foyle has some excellent advice for those who find their Christian life stressful.
********************
CONCLUSION:
Jacob had gained lots of experiences, though he often stumbled. His children shamed him, and they struggled as well, to recover from their sins. Despite it all, God loved and cared for Jacob, blessed him and them, and kept him from danger, as He had promised. They were a dysfunctioning God loved family.
May He care and keep us also, and give us wisdom to deal with life’s vicissitudes.
Digression 1:
Because of the great number of stories in this saga connected with sexual imperfections, there is a need to use sexual terms to describe the situations and relationships. It is interesting to note the use of terms in the AV and then compare them with the newer versions, NIV in particular. The AV terms are not now in common use, whereas the NIV uses terms and expressions more familiar to us. However between the old Shakespearian English of the AV, and the more modern versions, has been a period of history, the Victorian era, when English usage, sought to cover the sins that were there. Speech in those situations then takes on expressions of its own - nicknames and flippancy, - which does no credit to language, or conversation, or discussion, rather bringing it into disrepute, with sniggering and innuendo.
“Shall not be named among you” does not mean “do not talk about these things, keep them secret”, it means “don’t do them”. We often have a need for discussion on such subjects and we need to do that carefully, openly and with dignity.
Now that schools have courses in living skills and human development programs there has been great encouragement to use correct terms for body parts and functions. The younger ones are quite comfortable with this, but it is harder for the older ones. Perhaps in Bible times people did talk about body parts and functions more easily than we do - circumcision must have been discussed more openly. The original Hebrew words in phrases such as “the tender mercies of God”, would shock us, (the original refers to “bowel movements”). Moses and other writers, used descriptive language of the time, which must have been the vernacular, but our translators, to suit our sensibilities, replace the concrete language of the Hebrew with euphemisms, and turns the English to a more acceptable body organ, the heart. In doing so, they blur the image.
When our English translations could not cover up some of these stories, our grandparents coped by leaving these chapters out of the family readings, and certainly, community and worship readings. We should resist the temptation to gloss these stories.
Of course, familiarity can bring contempt with our children, so we need to temper the human development programs with a Godly focus, and add the Godly requirements for each sexual bodily part, which will not be added in the secular education programs.
********************
Digression 2:
“The law of the Levirate where the brother of the dead husband was required to marry the widow was of far more ancient date than the Law of Moses. It prevented the extinction of any line of descent, a matter of great importance in those genealogical days, and secondly, it was an obstacle to the accumulation of landed property in a few hands, as the son first born after the Levirate marriage inherited the property of his deceased uncle, while the second son was the representative of the real father. A similar custom existed in parts of India and Persia, and exists among the Mongols today.
The Mosaic Law did not institute, but regulated the custom, confining such marriages to cases where the deceased brother had died without children, and permitting the brother to refuse to marry the widow under penalty, nevertheless, of disgrace. Onan by refusing to take Tamar, may have been actuated by the selfish motive of obtaining for himself the rights of primogeniture, which would otherwise have gone to his eldest son, as heirs of his uncle”, Commentary by Ellicott.
It might be expected that there would be here a discussion about the irrelevance of women in these laws and deliberations.
Nevertheless turning from that, we do realise, and accept that there were constraining influences, and cultural relativities, that affected God’s women pilgrims in the matriarchal line, before the advent of our Lord.
When the new privileges came, with our Lord Jesus Christ’s teaching, there was a huge pouring out of grace upon the women, sisters of the Lord, and other repressed minorities, and those people were instantly attracted to the Christian message.
When women came to realise, and experience the enormous changes, they recognised that God had indeed blessed them, more than any other women since the fall. They could at last make their own statement about their relationship with God, and instead of circumcision for males only, which was now abandoned, they could be baptised as well as males.
In the beginning Adam and Eve had complementary roles, and were “made in His image”, until they both “fell”. It must have seemed like a reward, when our Lord Jesus Christ came with the new conditions, for their new acceptance, or at least tolerance, from their repressed and second class state, (like possessions), for over two thousand years of history, before Christ.
Sadly, minority groups were targeted again before long, and Susan Dowell’s research piece called “They Two Shall Be One - Monogamy in History and Religion”, is informative about the evils that have befallen women once more, over the two thousand years since the time of Christ.
SOURCES - BOOK THREE
Section 1: Jacob Establishes His Family
Chapter 1
1. Ellison, H. L. - “Fathers of the Covenant”, Paternoster Press, Exeter UK, 1978, ISBN 0 85364 220 6.
2. Adams, Sarah Fowler, 1805-1848 - “Nearer My God to Thee”, Scriptural Reference - Genesis 28:10-22.
Chapter 2
1. Whittaker, H. A. - “Wrestling Jacob”, the Christadelphian Office Publication, Birmingham, UK, 1980.
2. “Women of the Bible”, Williams, Joan - “Leah”, Christadelphian Office Publication, Birmingham, UK, 1982.
3. Tong, Su - “Raise the Red Lantern”, one of three novellas, translated by Michael Duke, W. Morrow and Company, New York, 1993, (film, by Zhang Yimou), ISBN 06 88122 1 75.
4. Time Magazine, Reviewer - Richard Corliss, Rockefeller Centre, New York, USA, ISBN 10020 1393.
Chapter 3
1. NIV Study Bible, Scripture taken form the Holy Bible, New International Version, Copyright, 1973, 1978, 1984, International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zonderman Bible Publishers, Michigan, 49506, USA - “Ancient Texts of the Old Testament”, “Code of Hammurabi”, “Ancient Texts Relating to the Old Testament”.
2. Bowen, Barbara M. - “Strange Scriptures”, in “Rachel Took the Images”, Erdmann, Grand Rapids, M., USA, 1980, ISBN 0 8028 1511 1.
3. NIV Study Bible, “Verse Comment”, op cit.
Chapter 4
1. Orwell, George - “1984”, summary of an idea, Ellison, H. L. “Fathers of the Covenant”, op cit.
2. Whittaker, H. A. - “Wrestling Jacob”, op cit.
3. Russell, E. J. - “How to Study the Scripture”, Forum Magazine, Sydney, 1988-96 (bimonthly), April 1994.
4. Gleuk Nelson - “The River Jordan”, McGraw Hill, New York, USA, 1948
5. Smith, George Adam. - “The Historical Geography of the Holy Land” Fontana, London, 1966.
6. Ellison, H. L. - “Message of the Old Testament”, Paternoster Press, Exeter, 1969, ISBN 85364 089 0.
7. Ellison, H. L. - “Fathers of the Covenant”, op cit.
Chapter 5
1. Ellison, H. L. - “The Fathers of the Covenant”, op cit.
2. Koran, translated in 1734, from the original by G. Sale, Everyman’s Library, G. M. Dent and Company, London, 1909.
3. Mann, Thomas - “Joseph and His Brothers, The Tales of Jacob”, Berlin Books, Vienna, 1936, translated from the German by H. T. Lowe-Porter, Sphere Books, London, 1968.
4. Whittaker, H. A. - “Wrestling Jacob”, op cit.
Section 2: Jacob and His Sons
Chapter 1
1. Stanley’s - “Sinai and Palestine”, John Murray, London, 1905.
2. Henry, Matthew - “Commentary”, William Collins, London, n. d.
2. Blixen, Karen - “Out of Africa”, Penguin, London, 1985, ISBN 0 1400 8533 5.
3. Companion Bible - “Chronological Chart, Appendix 50”, Lamp Press, London, n. d.
Chapter 2
1. Lewis, C. S. - “Grief Observed”, Faber and Faber, London, UK, 1940, Copyright.
2. Park, Ruth - “Fishing in the Styx”, Viking, Victoria, 1993, ISBN 0 67 08468 05.
Chapter 3
1. NIV Study Bible - “Verse Comment”, Zonderman, New Jersey, USA, 1983.
2. Whittaker, H. A. - “Wrestling Jacob”, the Christadelphian, Birmingham, England, 1980.
3. Companion Bible - “Chronological Chart, Appendix 50”, op cit.
Chapter 4
1. Caribbean Pioneer Magazine, St Mary, Jamaica, West Indies, October 1998.
2. Time-Life History of the World 3000-1500 BC - “The Age of the God Kings”, Time-Life Books, Amsterdam, 1987, ISBN 070540970 8, referred to as “Time-Life History”.
3. Flack, Marjorie - “The Story about Ping”, illustrated by Kurt Wiese, Viking, 1933.
4. Mann, Thomas - “Joseph and His Brothers, Young Joseph”, Berlin Books, Vienna, 1936, translated from the German by H. T. Lowe-Porter, Sphere Books, London, 1968.
Chapter 5
1. Leupold, H. C. - “Exposition of Genesis”, reliable German scholar, translated and re published Baker Bookhouse, Macmillan Publishing, New York, USA, 1939.
2. Whittaker, H. A. - “Joseph the Saviour”, Christadelphian Office Publication, Birmingham, UK, 1980.
3. Yeats, W. B. - “He wishes for the Cloths of Heaven”, in “The Wind Among the Reeds”. 1899.
Chapter 6
1. Mann, Thomas - “Joseph and His Brothers, Young Joseph”, op cit.
Chapter 8
1. “Women of the Bible”, Fifield, Lorna - “Tamar”, op cit.
2. Ellicott, Charles John - “Commentary”, Cassell and Company, London, 1884.
3. Foyle, Marjory F. - “Honourably Wounded - Stress Among Mission Workers”, MARC, Interserve, 1987.
4. Dowell, Susan - “They Two Shall Be One - Monogamy in History and Religion”, Collins Religious Division, London, 1990, Copyright, ISBN 0 00 5992115 X.
