Genesis 31:43-55

2009.Mar.20 17:00

Treaty Between Family

Then Laban replied to Jacob, "The daughters are my daughters, and the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine. But what can I do this day to these my daughters or to their children whom they have borne? "So now come, let us make a covenant, you and I, and let it be a witness between you and me." Then Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. Jacob said to his kinsmen, "Gather stones." So they took stones and made a heap, and they ate there by the heap. Now Laban called it Jegar-sahadutha, but Jacob called it Galeed. Laban said, "This heap is a witness between you and me this day." Therefore it was named Galeed, and Mizpah, for he said, "May the LORD watch between you and me when we are absent one from the other. "If you mistreat my daughters, or if you take wives besides my daughters, although no man is with us, see, God is witness between you and me." Laban said to Jacob, "Behold this heap and behold the pillar which I have set between you and me. "This heap is a witness, and the pillar is a witness, that I will not pass by this heap to you for harm, and you will not pass by this heap and this pillar to me, for harm. "The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor, the God of their father, judge between us "So Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac. Then Jacob offered a sacrifice on the mountain, and called his kinsmen to the meal; and they ate the meal and spent the night on the mountain. Early in the morning Laban arose, and kissed his sons and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned to his place.
(Genesis 31:43-55, NASB)

Like Abraham and Lot before them, Laban and Jacob agree to separate. In this case, the agreement is a bit behind the times, the separation a fait accompli. But, no bother. Now, Laban’s decided he’s willing to accept it. Then Laban goes into this business of “And if you do X, you’re god will notice.” Which is true, although I’m not sure the point is of much value. He doesn’t even explicitly say that he doesn’t want Jacob doing these things, although that intent is clear. The biggest aspect of the treaty is that neither will cross the border (in this case, a pile of stones) with the intent to harm the other. I guess this leaves open the possibility of a friendly reunion, but basically says they will leave each other be.

Okay, well, I guess at this point, that’s about as good as you can expect. Sometimes, just ending the relationship is the best thing for it (marriage, young children and one’s relationship with Yahweh being the cases in which this will not apply), but getting to that point indicates that at least one (and probably both) party has not made a real effort throughout the course of a relationship. Hopefully, though, they learn from the experience. Okay. Enough about the relationship between Laban and Jacob. Because Jacob does seem to be learning a bit. We’ll soon see how he interacts with Esau.

So, anyway, there’s a nice bit of seeing the actions going along with the agreement, including the building of what might be called an altar, animal sacrifice, and a shared meal. All memes which will appear numerous other times in the Bible. With particular attention to the Sinai Covenant.

Genesis 31:22-31

2009.Mar.06 17:00

Politics

Read Genesis 31:22-31 | Full Chapter

When it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob had fled, then he took his kinsmen with him and pursued him a distance of seven days' journey, and he overtook him in the hill country of Gilead. God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream of the night and said to him, "Be careful that you do not speak to Jacob either good or bad."
(Genesis 31:22-24, NASB)

So, Laban realizes Jacob is headed out–without so much as a good-bye–and follows him. But before Laban reaches his son-in-law, Yahweh gives him a rather odd message in a dream: “Be careful that you do not speak to Jacob either good or bad.” Looking through various other versions gives no particular insight. So, I would take this to mean that Laban should not try to talk with Jacob, period, and should in fact head on back. Obviously, this is not how Laban takes it. Whether that is indicative that Laban is unwilling to take sound advice, or that something has just been lost in translation, I couldn’t say.

Laban caught up with Jacob. Now Jacob had pitched his tent in the hill country, and Laban with his kinsmen camped in the hill country of Gilead. Then Laban said to Jacob, "What have you done by deceiving me and carrying away my daughters like captives of the sword? "Why did you flee secretly and deceive me, and did not tell me so that I might have sent you away with joy and with songs, with timbrel and with lyre; and did not allow me to kiss my sons and my daughters? Now you have done foolishly. "It is in my power to do you harm, but the God of your father spoke to me last night, saying, 'Be careful not to speak either good or bad to Jacob.' "Now you have indeed gone away because you longed greatly for your father's house; but why did you steal my gods?" Then Jacob replied to Laban, "Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your daughters from me by force.
(Genesis 31:25-31, NASB)

Let’s play a bit of politics here, by which I mean, have two people not really saying what they’re probably thinking. Laban claims that he is mainly upset for two reasons:

He did not get to say a proper goodbye.
He believes Jacob stole the idol.

Jacob’s reason for hitting the road without telling his father-in-law seems a bit more sincere: he was afraid Laban would not allow Rachel and Leah to go with him. More sincere, but probably not the full reason either.

God’s message to Laban, however strangely interpretted–in my opinion–seems to be the saving grace here. Laban uses it to save face. “I was going to kick your bleep, but I’m going to be the better man, thanks to a timely message from your god.” Jacob is able to give a reasonable if incomplete answer, and thus Rachel’s thieving of Laban’s idols is the only standing issue.

I don’t see any particular lesson in all this, outside of reiterating my theme of relationship quality from the past many articles: “When you’re reduced to politics with your family to avoid actual killing, something’s, um, wrong.” I know that political phrases/tact/diplomacy is sometimes necessary even with family, but when dinner starts to feel like a presidential debate, only less civil, something needs to be done, if just asking Yahweh to intervene. That’s easy to write in a blog, difficult to follow.

Genesis 30:31-36

2009.Jan.23 17:00

What Jacob Wants

Read Genesis 30:31-36 | Full Chapter

[Laban] said, What shall I give you? And Jacob said, You shall not give me anything, if you will do this one thing for me [of which I am about to tell you], and I will again feed and take care of your flock. Let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted animal and every black one among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats; and such shall be my wages. So later when the matter of my wages is brought before you, my fair dealing will be evident and answer for me. Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and black among the sheep, if found with me, shall be counted as stolen. And Laban said, Good; let it be done as you say. But that same day [Laban] removed the he-goats that were streaked and spotted and all the she-goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white on it, and every black lamb, and put them in charge of his sons. And he set [a distance of] three days' journey between himself and Jacob; and Jacob was then left in care of the rest of Laban's flock.
(Genesis 30:31-36, AMP)

Jacob’s request is in some ways an acknowledgement that both he and Laban play the game of deceit. The idea is that as long as Jacob is caring for Laban’s flocks, if Jacob has any animals of his own, it would be easy for either party to make conflicting claims. Since Jacob is asking for a portion of Laban’s flock in payment for his continued service, this issue must be addressed. Jacob’s proposal is that they be divided by color.

How much does Jacob understand about heredity? And how much does Laban? Those could be particularly relevant questions if one were trying to decide who is practicing the most deceit. Fortunately, I consider that a moot point, instead caring more about this issue of mutual faithlessness. In either case, the idea is probably that sheep and goats with a particular type of goat will tend to have offspring of the same; in addition, coloration is something easy to distinguish. Laban agrees to the wages and to the policy of determining which animal belongs to which owner.

That is, he agrees in theory. Laban, in order to minimize his loss, sends the speckled and spotted and so forth and has his sons take care of them. That is, he removes them from the flock under Jacob’s care so that Jacob cannot take them as his wages. Jerk. But then, it is probably Jacob anticipates his uncle’s action; he’d be rather a fool not to expect something of the kind.

So, where are we? There’s a lot of ugly crap between Jacob and Laban. Neither is innocent, although in their relationship, Laban seems to be the more willing to take advantage of his relative. The tables will, of course, turn, for better or worse. For the whole family, it’s for worse. Laban will ultimately be hurt by his deceptive acts, just a Jacob will feel the pain of the lies practiced by his sons. In fact, from the birth of Jacob through his arrival in Egypt, there’s a ton of lying going on. And the running thread through all those lies is that someone always gets hurt. Not a surprise, mind you, but worth the notice.

And, of course, a lot of it has to do with money. Although some is plain old jealousy.

Genesis 30:25-30

2009.Jan.16 17:00

Contract Negotiations?

Read Genesis 30:25-30 | Full Chapter

Now it came about when Rachel had borne Joseph, that Jacob said to Laban, "Send me away, that I may go to my own place and to my own country. Give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you, and let me depart; for you yourself know my service which I have rendered you." But Laban said to him, "If now it pleases you, stay with me; I have divined that the LORD has blessed me on your account." He continued, "Name me your wages, and I will give it." But he said to him, "You yourself know how I have served you and how your cattle have fared with me. "For you had little before I came and it has increased to a multitude, and the LORD has blessed you wherever I turned. But now, when shall I provide for my own household also?"
(Genesis 30:25-30, NASB)

I think we’re probably just negotiating here about future wages. That is to say, Jacob has now fulfilled his seven years of work for Laban in exchange for marrying Leah–although unintentional on his part–and his additional seven years for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel. Both Jacob and Laban consider that Jacob’s has been a good and effective laborer for his uncle (maybe laborer is not the right work; he seems closer to a steward). It’s possible that Jacob is really ready to head home, but I don’t see any reason to be convinced of that.

Remember, then, that if Jacob heads back to Canaan, he’s got to deal with his older brother Esau. It appears they’re both young(-ish) still, in good health and both moving towards clan headship if not already there. Not perhaps a meeting to which Jacob is looking forward. Aside from the chance to see his mother again, there’s not a huge draw for Jacob to head back. But it is a great negotiation point. “I don’t rely on you, Laban.” Add to that the recitation of his resume, and Jacob’s got a good angle for bargaining.

Laban does not hide his desire to keep Jacob on. Granting that I have no idea about negotiation techniques, or really business in general, of this time and place, I’m wary of making too many guesses. But, because of what else has been presented about Laban (and due to having read this account before), I’m inclined to think Jacob ought to be suspicious of Laban’s willingness to acknowledge the value of keeping Jacob on. And he probably is. After all, these are two skilled and experienced deceivers.

I spend time wondering about the Genesis accounts. As an aside ,I suppose I should mention that I do not assume that these particular individuals must have historically existed, and particularly I assume that at least some details are not historically accurate. That is to say, I don’t see any reason for God to have made this part of the Bible an accurate history. If the intention is to illustrate his workings in humanity, his revelations to humanity focused through his workings in the people of Israel, then ensuring historical accuracy of each event is probably a detriment to the effectiveness of understanding the Bible. On the other hand, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the narrative is essentially historically accurate. My point, then, is that I am willing in my studies to accept these narratives as biographical because I believe that the Bible is inspired by Yahweh in order to instruct, whether or not they are historical fact.

Anyway, like I was about to say…

I wonder about the things in Genesis, as the preamble to the introduction of Yahweh’s covenant with Israel through Moses, which presents the patriarchs in often unflattering light. Yes, Jacob and (largely because of him) Laban are very successful, and that’s made pointedly by both of them in this section. But just is clear is that they are both willing to lie to meet their goals. I think it’s appropriate (as well as accurate) to reveal these national founders as imperfect, but I still find it surprising. Or, I suppose, it’s interesting how we as Christians often divide Biblical characters between those who are good but human–and thus commit some sin–and those who are bad but whom “God uses”.

Actually reading through the Bible, I’m not sure its writers made that distinction.

Genesis 29:15-20

2008.Nov.21 14:24

Young and In Love

Read Genesis 29:15-20 | Full Chapter

Then Laban said to Jacob, "Because you are my relative, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?" Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. And Leah's eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful of form and face. Now Jacob loved Rachel, so he said, "I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel." Laban said, "It is better that I give her to you than to give her to another man; stay with me." So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her.
(Genesis 29:15-20, NASB)

I think this is the first example in the Bible of the “in love” phenomenon. Jacob is clearly infatuated with his attractive cousin. Enough that he’s willing to work without pay for seven years in order to marry her. But, of course, there’s more than just that going on here.

In Genesis 3:17, God tells Adam, " And so, the ground will be under a curse because of what you did. As long as you live, you will have to struggle to grow enough food" (Genesis 3:17, CEV) . To Eve, He says, " You will suffer terribly when you give birth. But you will still desire your husband, and he will rule over you." (Genesis 3:16, CEV) . While you don’t see either of these curses exactly in this narrative, they do feel at least relevant. I’ll leave the difficulties experienced by Jacob’s wives for later; I do want to look a little at Jacob here.

He’s working for his uncle without pay. On the other hand, he probably receives food, lodging, etc, so it’s not like he’s getting a raw deal. Nor does he seem intent on changing this. His one concern appears to be marrying Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, and Jacob proposes that the “price” be seven years. I’m surprised that he didn’t say, for example “one year” and negotiate up. Seven years would be a long time to wait to be married, and working for only room and board would not help. Other the other hand, he may figure that seven years will be needed for Esau to calm down regardless.

Much of the interaction between Laban and Jacob will regard Jacob’s work for his uncle. For Laban, ensuring that the skilled labor sticks around seems to be a motivating factor in all his dealings with Jacob. That’s where I see the curse of toil come in. Certainly, much good comes of all this for Jacob, but I can’t imagine that he doesn’t spend a lot of time frustrated.

Before I leave this section, I want to go back to the “in love” bit. This does strike me as a college age guy sees a woman and “falls in love with her” and is willing to do whatever for her, or at least write badly rhyming songs about it. Yes, Jacob does make a commitment, showing that his desire to marry Rachel has at least some depth, but I think it’s telling that the commitment he makes is not to her. Then, there’s almost no mention of their courtship, so I am clearly guessing.

« 1 2 »