A while ago I wrote a series of posts about Jacob, one of the Old Testament (Torah) patriarchs. I promised to then turn to examining the Qur’an for all references to Jacob (Yaqoub) contained therein, and so now, here is that continuation of the topic. See previous posts about Jacob under the label of “Jacob.”
As a reminder of who Jacob is and his genealogy, here is a summary. Remember that Abraham, the patriarch of what would become the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths, was commanded by God to sacrifice his son, Isaac. This was a test of Abraham before granting him to be the father of all the divine faiths in the one God, and when Abraham demonstrated that he would do as the Lord commanded the angel of the Lord stopped him and substituted a ram. Isaac became prosperous, had sons, one of whom was Jacob, who supplanted the birthright of his brother Esau. Jacob was blessed by his father Isaac and earned through his faithfulness the blessings of God. Jacob had twelve sons, each of whom became the founder and patriarch of one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. One son, Joseph, who was sold into slavery by his jealous brothers, became favored by the Pharaoh due to his gift of dream interpretation by God, and hence saved not only Egypt but the entire region, including the Israelites, from seven years of famine.
Jacob is first mentioned in the second chapter of the Qur’an. In the Qur’an, the first chapter is a seven line introduction, while the second chapter is a lengthy two hundred and eighty six lines which sets forward the basic origins and belief context of Islam. The purpose of this chapter regarding the events that are recorded in the Torah (Old Testament of the Bible) is to neither refute them, copy and modify them, or exclusively claim them, as many Christians (and some Muslims) have incorrectly believed. Rather, the Prophet (PBUH) is recording what he has learned from God, through the archangel Gabriel, which is that the people who will become the Muslims are faith descendants of Abraham, just like the Jews and the Christians. To use a secular expression, the Qur’an is like a person who discovers his or her ancestry, and finds they belong to a third branch of a shared family. This shared family is defined as those to acknowledge only the one God, the one who created Adam, whose descendants faithfully knew and worshipped God, culminating in God’s blessing of Abraham and his descendants.
Because that is the purpose of this chapter, and indeed the entire Qur’an, this is why 1) the Qur’an does not record events in the detail that is in the Torah (Old Testament) because Muslims accept that all of those events took place and Gabriel therefore certainly did not repeat them all in the telling for the Prophet (PBUH) and 2) the patriarchs call themselves “Muslims.” “Muslim” a believer in Islam where Islam is defined as belief in the one true God, the same one who created Adam and was worshipped and served by his descendants in the faith, culminating in God’s covenant with Abraham where God promises Abraham will “father a multitude.” The archangel Gabriel is like someone who seeks out a branch of the family who do not even know who they are, and who explains it to them, and Gabriel does this, as in all things, at the behest of God. The Qur’an serves this one purpose, in addition to its other purposes, of recording the explanation that the archangel Gabriel (Jibreel) provides to the Prophet (PBUH) of the origins and the purpose of these Arabic people who will now become the Muslim people. At that time the Arabians lived among Jews and Christians, but did not realize their common origin or that they shared the same God. They also did not realize that they lived among sacred sites established by Adam and Abraham.
So here is the first mention of, specifically, Jacob.
Surah 2: 132-133, 136, 140
And the same did Ibrahim [Abraham] enjoin on his sons and (so did) Yaqoub [Jacob]. O my sons! Surely Allah [God] has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims.
Nay! Were you witnesses when death visited Yaqoub, when he said to his sons: What will you serve after me? They said: We will serve your God and the God of your fathers, Ibrahim [Abraham] and Ismail [Ishmael] and Ishaq [Isaac], one God only, and to Him do we submit.
Say: We believe in Allah and (in) that which had been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Ibrahim [Abraham] and Ismail [Ishmael] and Ishaq [Isaac] and Yaqoub [Jacob] and the tribes, and (in that which was given to Musa [Moses] and Isa [Jesus], and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit.
Nay! Do you say that Ibrahim [Abraham] and Ismail [Ishmael] and Yaqoub [Jacob] and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do.
So Jacob is mentioned in the context of the other patriarchs, as a list of those faithful patriarchs who personally pledged themselves in covenant with God. The archangel Gabriel, therefore, is explaining to the Prophet (PBUH) what has transpired in the ages past, where the forefathers pledged themselves to the one and only God and rather than repeating all that is in the Torah (Old Testament) Gabriel provides statements of faith and avowal that summarize the feelings and faith of these forefathers.
For example, look at 2:133, which is a one line summary of Jacob’s deathbed reiteration of faith, which he solicits from his sons before he dies. This is a one line summary of what is described in detail in Genesis 48 and 49, two chapters that give a detailed accounting of Jacob being sick, taking to his deathbed, and blessing Joseph and his sons, and then to bless and prophesy for each of his own “twelve tribes of Israel” sons. The archangel Gabriel is, at the behest of God, taking the Prophet (PBUH) “back in time” in a sense, to learn “the bottom line” of the events that form what will become the Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths.
This is why God did not send the archangel Gabriel to say to the Arab people, “You shall become either Jews or Christians.” That would be theologically incorrect. In the time of the patriarchs there were, obviously, no Christians yet but also, if you think about it, there were no “Jews” either. The Exodus had not happened yet, and thus Moses and the Law giving by God were still in the future. Thus in 2:140 God, through the archangel Gabriel, strongly enforces upon the Prophet (PBUH) that the patriarchs had a covenant of recognition and worshipping the one true God, a covenant that cannot yet be ascribed to a particular name of faith. This overall covenant with God is what the name “Islam” and the followers of Islam, “Muslims,” now comes into being, but the “new” name of the “new” faith is not disparaging Judaism or Christianity, but referencing back to the common faith source and giving themselves identification of that branch of the faith.
To look at our analogy, suppose our genealogist discovers that he and two of his neighbors have descended from an ancestor called “Smith.” The last names of the genealogist’s neighbors are “Csmith” and “Jsmith” and Jsmith is a descendent of Abraham through Moses, and Csmith is a descendant of Abraham through Jesus. Well, discovering that all three trace back to “Smith” means that it would be incorrect for the genealogist who has just discovered his place in this family tree to now change his name to “Csmith” or “Jsmith.” He is a descendent of “Smith.” So what should he call himself and his family to now become part of the authentic fold that he has just discovered that he belongs to? He decides that he cannot trace every relationship and descendent from Smith to the present, and thus pick up one of names in his own lineage, so he calls his entire family “Smith.” “Smith” is “Muslim.”
To use a contemporary term, this is “reconnecting with one’s roots.” The Arabians at the time of the Prophet (PBUH) obviously did not have a written record of their biological lineage all the way back to Abraham, as clearly do the Jews and the Christians. So it would be incorrect, both theologically and culturally, to now “decide” that the future “Muslims” is of either Jews or Christians. Finding one shares with others a great etc. grandfather does not mean that you are now the sons and daughters of the other two branches; you are sons and daughters of the common faith ancestor. This is why God, through the archangel Gabriel, gifted Muslims with the right to refer to the patriarchs as being “Muslims.” It is God’s way of saying, “Because you do not have in writing your lineage, then call yourselves ‘Smith,’ do not call yourself or adopt the ways of “Csmith” or “Jsmith.” In 2:136 you see that Muslims acknowledge and revere the Moses and Jesus “ancestry,” but they do not claim to insert themselves now into those branches of the tree.
Another way to understand this is to realize that what God had with the patriarchs, “Covenant,” is the heart of both of the ancestral Jewish and Christian faiths. Over time as the faiths matured, “Covenant” came to mean more than pledges of belief by the patriarchs to God, and God’s blessing in return. “Covenant” came to mean the set of Law for the Jews, and the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the making of the New Covenant for the Christians. Thus use of the word or concept of “Covenant” would be problematic for these new Muslims and God, with his all-knowing and foreseeing, avoided this problem without eliminating, clearly, that Muslims are heirs of the patriarchal covenants. Pledging to God and having God confer recognition and gift in return, a covenant, is the basis for the Muslim “branch of faith and heritage” too. The covenant with these people who have now had their faith ancestry revealed to them, therefore, became codified not by that word “covenant,” but by the Qur’an. The Qur’an is God’s “covenant” with Muslims.
See, I know that this last sentence gives some Jewish and Christian readers a shock. That is exactly why God, in his wisdom, foresaw this problem of understanding and therefore gave the Muslims their own path and terminology to reference their share of Abraham’s covenantal descendant multitude. God never errs and he is never inconsistent; it is humans who fail to understand God’s consistency. God gathered the people who would become Muslims, believers who did not know their own faith history and heritage, and reintroduced them to the patriarchs, but gave them the terminology that would not cause confusion with the other children of Abraham.
There is a further problem that God avoids on behalf of humans by giving the Muslims their own “covenant” that references back to the original covenants with the forefathers and patriarchs. That problem is that the Jewish faith struggled with continual idolatry, as is repeatedly documented in the Old Testament, with even King Solomon succumbing to it in his old age. This is another reason why there are swipes at the Jewish faith regarding being “polytheistic” in the Qur’an and why Muslims are made by God to basically hit the “reset” button for themselves, rather than become Jews and enter the fray of keeping pure the continuity of that faith. Likewise early Christianity suffered from the inevitable arising of heresies. Muslims, as you see clearly in these and other citations, do not deny at all Jesus, and instead revere him. The concern is that early Christians (and indeed many nominally Christian moderns) argue about the “true nature” of Jesus for two thousand years, endangering their own faith in the one God. This is why God permitted Muslims to revere Jesus, but run rather than embrace Christianity and thus, as I commented above about Jews, “enter the fray” of idolatry.
It is like even if our genealogist was tempted to rename his family either Csmith or Jsmith, and join in their branches wholeheartedly, but he discovers that many of them quarrel about the foundations of their family, Smith. Worse he discovers that sects of those branches claim to have “Mr. Real-smiith” and “Ms. Super-smyth.” This is why one observes what seems to be a contradiction in the Qur’an, which is reverence for Moses and Jesus, and their descendent branches of the faith, but also a disparaging caution about those faiths. That is a topic for a whole other commentary and discussion, but I’d be remiss not to mention and explain it here as we cite passages from the Qur’an that are right next to what are, for many, both Muslim or not, some difficult to understand statements about Judaism and Christianity.
Surah 3:84
Say: We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit.
This is a repeat of what was said in 2:136, which is to punctuate throughout the Qur’an the basic statements of belief as asserted by the faith ancestry.
Surah 6:84
And We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoub; each did We guide, and Nuh [Noah] did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood [David] and Sulaiman [Solomon] and Ayub [Job] and Yusuf [Joseph] and Haroon [Aaron]; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others).
Here Jacob is mentioned in a list of the holy people who God has given to humanity, through Abraham, as gifts. Notice that God is stating his guidance of these faith forefathers, a mixed list of patriarchs, kings, prophets and the faithful and his reward for those who are charitable. This is an example of where the passage goes in a slightly different direction than those who detract from religion may expect. God guides these faithful and rewards them, but where one expects to read that God rewards them for their faith, one sees that God rewards those he guides when they do good to others, when they love their neighbor and are charitable.
Surah 11:71
And his [Abraham] wife [Sarah] was standing (by), so she laughed, then We gave her the good news of Ishaq [Isaac] and after Ishaq of (a son’s son) Yaqoub [Jacob].
Here Jacob is mentioned that through the one miracle of God providing Abraham and Sarah with a child in their old age, Isaac, there is a cascading of goodness forward in time beyond the one child, such as the grandchild, Jacob now coming into being because his father was conceived through the gift of God. So the deeper meaning of this passage beyond reiterating the laughter of Sarah at the thought of becoming pregnant in her old age and restating that God keeps his word of the miracle, but that the “good news” cascades forward through the generations.
Surah 12:38
And I follow the religion of my fathers, Ibrahim and Ishaq and Yaqoub; it beseems us not that we should associate aught with Allah; this is by Allah’s grace upon us and on mankind, but most people do not give thanks.
Here Joseph attests his faith in front of the Pharaoh, including mention of his father Jacob, before interpreting the dream of famine of the Pharaoh.
Surah 19:6
Who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased.
These are words that describe the concern that Zakariya (Zacharias), the Jewish priest during the time just before the birth of Jesus, had because he and his wife had no children. The Qur’an relates what we know from the Gospel of St. Luke 1, which is that the angel of the Lord appears to Zacharias as he was in the temple serving God with incense sacrifice, and announced that he and Elizabeth would give birth to the son who will be called John. This son will be John the Baptist, the herald of the coming of Jesus Christ.
This is an example of what is common in the Qur’an, which is to express an interior or exterior dialogue (spoken or unspoken) that quickly illuminates the faith of the speaker or thinker. Rather than repeat all of the dialogue that is in the Bible, as here in the New Testament Luke 1, in the Qur’an the priestly concern and heritage of Zacharias is illustrated by his thought where he is sad that he has no son to serve God, in the heritage of the children of Jacob.
Surah 19:49
So when he withdrew from them and what they worshipped besides Allah, We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoub, and each one of them We made a prophet.
This passage recounts how once Abraham committed to God and withdrew from contact with pagans and non-believers, God have him sons and descendents that are true prophets.
Surah 21:72-3
And We gave him Ishaq and Yaqoub, a son’s son, and We made (them) all good.
And we made them Imams who guided (people) by Our command, and We revealed to them the doing of good and the keeping up of prayer and the giving of the alms, and Us (alone) did they serve.
Ah, now, see; take a close look at these two passages. One is a restatement of how Abraham received as a gift of God not only Abraham’s son, Isaac, but as the out flowing of having a son who is a prophet, Abraham’s son Isaac also fathers a prophet, Jacob. So at first it looks as just a restatement of how God’s mercy in granting a son moves forward in time in goodness, as that son also has a son who serves God.
But when you look at the next line, you now see that God is giving to the Muslims Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as “role models” for their Imams. Muslim Imams are not modeled after the priesthood, and this is why they are not priests, and they are not modeled after evangelists, preachers, scholars or rabbis. Muslim Imams are role modeled after the father-son-grandson filial relationship in faith as gifted by God. This is why the Imamate, the genealogy and authority of the Imams who descend from the Prophet (PBUH) are such crucial and often contentious component of Islamic faith. When Muslims ponder the Imams of their early history, and the Imams of their present, they think of the Imams as being “sons” and “grandsons” of the authentic faith, just as were Isaac and Jacob from Abraham. This is an essential component of understanding not only the theology but the living structure and dynamics of the faith of Islam, and the divisions therein.
Surah 29:27
And We granted him Ishaq and Yaqoub, and caused the prophethood and the book to remain in his seed, and We gave him his reward in this world, and in the hereafter he will most surely be among the good.
The idea of the Imam is developed further here, even though this passage does not refer to the Imamate, but is contained within a retelling of Lot’s rescue by God from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. There is the idea that the prophethood, as role modeled by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is contained and remains in their “seed.” Now this does not mean that literally it is a genetic basis for passing on the faith and prophecy. Here the Qur’an is explaining that faith is and passed on from father to son as each generation affirms their faith. Jacob would not have been the recipient and container of the “seed” of his father Isaac if Jacob disavowed God. Rather, each father must be understood as being not only a biological father, but a spiritual father, who passes on the seed of faith to their son. It is this role modeling that result in many modern day imams having sons who follow their footsteps, just as many rabbis have sons who are rabbis in the Jewish faith. The equivalent in the Catholic faith is the “laying on of the hands” when priests and bishops are consecrated and confirmed. If one looks in the Catholic Church hierarchy database, one can trace the ancestry of the consecrating bishops, back to when these records are last reliable and kept, which is the fourteenth century. The father to son to grandson role model of passing the seed of the faith is a fundamental understanding of all of the Abrahamic faiths.
Surah 38:45-7
And remember Our servants Ibrahim and Ishaq and Yaqoub, men of power and insight.
Surely We purified them by a pure quality, the keeping in mind of the (final) abode.
And most surely they were with Us, of the elect, the best.
By now it is familiar spiritual motif for you to observe that this progression from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob is a crucial role model constantly referenced within the theology of Islam. Having discovered, through revelation by God, their connection and spiritual ancestry to Abraham and his descendants, with great firmness and repetition the Muslims study and imitate the foundational manifestation of faith of these patriarchs. This passage builds on this understanding to make two points. One is that God purified each one of them. Again, it is not as though biology is the reason to pass along the seed of faith. Each spiritual heir and prophet must be purified and kept pure by God, since humans are not by themselves enough; only God can make and keep them pure. This purity allows them to always keep in mind that the earthly life is not the final destination, but the final abode is of either heaven or hell. That is the second point, which is that receiving and accepting purity from God results in both earthly gifts, such as power and insight, and also the eternal gift of being among the best, the elect, in heaven.
I hope that you have found this tracing of mentions of Jacob in the Qur’an and my accompanying commentary helpful.
Showing posts with label Jacob and his sons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jacob and his sons. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
Another fine commentary about understanding God
This is in the online edition of the Jerusalem Post. The commentary summarizes some of the outstanding insight into God's nature that I've been mentioning.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1225199607579&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
snip
Oct 30, 2008 11:44
Parashat Noah: God doesn't want yes-men
By SHLOMO RISKIN
The writer is the founder and chancellor of Ohr Torah Stone Colleges and Graduate Programs, and chief rabbi of Efrat.
snip
Most significantly, when these individuals were faced with similar challenges they each reacted very differently. When the Almighty tells Abraham His plan to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, the first Hebrew argues aggressively, railing against a wholesale destruction: "Will you then destroy the righteous together with the wicked?... Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous together with the wicked!... Will the judge of the entire earth not act justly? (Gen. 18:23-25).
And Abraham goes on to bargain with God as if they were standing in the Mahaneh Yehuda market.
In stark contrast, when God informs Noah that He is about to destroy the world, we hear not a peep of protest.
It seems to me that precisely in this contrast we can understand the entire picture. Noah's greatest virtue is obedience - whatever God wishes to do, Noah is ready to accept. He takes the world as it is, and submits to whatever plan God suggests.
That is not the mission that God wishes to impose on His chosen people. God knows that He has created an imperfect world, and wants His people to perfect it, to challenge and goad even Him to cause His compassion to overcome His anger and even His strict justice. God is not seeking pure obedience; He wants to be challenged.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1225199607579&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
snip
Oct 30, 2008 11:44
Parashat Noah: God doesn't want yes-men
By SHLOMO RISKIN
The writer is the founder and chancellor of Ohr Torah Stone Colleges and Graduate Programs, and chief rabbi of Efrat.
snip
Most significantly, when these individuals were faced with similar challenges they each reacted very differently. When the Almighty tells Abraham His plan to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, the first Hebrew argues aggressively, railing against a wholesale destruction: "Will you then destroy the righteous together with the wicked?... Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous together with the wicked!... Will the judge of the entire earth not act justly? (Gen. 18:23-25).
And Abraham goes on to bargain with God as if they were standing in the Mahaneh Yehuda market.
In stark contrast, when God informs Noah that He is about to destroy the world, we hear not a peep of protest.
It seems to me that precisely in this contrast we can understand the entire picture. Noah's greatest virtue is obedience - whatever God wishes to do, Noah is ready to accept. He takes the world as it is, and submits to whatever plan God suggests.
That is not the mission that God wishes to impose on His chosen people. God knows that He has created an imperfect world, and wants His people to perfect it, to challenge and goad even Him to cause His compassion to overcome His anger and even His strict justice. God is not seeking pure obedience; He wants to be challenged.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Bible Commentary: Part 4 of 4 Jacob in the Qur'an
This section, where I cite and comment all the instances where Jacob (Yaqoub) appears in the Qur'an is next on my schedule.
First citations from Surah 2:132-3.
And the same did Ibrahim [Abraham] enjoin on his sons and (so did) Yaqoub. O my sons! surely Allah has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims.
Nay! were you witnesses when death visited Yaqoub, when he said to his sons: What will you serve after me? They said: We will serve your God and the God of your fathers, Ibrahim [Abraham], Ismail [Ishmael] and Ishaq [Isaac], one God only, and to Him do we submit.
These passages mention four great Biblical patriarchs, including Abraham, who is viewed as the father of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths. Abraham, Jacob, Ismail and Isaac, and the other patriarchs, prophets, judges and kings of the ancient Israelites are referenced repeatedly and with reverence throughout the Qur'an, as you will see in further passages that mention Jacob, which I will provide in this commentary. Before we do, we have to clear the air about the role of the Qur'an in faith history. We will do this by examining this passage and using faith and reasoning in a logical way.
(To be continued...)
First citations from Surah 2:132-3.
And the same did Ibrahim [Abraham] enjoin on his sons and (so did) Yaqoub. O my sons! surely Allah has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims.
Nay! were you witnesses when death visited Yaqoub, when he said to his sons: What will you serve after me? They said: We will serve your God and the God of your fathers, Ibrahim [Abraham], Ismail [Ishmael] and Ishaq [Isaac], one God only, and to Him do we submit.
These passages mention four great Biblical patriarchs, including Abraham, who is viewed as the father of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths. Abraham, Jacob, Ismail and Isaac, and the other patriarchs, prophets, judges and kings of the ancient Israelites are referenced repeatedly and with reverence throughout the Qur'an, as you will see in further passages that mention Jacob, which I will provide in this commentary. Before we do, we have to clear the air about the role of the Qur'an in faith history. We will do this by examining this passage and using faith and reasoning in a logical way.
Notice that the format of the Qur'an is obviously different from both the Old and New Testament as it is clearly "conversational" in tone, and also with great poetic grace, such as is found in Psalms in the Bible. So it is clearly not a set of written exerpts from the Jewish books of the bible. In other words, it's not like the Prophet (PBUH) read the Jewish books and memorized certain sections. These were rough and paganistic times, and just because Jews and some Christians lived in proximity with the people who would become Muslims, there would be no motivation at all to study Jewish scrolls, if one even had access to them, and then to memorize passages, and then likewise to read from the Gospels about Jesus, and then to memorize an accurate but highly summarized recitation of faith history, and then combine it with new laws and call it the Qur'an. People who accuse the Qur'an of being "non revelatory" in nature must think this through. If it is not revelatory, then where did it come from, and why is the composition so strong in its emphasis and revererance for the ancient Israeli patriarchs and prophets? Who among those very rough and tumultuous times would have read the Jewish scribes and the Christian Gospels to extract detailed information about the prophets, and then construct a new faith, this branch from Abraham, out of thin air? It just is not even a technically feasible theory.
The problem is that historians and critics on both "sides" insist on focusing on claims regarding the "sequential" order of the revelatory books of God. In other words, Christians worry that if they say that the Qur'an is revelatory, that it "succeeds" or "supercedes" the Old and New Testaments. They worry that the Qur'an is "new, final, edited" word from God. On the other side, that is the logic that Muslims utilize too. They figure, why would we have received this book, if it is not to supercede the others that come from before? Thus the dialogue locks into whether sequence in delivery by God determines subordination and domination of one belief over the other. That is a great shortcoming on both sides of understanding how God comprehends outside of time the needs of all of his children and servants. I have alluded to this before but let me repeat. God was reaching out to the Arabic people who would become Muslims and restoring, as in reconnecting, their broken linkage to that of Abraham and his descendants. When one seeks a tribe, for instance, from the family tree that one has lost touch with, one does not say that just because they were the third ones found and those that are the most recent, that they "replace" the ones who came before, the Jews and Christians. Likewise, the known tribes in this analogy, the Jews and the Christians, cannot say that the Muslims were not properly invited by God, just because they do not understand God's ways. Those who cannot see that God is perfectly capable of revelation that does not negate or supercede what has gone before, despite the strong words, at least to modern ears, that are in the Qur'an, need to have more faith in God and his ability to always do what is correct. I will take you step by step how to think of it in this light, using the passages cited in this commentary.
(To be continued...)
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Bible commentary: Part 3 of 4 Jacob's children
Here is my commentary, with things that should be noted and understood about Genesis 34.
1. One hothead can cause the destruction of an entire people.
Notice that the Bible records that the offender, Shechem, was “really in love” with Dinah, who he defiled in kidnapping and raping her. So the man who recorded this part of Genesis (all of the first five books are based on the knowledge of Moses, but different scribes have contributed material within the framework of what Moses outlined) takes care not to lose the human element and truth of this incident. Imagine if what would have happened if Shechem had kept it “zipped up,” not defiled Dinah, and instead, sent his father, Hamor, to give the exact same speech that he did give, before it was too late and the damage done. It is quite possible that Jacob and his sons would have agreed to an alliance and intermarriage if the people of Hamor had first converted by being circumcised and worshipping God. Thus, not only might Shechem won Dinah’s affection honorably, but their entire people might have been incorporated into the salvation history of the people of God. Everyone acted “honorably” only after the great dishonor was done and it was too late.
2. Jacob’s role as a patriarch of the worship of the one true God was by no means completed.
This incident occurred very early in the many years of faith formation that Jacob and his sons, especially Joseph, would labor at in service to God. In fact, Jacob’s father Isaac was still alive (Isaac lives to be one hundred and eighty years old), dying only after this incident when Jacob brings his people back to Hebron, where Isaac resided. The entire movement to Egypt due to the years of famine still was in the future. So Jacob and his sons were only starting their service to God and laying the formation of what would become the Israelites. Thus Jacob waited for his sons to come from the fields in order to determine what should be done about the offense to Dinah, as it was not just a personal defilement, but an issue regarding the integrity of the faith going forward. If this had not been dealt with within the context of the still emerging faith of the pre-Israelites, there would have been a risk of intermarriage causing the entire purity of the faith to be compromised before it even solidified. I will blog Genesis 35, which follows up their movements after the incident about Dinah, and demonstrate an explanation of this point further.
3. Jacob’s sons were not only clever in their reply regarding tactics, but they maintained a sin free correct stance.
This is why Jacob’s sons gave the perfect reply when they insisted that every male be circumcised. Yes, the obvious reason was to incapacitate all of the fighting men (since those were the ones who were circumcised, according to the translations of “able-bodied,” not the boy children or non-combatants). But they were able to set this deadly trap yet still speak God honest truth, for the reasons I described above, that no man could intermarry with them and not be of their faith, since they were on the God given mission of forming the proto-Israelite faith that would come to fruition when Moses received the Law from God for the people. So the sons of Jacob spoke wisely that it was their “policy” that there would be no intermarriage unless the pagan tribe “converted.” Again, imagine if only Shechem had asked first, and possibly the tribe had converted sincerely first.
A second point I want to make is from “God’s point of view.” Notice that humans are handling their own matters, in regard to this crime, and God is not telling them what to do. Yet the sons are showing wisdom that they are not even aware of when they insist that all the men be circumcised and thus are converted. It is a common human tragedy that many suffer because of the sin or crime of one or a handful of people, and so the sons planned to slay the soldiers of the town to avenge (and free from being imprisoned) Dinah. But even though the men of the town agreed to be circumcised a bit cynically (desiring the wealth and also because their backs were against the wall regarding their honor), they did agree and that is to their credit. So from God’s point of view the men of the town did do the honorable thing, and that would have weighed in their favor when they reached their personal judgment at the hands of God after their deaths. In other words, if the men had not agreed to be circumcised, and had sided with Shechem keeping Dinah in a dishonorable way, they would have taken on shared guilt and culpability for the sins of Shechem. Thus they died having done the spiritually correct and honorable thing in the eyes of God by having been circumcised. See? This is one of the reasons the Bible is the best of treasures. One can understand much about human nature but also glean much about how God views the events, and the many ways that salvation can come about.
4. Dinah’s two full brothers lead the avenging of their sister.
All of the brothers participate in slaying the soldier s of the town and freeing their sister, but two of her full brothers have the honor of conducting the slaughter of vengeance and freeing Dinah. There is two interesting foreshadowings to glean from this. It is Simeon and Levi that perform the avenging, and Levi will be the patriarch of what will be the priestly tribe, the Levites. There is thus an obvious parallel in defending the purity of their sister and the mission of the priesthood to maintain the purity of the faith. Again, the sons had no way of realizing that at the time, but it shows how God is in control, that the men and women will step forward appropriate to even their still unforeseen vocations. The Levites will be the priests, the ones who can touch the Ark with purity. Thus Levi is one of the brothers who defend the purity of his sister.
My second point is that this is a matter of the heart, of filial love, and not just of honor. So many who misunderstand the Bible accuse it of recording a time when women were “chattel.” That is obviously incorrect. Why would Simeon and Levi be the ones who step forward out of those who were all in agreement in order to actually execute the revenge and free Dinah? Simeon is the second son and Levi the third, while Dinah was born after the tenth son Zebulun. So this was not a matter of where the eldest, Reuben, leads the endeavor, or those who were closest in age to Dinah and thus raised with her. All participated in the trap, the planning and the sacking but clearly Simeon and Levi stepped forward on their own accord out of the deepness of their full sibling filial connection to Dinah. Biblical males were not brutes who only cared about honor or dishonor of their own; they cared deeply about their mothers, sisters and daughters. One can surmise from the leadership of Simeon and Levi that they stepped forward in expression of love for their sister, in addition to the outrage that all of the brothers had for how she had been treated. In fact, the last words of Laban, father of Leah and Rachel, to Jacob, before they parted company, was to warn Jacob that God would know even if Laban did not if Jacob mistreated his daughters (Genesis 31:50). So Simeon and Levi leading the slaughter and freeing Dinah is another example of how there is great love within Biblical families, and not the treating of women as “chattel.” One has to think about how different that is today, among modern society, where moderns are often “love and honor deficient” in their views of the members of their own families, all the while saying that women are “liberated.”
5. When there is lust, everyone loses, including the women who enable the men who lust.
Clearly the town was a place where the chief of the region, Shechem, was enabled to do what he felt like, including that rape of Dinah. I’m not saying it was a sinful town, like Sodom and Gomorrah. I am pointing out a subtly that ought to be more obvious than it is. Where was the mother of Shechem, and where were the wives of the town elders? Did none of them think there was something wrong with Shechem raping Dinah and imprisoning her for forced marriage? The Bible does not say and we are left to wonder. But often one can infer the enabling of women “behind the scenes.” If one of the women had spoken up, that would have been recorded, since as I pointed out, care is taken to record that Shechem really did love Dinah. If the mother of Shechem or the wives of the elders had disapproved of what he had done, we probably would have seen some mention of it, as the Bible makes a point of recording the virtuous actions of even the pagan, and even the lowly in station. Yet there is silence, and only the discussion of the men.
So what is the reward of the women who did not speak up to prevent or even behind the scenes discourage the abuse of Dinah? “Then the other sons of Jacob followed up the slaughter and sacked the city in reprisal for their sister Dinah’s defilement. They seized the flocks, herds and asses, whatever was in the city and in the country around. They carried off all their wealth, their women, and their children, and took for loot whatever was in the houses.” Thus the women, those who should have provided some moral compass (and trust me, the mother of the chieftain and wives of the town leaders did plenty of that) saw their husbands slaughtered, lost their homes, their tribe was destroyed, and they and their children were carried off by the sons of Jacob. Women who enable cruelty and defilement of other women, especially toward women who serve God, as did Dinah by virtue of her birth, will pay dearly at some point. And notice that women did not have the opportunity to convert in the sense that they were not circumcised as their victim husbands were. They lacked a grace that the men had to pay the hard way. Hopefully they became pious and raised good children within Jacob’s extended family, but we have no way of knowing today.
6. Jacob wimped out, while Simeon and Levy stood strong.
I am not saying this to be bloodthirsty. I am pointing this out so that one can see that even Biblical Patriarchs sometimes did not measure up to the situation they were faced with. With those lines of rebuke to Simeon and Levy, Jacob is showing his “politician” side rather than his maintenance of purity. He is worried that he and his people will be “hated,” even though his sons had just come from quite a victory. This is the constant balance that all humans have, whether they are secular or religious leaders. Where does one draw the line? If Jacob had taken the easy way out, such as letting the men convert via circumcision, and settling down in that area, intermarrying, leaving Dinah with Shechem, might he not have derailed what was his mission as “Israel?”
And in fact we do know that Simeon, Levy and the rest of the children of Jacob did the right thing, as recorded in the following chapter of this event, Genesis 35:1-5.
Bethel Revisited. God said to Jacob: “Go up now to Bethel. Settle there and build an altar there to the God who appeared to you while you were fleeing from your brother Esau.” So Jacob told his family and all the others who were with him: “Get rid of the foreign gods that you have among you; then purify yourselves and put on fresh clothes. We are now to go up to Bethel, and I will build an altar to the God who answered me in m hour of distress and who has been with me wherever I have gone.” They therefore handed over to Jacob all the foreign gods in their possession and also the rings they had in their ears. Then, as they set out, a terror from God fell upon the towns round about, so that no one pursued the sons of Jacob.
So you see that God did not rebuke the sons of Jacob, and not Jacob either. God simply confirmed that he would not have wanted Jacob to settle in that area, as his work lay elsewhere, and God would not have wanted the faith to be put at risk of dilution. This is why God orders Jacob to leave that area and return to Bethel and to build an altar to God, since that is where he must serve the next part of his mission to God. Further, God uses this as a purification opportunity because Jacob is fully aware that some among them had already picked up the use of pagan images and beliefs. Here is the footnote in the Catholic Bible Personal Study Edition:
Foreign gods: pagan images, including household idols that Jacob’s people brought with them from Paddan-aram. Rings: Earrings were often worn as amulets connected with pagan magic.
See, one reason that God kept the ancient Israelites moving is that as is human tendency, they would pick up idolatrous and other pagan worships and customs whenever they “settled down,” as their faith identity was still in the earliest days of formation and there were many temptations around them. In this light you can really see how Simeon, Levy and the other brothers were not being “bloodthirsty,” in the sense that many who do not understand accuse Biblical people of being, but they were maintaining the purity of their devotion to God, resisting as best they could the dilution of pagan influences. This is something, quite honestly, that the Israelites struggled with throughout their history, where even the great King Solomon fell because even as he spoke to God out of one side of his mouth, he married many pagan wives and built idolatrous pagan altars for them in his latter years. So this is why it is crucial that you read events, such as the rape of Dinah and the revenge of Jacob’s sons as much more than an example of “woman as chattel” and “those bloodthirsty times” where “God is so mean.” God let humans discern their way among these tricky and often brutal situations, and then led them toward the light.
Genesis 35: 9-15
On Jacob’s arrival from Paddan-aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him:
“You whose name is Jacob
Shall no longer be called Jacob,
But Israel shall be your name.”
Thus he was named Israel. God also said to him:
“I am God Almighty;
Be fruitful and multiply.
A nation, indeed an assembly of nations,
Shall stem from you,
And kings shall issue from your loins.
The land I once gave
To Abraham and Isaac
I now give to you;
And to your descendants after you
Will I give this land.”
Then God departed from him. On the site where God had spoken with him, Jacob set up a memorial stone, and upon it he made a libation and poured out oil. Jacob named the site Bethel, because God had spoken with him there.
It is during this journey, when they left Bethel and were on their way to Ephrath that Rachel gave birth to Benjamin and died. Also, while they were encamped in that area Jacob’s eldest son, Reuben, lay with Bilhah, Jacob’s concubine. This is an important detail because as I’ve often pointed out in my blog, humans are humans and even in very sacred moments they do tend to do things such as this. I’ll discuss this more in future blogging about Jacob and his sons, but just to make one point. The Bible teaches by recording behavior details such as this that humans are multifaceted and complicated, and one cannot be hasty to judgment. If one stopped reading at this point, one might think, “Wow, the oldest son, Reuben is no good, since he slept with Jacob’s concubine.” But if you read the Bible a mere couple of pages later, you will see that it is Reuben who tries to save his brother Joseph’s life when the other brothers want to kill him because of jealousy of his God given dream interpretation skills. One just cannot leap to judgment about who is “moral” and following God’s plan and who is not.
And so Jacob and his family return home.
Genesis 35:27-29 Jacob went home to his father Isaac at Mamre, in Kiriath-arba [that is, Hebron], where Abraham and Isaac had stayed. The lifetime of Isaac was one hundred and eighty years; then he breathed his last. After a full life, he died as an old man and was taken to his kinsmen. His sons Esau and Jacob buried him.
Here is another example, by the way, just in closing, of one of the patriarchs who lived an extraordinary number of years due to their sanctity and proximity to the Holy Spirit of God in their life, since that preserves them far beyond the measure of one hundred and twenty years.
1. One hothead can cause the destruction of an entire people.
Notice that the Bible records that the offender, Shechem, was “really in love” with Dinah, who he defiled in kidnapping and raping her. So the man who recorded this part of Genesis (all of the first five books are based on the knowledge of Moses, but different scribes have contributed material within the framework of what Moses outlined) takes care not to lose the human element and truth of this incident. Imagine if what would have happened if Shechem had kept it “zipped up,” not defiled Dinah, and instead, sent his father, Hamor, to give the exact same speech that he did give, before it was too late and the damage done. It is quite possible that Jacob and his sons would have agreed to an alliance and intermarriage if the people of Hamor had first converted by being circumcised and worshipping God. Thus, not only might Shechem won Dinah’s affection honorably, but their entire people might have been incorporated into the salvation history of the people of God. Everyone acted “honorably” only after the great dishonor was done and it was too late.
2. Jacob’s role as a patriarch of the worship of the one true God was by no means completed.
This incident occurred very early in the many years of faith formation that Jacob and his sons, especially Joseph, would labor at in service to God. In fact, Jacob’s father Isaac was still alive (Isaac lives to be one hundred and eighty years old), dying only after this incident when Jacob brings his people back to Hebron, where Isaac resided. The entire movement to Egypt due to the years of famine still was in the future. So Jacob and his sons were only starting their service to God and laying the formation of what would become the Israelites. Thus Jacob waited for his sons to come from the fields in order to determine what should be done about the offense to Dinah, as it was not just a personal defilement, but an issue regarding the integrity of the faith going forward. If this had not been dealt with within the context of the still emerging faith of the pre-Israelites, there would have been a risk of intermarriage causing the entire purity of the faith to be compromised before it even solidified. I will blog Genesis 35, which follows up their movements after the incident about Dinah, and demonstrate an explanation of this point further.
3. Jacob’s sons were not only clever in their reply regarding tactics, but they maintained a sin free correct stance.
This is why Jacob’s sons gave the perfect reply when they insisted that every male be circumcised. Yes, the obvious reason was to incapacitate all of the fighting men (since those were the ones who were circumcised, according to the translations of “able-bodied,” not the boy children or non-combatants). But they were able to set this deadly trap yet still speak God honest truth, for the reasons I described above, that no man could intermarry with them and not be of their faith, since they were on the God given mission of forming the proto-Israelite faith that would come to fruition when Moses received the Law from God for the people. So the sons of Jacob spoke wisely that it was their “policy” that there would be no intermarriage unless the pagan tribe “converted.” Again, imagine if only Shechem had asked first, and possibly the tribe had converted sincerely first.
A second point I want to make is from “God’s point of view.” Notice that humans are handling their own matters, in regard to this crime, and God is not telling them what to do. Yet the sons are showing wisdom that they are not even aware of when they insist that all the men be circumcised and thus are converted. It is a common human tragedy that many suffer because of the sin or crime of one or a handful of people, and so the sons planned to slay the soldiers of the town to avenge (and free from being imprisoned) Dinah. But even though the men of the town agreed to be circumcised a bit cynically (desiring the wealth and also because their backs were against the wall regarding their honor), they did agree and that is to their credit. So from God’s point of view the men of the town did do the honorable thing, and that would have weighed in their favor when they reached their personal judgment at the hands of God after their deaths. In other words, if the men had not agreed to be circumcised, and had sided with Shechem keeping Dinah in a dishonorable way, they would have taken on shared guilt and culpability for the sins of Shechem. Thus they died having done the spiritually correct and honorable thing in the eyes of God by having been circumcised. See? This is one of the reasons the Bible is the best of treasures. One can understand much about human nature but also glean much about how God views the events, and the many ways that salvation can come about.
4. Dinah’s two full brothers lead the avenging of their sister.
All of the brothers participate in slaying the soldier s of the town and freeing their sister, but two of her full brothers have the honor of conducting the slaughter of vengeance and freeing Dinah. There is two interesting foreshadowings to glean from this. It is Simeon and Levi that perform the avenging, and Levi will be the patriarch of what will be the priestly tribe, the Levites. There is thus an obvious parallel in defending the purity of their sister and the mission of the priesthood to maintain the purity of the faith. Again, the sons had no way of realizing that at the time, but it shows how God is in control, that the men and women will step forward appropriate to even their still unforeseen vocations. The Levites will be the priests, the ones who can touch the Ark with purity. Thus Levi is one of the brothers who defend the purity of his sister.
My second point is that this is a matter of the heart, of filial love, and not just of honor. So many who misunderstand the Bible accuse it of recording a time when women were “chattel.” That is obviously incorrect. Why would Simeon and Levi be the ones who step forward out of those who were all in agreement in order to actually execute the revenge and free Dinah? Simeon is the second son and Levi the third, while Dinah was born after the tenth son Zebulun. So this was not a matter of where the eldest, Reuben, leads the endeavor, or those who were closest in age to Dinah and thus raised with her. All participated in the trap, the planning and the sacking but clearly Simeon and Levi stepped forward on their own accord out of the deepness of their full sibling filial connection to Dinah. Biblical males were not brutes who only cared about honor or dishonor of their own; they cared deeply about their mothers, sisters and daughters. One can surmise from the leadership of Simeon and Levi that they stepped forward in expression of love for their sister, in addition to the outrage that all of the brothers had for how she had been treated. In fact, the last words of Laban, father of Leah and Rachel, to Jacob, before they parted company, was to warn Jacob that God would know even if Laban did not if Jacob mistreated his daughters (Genesis 31:50). So Simeon and Levi leading the slaughter and freeing Dinah is another example of how there is great love within Biblical families, and not the treating of women as “chattel.” One has to think about how different that is today, among modern society, where moderns are often “love and honor deficient” in their views of the members of their own families, all the while saying that women are “liberated.”
5. When there is lust, everyone loses, including the women who enable the men who lust.
Clearly the town was a place where the chief of the region, Shechem, was enabled to do what he felt like, including that rape of Dinah. I’m not saying it was a sinful town, like Sodom and Gomorrah. I am pointing out a subtly that ought to be more obvious than it is. Where was the mother of Shechem, and where were the wives of the town elders? Did none of them think there was something wrong with Shechem raping Dinah and imprisoning her for forced marriage? The Bible does not say and we are left to wonder. But often one can infer the enabling of women “behind the scenes.” If one of the women had spoken up, that would have been recorded, since as I pointed out, care is taken to record that Shechem really did love Dinah. If the mother of Shechem or the wives of the elders had disapproved of what he had done, we probably would have seen some mention of it, as the Bible makes a point of recording the virtuous actions of even the pagan, and even the lowly in station. Yet there is silence, and only the discussion of the men.
So what is the reward of the women who did not speak up to prevent or even behind the scenes discourage the abuse of Dinah? “Then the other sons of Jacob followed up the slaughter and sacked the city in reprisal for their sister Dinah’s defilement. They seized the flocks, herds and asses, whatever was in the city and in the country around. They carried off all their wealth, their women, and their children, and took for loot whatever was in the houses.” Thus the women, those who should have provided some moral compass (and trust me, the mother of the chieftain and wives of the town leaders did plenty of that) saw their husbands slaughtered, lost their homes, their tribe was destroyed, and they and their children were carried off by the sons of Jacob. Women who enable cruelty and defilement of other women, especially toward women who serve God, as did Dinah by virtue of her birth, will pay dearly at some point. And notice that women did not have the opportunity to convert in the sense that they were not circumcised as their victim husbands were. They lacked a grace that the men had to pay the hard way. Hopefully they became pious and raised good children within Jacob’s extended family, but we have no way of knowing today.
6. Jacob wimped out, while Simeon and Levy stood strong.
I am not saying this to be bloodthirsty. I am pointing this out so that one can see that even Biblical Patriarchs sometimes did not measure up to the situation they were faced with. With those lines of rebuke to Simeon and Levy, Jacob is showing his “politician” side rather than his maintenance of purity. He is worried that he and his people will be “hated,” even though his sons had just come from quite a victory. This is the constant balance that all humans have, whether they are secular or religious leaders. Where does one draw the line? If Jacob had taken the easy way out, such as letting the men convert via circumcision, and settling down in that area, intermarrying, leaving Dinah with Shechem, might he not have derailed what was his mission as “Israel?”
And in fact we do know that Simeon, Levy and the rest of the children of Jacob did the right thing, as recorded in the following chapter of this event, Genesis 35:1-5.
Bethel Revisited. God said to Jacob: “Go up now to Bethel. Settle there and build an altar there to the God who appeared to you while you were fleeing from your brother Esau.” So Jacob told his family and all the others who were with him: “Get rid of the foreign gods that you have among you; then purify yourselves and put on fresh clothes. We are now to go up to Bethel, and I will build an altar to the God who answered me in m hour of distress and who has been with me wherever I have gone.” They therefore handed over to Jacob all the foreign gods in their possession and also the rings they had in their ears. Then, as they set out, a terror from God fell upon the towns round about, so that no one pursued the sons of Jacob.
So you see that God did not rebuke the sons of Jacob, and not Jacob either. God simply confirmed that he would not have wanted Jacob to settle in that area, as his work lay elsewhere, and God would not have wanted the faith to be put at risk of dilution. This is why God orders Jacob to leave that area and return to Bethel and to build an altar to God, since that is where he must serve the next part of his mission to God. Further, God uses this as a purification opportunity because Jacob is fully aware that some among them had already picked up the use of pagan images and beliefs. Here is the footnote in the Catholic Bible Personal Study Edition:
Foreign gods: pagan images, including household idols that Jacob’s people brought with them from Paddan-aram. Rings: Earrings were often worn as amulets connected with pagan magic.
See, one reason that God kept the ancient Israelites moving is that as is human tendency, they would pick up idolatrous and other pagan worships and customs whenever they “settled down,” as their faith identity was still in the earliest days of formation and there were many temptations around them. In this light you can really see how Simeon, Levy and the other brothers were not being “bloodthirsty,” in the sense that many who do not understand accuse Biblical people of being, but they were maintaining the purity of their devotion to God, resisting as best they could the dilution of pagan influences. This is something, quite honestly, that the Israelites struggled with throughout their history, where even the great King Solomon fell because even as he spoke to God out of one side of his mouth, he married many pagan wives and built idolatrous pagan altars for them in his latter years. So this is why it is crucial that you read events, such as the rape of Dinah and the revenge of Jacob’s sons as much more than an example of “woman as chattel” and “those bloodthirsty times” where “God is so mean.” God let humans discern their way among these tricky and often brutal situations, and then led them toward the light.
Genesis 35: 9-15
On Jacob’s arrival from Paddan-aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him. God said to him:
“You whose name is Jacob
Shall no longer be called Jacob,
But Israel shall be your name.”
Thus he was named Israel. God also said to him:
“I am God Almighty;
Be fruitful and multiply.
A nation, indeed an assembly of nations,
Shall stem from you,
And kings shall issue from your loins.
The land I once gave
To Abraham and Isaac
I now give to you;
And to your descendants after you
Will I give this land.”
Then God departed from him. On the site where God had spoken with him, Jacob set up a memorial stone, and upon it he made a libation and poured out oil. Jacob named the site Bethel, because God had spoken with him there.
It is during this journey, when they left Bethel and were on their way to Ephrath that Rachel gave birth to Benjamin and died. Also, while they were encamped in that area Jacob’s eldest son, Reuben, lay with Bilhah, Jacob’s concubine. This is an important detail because as I’ve often pointed out in my blog, humans are humans and even in very sacred moments they do tend to do things such as this. I’ll discuss this more in future blogging about Jacob and his sons, but just to make one point. The Bible teaches by recording behavior details such as this that humans are multifaceted and complicated, and one cannot be hasty to judgment. If one stopped reading at this point, one might think, “Wow, the oldest son, Reuben is no good, since he slept with Jacob’s concubine.” But if you read the Bible a mere couple of pages later, you will see that it is Reuben who tries to save his brother Joseph’s life when the other brothers want to kill him because of jealousy of his God given dream interpretation skills. One just cannot leap to judgment about who is “moral” and following God’s plan and who is not.
And so Jacob and his family return home.
Genesis 35:27-29 Jacob went home to his father Isaac at Mamre, in Kiriath-arba [that is, Hebron], where Abraham and Isaac had stayed. The lifetime of Isaac was one hundred and eighty years; then he breathed his last. After a full life, he died as an old man and was taken to his kinsmen. His sons Esau and Jacob buried him.
Here is another example, by the way, just in closing, of one of the patriarchs who lived an extraordinary number of years due to their sanctity and proximity to the Holy Spirit of God in their life, since that preserves them far beyond the measure of one hundred and twenty years.
Bible commentary: Part 2 of 4 Jacob's children
Genesis: 34
The Rape of Dinah. Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit some of the women of the land. When Shechem, son of Hamor the Hivite, who was chief of the region, saw her, he seized her and lay with her by force. Since he was strongly attracted to Dinah, daughter of Jacob, indeed was really in love with the girl, he endeavored to win her affection. Shechem also asked his father Hamor, “Get me this girl for a wife.”
Meanwhile, Jacob heard that Shechem had defiled his daughter Dinah; but since his sons were out in the fields with his livestock, he held his peace until they came home. Now Hamor, the father of Shechem, went out to discuss the matter with Jacob, just as Jacob’s sons were coming in from the fields. When they heard the news, the men were shocked and seethed with indignation. What Shechem had done was an outrage in Israel; such a thing could not be tolerated.
Hamor appealed to them, saying, “My son Shechem has his heart set on your daughter. Please give her to him in marriage. Intermarry with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for yourselves. Thus you can live among us. The land is open before you; you can settle and move about freely in it, and acquire landed property here. Then Shechem, too, appealed to Dinah’s fathr and brothers: “Do me this favor, and I will pay whatever you demand of me. No matter how high you set the bridal price, I will pay you whatever you ask; only give me the maiden in marriage.”
Revenge of Jacob’s Sons. Jacob’s sons replied to Shechem and his father Hamor with guile, speaking as they did because their sister Dinah had been defiled. “We could not do such a thing,” they said, “as to give our sister to an uncircumcised man; that would be a disgrace for us. We will agree with you only on this condition, that you become like us by having every male among you circumcised. Then we will give you our daughters and take yours in marriage; we will settle among you and become one kindred people with you. But if you do not comply with our terms regarding circumcision, we will take our daughter and go away.”
Their proposal seemed fair to Hamor and his son Shechem. The young man lost no time in acting in the matter, since he was deeply in love with Jacob’s daughter. Moreover, he was more highly respected than anyone in his clan. So Hamor and his son Shechem went to their town council and thus presented the matter to their fellow townsmen: “These men are friendly to us. Let them settle in the land and move about in it freely; there is ample room in the country for them. We can marry their daughters and give our daughters to them in marriage. But the men will agree to live with us and form one kindred people with us only on this condition, that every male among us be circumcised as they themselves are. Would not the livestock they have acquired-all their animals-then be ours? Let us, therefore, give in to them, so that they may settle among us.”
All the able-bodied men of the town agreed with Hamor and his son Shechem, and all the males, including every able-bodied man in the community, were circumcised. On the third day, while they were still in pain, Dinah’s full brothers Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob’s sons, took their swords, advanced against the city without any trouble, and massacred all the males. After they had put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword, they took Dinah from Shechem’s house and left. Then the other sons of Jacob followed up the slaughter and sacked the city in reprisal for their sister Dinah’s defilement. They seized their flocks, herd and asses, whatever was in the city and in the country around. They carried off all their wealth, their women, and their children, and took for loot whatever was in the houses.
Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: “You have brought trouble upon me by making me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites. I have so few men that, if these people unite against me and attack me, I and my family will be wiped out.” But they retorted, “Should our sister have been treated like a harlot?”
The Rape of Dinah. Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit some of the women of the land. When Shechem, son of Hamor the Hivite, who was chief of the region, saw her, he seized her and lay with her by force. Since he was strongly attracted to Dinah, daughter of Jacob, indeed was really in love with the girl, he endeavored to win her affection. Shechem also asked his father Hamor, “Get me this girl for a wife.”
Meanwhile, Jacob heard that Shechem had defiled his daughter Dinah; but since his sons were out in the fields with his livestock, he held his peace until they came home. Now Hamor, the father of Shechem, went out to discuss the matter with Jacob, just as Jacob’s sons were coming in from the fields. When they heard the news, the men were shocked and seethed with indignation. What Shechem had done was an outrage in Israel; such a thing could not be tolerated.
Hamor appealed to them, saying, “My son Shechem has his heart set on your daughter. Please give her to him in marriage. Intermarry with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for yourselves. Thus you can live among us. The land is open before you; you can settle and move about freely in it, and acquire landed property here. Then Shechem, too, appealed to Dinah’s fathr and brothers: “Do me this favor, and I will pay whatever you demand of me. No matter how high you set the bridal price, I will pay you whatever you ask; only give me the maiden in marriage.”
Revenge of Jacob’s Sons. Jacob’s sons replied to Shechem and his father Hamor with guile, speaking as they did because their sister Dinah had been defiled. “We could not do such a thing,” they said, “as to give our sister to an uncircumcised man; that would be a disgrace for us. We will agree with you only on this condition, that you become like us by having every male among you circumcised. Then we will give you our daughters and take yours in marriage; we will settle among you and become one kindred people with you. But if you do not comply with our terms regarding circumcision, we will take our daughter and go away.”
Their proposal seemed fair to Hamor and his son Shechem. The young man lost no time in acting in the matter, since he was deeply in love with Jacob’s daughter. Moreover, he was more highly respected than anyone in his clan. So Hamor and his son Shechem went to their town council and thus presented the matter to their fellow townsmen: “These men are friendly to us. Let them settle in the land and move about in it freely; there is ample room in the country for them. We can marry their daughters and give our daughters to them in marriage. But the men will agree to live with us and form one kindred people with us only on this condition, that every male among us be circumcised as they themselves are. Would not the livestock they have acquired-all their animals-then be ours? Let us, therefore, give in to them, so that they may settle among us.”
All the able-bodied men of the town agreed with Hamor and his son Shechem, and all the males, including every able-bodied man in the community, were circumcised. On the third day, while they were still in pain, Dinah’s full brothers Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob’s sons, took their swords, advanced against the city without any trouble, and massacred all the males. After they had put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword, they took Dinah from Shechem’s house and left. Then the other sons of Jacob followed up the slaughter and sacked the city in reprisal for their sister Dinah’s defilement. They seized their flocks, herd and asses, whatever was in the city and in the country around. They carried off all their wealth, their women, and their children, and took for loot whatever was in the houses.
Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: “You have brought trouble upon me by making me loathsome to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites. I have so few men that, if these people unite against me and attack me, I and my family will be wiped out.” But they retorted, “Should our sister have been treated like a harlot?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
