Jacob: The Man Who Fought With God and Men and Overcame With the
Power of God
Introduction
The book of Genesis contains a magnificent account of the life of one of the
greatest believers in all of Scripture, namely Jacob, whose name was later changed
to Israel by the Lord. His descendants would later be called the twelve tribes of
Israel from whom the Messiah Jesus Christ would descend from. In fact, with
regards to His human nature, the Lord Jesus Christ would descend from Jacob’s
son, Judah.
My study of this individual has left me awestruck. What a life! He was born
into a family of privilege, both spiritual and temporal. His grandfather was the
father of the Christian faith, Abraham and his father was another great man of
faith, Isaac. However, he was not a very nice person. He certainly did not live up to
God’s standards. In fact, he was a man driven by his old Adamic sin nature. He
was deceitful and a swindler. Jacob was a “momma’s boy.” He and his mother
Rebekah deceived his blind father so as to cheat his twin brother, Esau.
But despite all this, God’s grace performed a mighty work in this man. By
God’s grace and through his faith, Jacob became a great man of God. He was a
man of faith like his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac.
In our study, we will see that Jacob came into contact with the preincarnate
Christ and inherited the unconditional promises that were given to his grandfather
and his father. In fact, the Lord would enlarge upon the promises of the Abrahamic
covenant, giving Jacob even more revelation which continued to develop the plan
of salvation for mankind, both Jew and Gentile.
This man’s family was a disaster. He had multiple wives and two concubines
who all fought for his attention and undoubtedly drove him crazy. Like him, his
sons were deceitful and murdered!
His life was filled with great joy and great sorrow. He suffered unspeakable loss
of a child, Joseph, his favorite. He was deceived by his sons who conspire to tell
him that Joseph was killed by wild animals. Like his father who was deceived by
him, so Jacob would be deceived by his sons. What a mess his home life was and
yet God’s grace prevailed. Though, he stumbled many times in unbelief, God’s
grace carried him and eventually he persevered by walking by faith through all of
it. Eventually he was victorious as his beloved child reappeared in his life as the
prime minister of Egypt. Joseph was placed in this position to save not only the
world from wide famine but also their family who were not only given the
wonderful and magnificent promises which would bring blessing to their family
but blessing to the entire world.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
1
Chapter One: Jacob’s Family History
Genesis 25:19-26 records the birth of Jacob whose father was Isaac and whose
mother was Rebekah. Genesis 25:19-20 records the family history of Isaac and as a
part of this history Genesis 25:21 records Rebekah’s problem with getting
pregnant. In this passage we see that Isaac, in response to this problem, prays to the
Lord to resolve his wife’s problem of infertility. The Lord fulfills Isaac’s prayer
request twenty years later since Genesis 25:21 records Isaac as being forty when he
married Rebekah and Genesis 25:26 records Isaac as being sixty when Rebekah
had twins.
Genesis 25:19 begins a new section in Genesis, which ends in Genesis 35:29
and constitutes the eighth book in Genesis presenting to us the family history of
Isaac and in particular Jacob whose name was later changed by the Lord to
“Israel.” The emphasis in this section is upon Jacob since he would carry on the
line of Christ. Up to this point in Genesis, we see that the human nature of Jesus
Christ would come from the line of Seth (Luke 3:38) and Shem (Gen. 9:24-27;
Luke 3:36), Abraham (Gen. 12:3) and Isaac (Gen. 17:19).
At the forefront of Jacob’s story is his struggle with his twin brother, Esau,
which was a fulfillment of the Lord’s prophecy to Rebekah in Genesis 25:22-23.
Genesis 25:19 Now these are the records of the generations of Isaac,
Abraham's son: Abraham became the father of Isaac; 20 and Isaac was forty
years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of
Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife. (NASB95)
“These are the records of the generations of Isaac” refers to the family
history of Isaac, which follows in Genesis 25:19-35:29 as indicated by the noun
toledhoth, “the records of the generations” which is always used as an
introduction to what follows. In Genesis 25:19, the noun toledhoth introduces the
eighth section of the book of Genesis, which is completed in Genesis 35:29 and
centers upon Jacob who like his father Isaac and his grandfather Abraham are
ancestors of the human nature of Jesus Christ.
“Paddan Aram” is another name for “Aram Naharaim,” which means, “Aram
of the Two Rivers.” Therefore, the word is synonymous with the name
“Mesopotamia,” which appears in Genesis 24:10 since the word “Mesopotamia”
is composed of the pronoun noun Aram, “Aram” and the plural form of the noun
nahar, “two rivers.”
These two rivers were in the western part of Mesopotamia and the two rivers
were the Balikh and the Khabur, tributaries of the Euphrates River. The city of
Haran was on the Balikh River about a seven hundred mile journey north-northeast
of Beersheba and nearby was the city of Nahor, which was founded by Abraham’s
brother, Nahor.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
2
The name “Paddan” means “field, plain” therefore, the expression “Paddan
Aram” means, “plain of Aram.” The name “Aram” (Hebrew: ‘aram) means,
“exalted” and is frequently translated “Syrian” or “Syria” and is used to speak
specifically of the Aramean people who were a leading branch of Semitic people
living in Mesopotamia and northern Syria (2 Sam. 8:5-6; 1 Kgs. 20:20-21).
Isaac and Jacob both took Aramean wives (Gen. 25:20; 28:5) and in fact, Jacob
is called the “wandering Aramean” in Deuteronomy 26:5. Therefore, “Paddan
Aram” refers to the city of Nahor where Abraham’s brother founded a city and
named it after himself and was the place that Abraham’s servant found Rebekah,
Isaac’s wife.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
3
Chapter Two: Jacob’s Birth
Jacob’s Birth was an Answer to Prayer
The birth of Jacob was an answer to prayer. In fact, his father Isaac prayed for
twenty-years for a child.
Genesis 25:21 Isaac prayed to the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she
was barren; and the LORD answered him and Rebekah his wife conceived.
(NASB95)
“Prayed” is the qal imperfect form of the verb `athar, which means, “to
intercede in prayer.”
“Lord” is the proper noun Yahweh, which is the personal covenant name of
God emphasizing the “immanency” of God where the Lord intervened in the life of
Isaac and Rebekah provided them children in order to fulfill His covenant promises
to Abraham and Isaac.
The proper noun Yahweh, “Lord” is used here to emphasize that by answering
Isaac’s prayer He would be fulfilling His promises to Abraham of numerous
progeny and that Isaac would be in the line of the Promised Seed, Jesus Christ.
Unlike Abraham and Sarah, the Scriptures do not record Isaac and Rebekah
trying to help the Lord out in solving their problem of being childless by using a
surrogate, which Abraham and Sarah did as recorded in Genesis 16. Evidently,
Abraham and Sarah taught Isaac to wait on the Lord since, of all the patriarchs
Isaac was the only one who was monogamous and did not take a concubine.
The faith of Isaac in praying for Rebekah and the Lord’s answer to his prayer
demonstrates the spiritual principle that you appropriate the omnipotence of God
by operating in faith (cf. Matthew 17:20). The fact that Rebekah was barren gave
the Lord an opportunity to demonstrate His power to fulfill His promise to
Abraham in giving him numerous progeny over seemingly insurmountable odds
(See Genesis 15:5; 22:17). Isaac and Rebekah had to learn the lessons of faith and
to understand that theirs is not a “natural” but a “supernatural” seed (see Genesis
11:30; 17:15-16; 18:1-15; 21:1-7).
The fact that Isaac’s intercessory prayer for his wife Rebekah solved her
problem of infertility teaches that prayer solves problems (Kgs. 17:1; cf. 18:36-46;
Acts 12:1-17; Phlp. 4:6).
Rebekah’s Pregnancy
Genesis 25:22-23 records Rebekah’s problems involved with her pregnancy and
her inquiring of the Lord as to the meaning of it. In this passage, the Lord responds
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
4
to her inquiry by prophesying of the family history of the two children who were
named, “Esau” and “Jacob.”
Genesis 25:22 But the children struggled together within her; and she said,
“If it is so, why then am I this way?” So she went to inquire of the LORD.
(NASB95)
By indicating that there is to be more than one child, the narrator, Moses under
the inspiration of the Holy Spirit takes the reader into his confidence. Of course,
Rebekah at the time did not know that she was carrying twins and that they were
struggling with each other in her womb.
“Struggle” is the verb ratsats, which is in the rare hithpoel stem meaning “to
crush each other.” It implies an extraordinary violent struggle taking place in the
womb of Rebekah, which she understood to be far greater than normal, and thus of
great significance. This struggle among the fetuses in Rebekah’s womb
foreshadowed the relationship of the children and their descendants later on in
history. So Rebekah is experiencing an unusually difficult pregnancy and fears of
miscarrying. Rebekah thought she was simply carrying the next generation but
little did she know that she was carrying twins.
The rivalry of Jacob and Esau begins in the womb of Rebekah and would
progress from her womb to the troubled delivery of the twins (25:26), and to their
differences in profession (25:27) as well as to the opposing preferences of the
parents (25:28). This struggle in the womb of Rebekah would also foreshadow
Jacob’s struggle with the preincarnate Christ (32:22-32).
The struggle of the twins, Esau and Jacob foreshadows the struggles between
Jacob and Esau in the following events: (1) Jacob secures the birthright (Genesis
25:27-34). (2) Jacob steals Esau’s blessing (Genesis 27:1-40). (3) Jacob prevails
with Esau and secures his good will (Genesis 32:1-33:16).
The rivalry between Jacob and Esau spilled over into conflicts between their
parents, Isaac and Rebekah (Genesis 27:1-46) and it also effected Jacob and his
wives as well as his wives with each other (Genesis 30:1-24) and Jacob and Laban
(Genesis 29:14b-31:55).
So because of the violent and unusual way that the fetuses were struggling
within her, Rebekah inquires of the Lord in prayer as to the meaning of it all.
The fact that Rebekah is recorded as having “went to inquire of the Lord”
indicates that she sought out the Lord in prayer in order to ascertain the meaning of
this struggle taking place in her womb. Of course, Rebekah was unaware that she
was carrying twins.
The question Rebekah asks is “elliptical” meaning that words such as copulas
(“is”) are left out because of Rebekah’s anxiety and urgent desire to find relief
from this problem pregnancy and to understand the significance of it.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
5
“If” is the conditional particle `im, which introduces the protasis of a first class
condition, which indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument.
A conditional sentence has an “if” part and a “then” part. The “if” introduces
the “protasis” and “then” introduces the “apodasis.” Often, the “protasis” often
introduces the “cause” and the “apodasis” the “effect.”
In Genesis 25:22, the particle `im, “if” is introducing a protasis, which presents
the “cause” of Rebekah’s pregnancy, which is of course, the sovereign will of God.
Now, remember the question of Rebekah’s is “elliptical” and so therefore, we
can translate or paraphrase the interrogative particle as “if, it is Your will.”
Rebekah recognizes that children are a gift from the Lord.
The adverb ken, “so” introduces the apodasis, which presents the “effect” of her
getting pregnant by the sovereign will of God.
“Why” is the interrogative particle lammah, which is a compound word
composed of the preposition le, “to me” and the adverb mah, “why” therefore, the
word literally means, “why…to me.”
The preposition le is called a “lamed of disadvantage” meaning that Rebekah
considers this unusual and difficult pregnancy to be to her disadvantage or
uncomfortable. Therefore, she is saying in effect, “Why am I having this happen to
me, which is very uncomfortable.”
The demonstrative pronoun zeh, “this” is pointing to Rebekah’s unusual and
difficult pregnancy. The interrogative particle lammah becomes emphatic when it
is used with the demonstrative pronoun zeh, “this.” The demonstrative pronoun
zeh, “this” when attached to the interrogative pronoun lammah strengthens the
meaning of the interrogative, adding directness and force and emphasizing the
close personal involvement of the speaker.
“I” is the pronoun `anokhi, which refers to Rebekah of course. Again, the
question is “elliptical” so we could translate this expression, “why am I having this
happen to me, which is very uncomfortable?” Therefore, Rebekah is saying in
effect to the Lord in prayer, “If this is Your will that I get pregnant, then why am I
having this struggle take place in my womb, which is very uncomfortable?”
Rebekah asks this question because she fears that she might be miscarrying and
doesn’t understand why the Lord would permit her to get pregnant but then lose
the children through a miscarriage. The Lord’s response to Rebekah’s question
appears in Genesis 25:23.
The Prophesy of Jacob and Esau and their Descendants
Genesis 25:23 The LORD said to her, “Two nations are in your womb;
And two peoples will be separated from your body; And one people shall be
stronger than the other; And the older shall serve the younger.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
6
The Lord’s statement to Rebekah that “two nations are in your womb”
implies that she is pregnant with twins and refers to the fact that these twins are
twin progenitors of two nations.
The oldest son “Esau” would be the progenitor of the Edomites (See Genesis
36:1-43) whereas the younger son “Jacob” would be the progenitor of the
Israelites.
Jacob would father twelve sons who were heads of the twelve tribes of Israel (1
Chronicles 1:34; 2:1-2; Acts 7:8) and through the nation of Israel would come the
Savior of the world (John 4:22; Romans 9:3-5).
To the nation of Israel would be given the Old Testament Scriptures, the
adoption as sons, the Mosaic Law, the Shekinah Glory, the promises and the
unconditional covenants (Davidic, Palestinian, New and Abrahamic) (see Romans
9:1-5).
The Edomites and the Israelites fought continuously.
From Rebekah’s womb, Jacob and Esau would be at odds with each other.
The Lord’s prediction that “two peoples will be separated from your
(Rebekah’s) body” indicates that Jacob and Esau would be separated, divided and
hostile towards one another and would have nothing in common.
The Lord’s prediction that “one people shall be stronger than the other”
refers to the fact that the Israelites would prevail over the Edomites in history. Also
this prophecy indicates that Jacob and not Esau would be in the Messianic line and
would inherit the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant. Normally, the oldest
would receive the father’s inheritance and estate but the Lord does not always
subscribe to this.
In Genesis 25:23, the Lord declares that the “older shall serve the younger”
indicating that the younger son, Jacob would receive the inheritance and not Esau
who was older. Esau, the older, did not actually serve Jacob, his younger twin but
rather Esau’s descendants did (see 1 Samuel 14:47; 2 Samuel 8:14; 1 Kings 11:1516; 22:47; 2 Kings 14:7).
This prophecy that “one people shall be stronger than the other; And the
older shall serve the younger” indicates that the sovereign will of God has
ordained the following: (1) Jacob to be in the Messianic line and not Esau. (2)
Jacob would be the beneficiary of the divine promises enumerated in the
Abrahamic Covenant and not Esau. (3) Jacob would receive his father’s estate and
not Esau.
Just as the Lord had chosen Isaac who was younger over Ishmael to receive
Abraham’s inheritance so the Lord had chosen Jacob who was younger than Esau.
In the Messianic line, Seth, Isaac, Jacob, Judah and David were not first-born sons.
Therefore, we see the Lord is expressing His sovereign will for Rebekah’s twin
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
7
sons, Esau and Jacob and that He has ordained from eternity past, that Jacob would
be in the line of Christ and not Esau.
Jacob did “not” merit this privilege, nor did Esau do anything to “not” merit it
but rather, it was all based upon God’s grace and mercy and sovereign will. The
prophet Malachi cites evidence of this conflict between Esau and Jacob in Israel’s
experience.
Malachi 1:2 “I have loved you, says the LORD. But you say, “How have
You loved us?” “Was not Esau Jacob's brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I
have loved Jacob; 3 but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a
desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness.”
(NASB95)
The terms “love” and “hate” are “anthropopathisms,” meaning that the writer is
ascribing the human emotion of personal love and hate to God, which He does
“not” possess in order to explain God’s choice of entering into a covenant
relationship with Jacob rather than Esau and does “not” indicate one is saved and
the other is not.
The verbs in the Hebrew translated “I have loved” and “I have hated” are in
the perfect tense and therefore, express not only God’s past relationship with Israel
and Edom but also His historical and present dealings (in Malachi’s day) with
these peoples.
Both Israel and Edom received judgment from God at the hands of the
Babylonians in the sixth century B.C. (Jer. 27:2-8). However, God promised to
restore Israel over and over again because of His covenant promises (Deut. 4:2931; 30:1-10) but He condemned Edom to complete destruction, never to be
restored (Jer. 49:7-22; Ezek. 35).
In Romans 9:13, Paul quotes Malachi 1:3 to demonstrate that God elected
Jacob’s descendants, the nation of Israel as His covenant people and He rejected
the Edomites as His covenant people who were descendants of Esau.
In Romans 9-11, the apostle Paul discusses the future of the nation of Israel and
teaches that God has temporarily set aside the nation at this time in history and will
restore her in the future because she was elected by Him to be His covenant
people. Therefore, when we see the statement “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”
we must understand that Paul is not referring to individuals but rather to the
nations which descended from Jacob (Israelites) and Esau (Edomites).
Therefore, the statement “Jacob I loved but Esau I hated” does “not” refer to
the fact that Esau was not saved and Jacob was since that would imply that God
hates sinners and elects some people to be saved and others to eternal
condemnation, which contradicts the teaching of Scripture that God’s will is for all
men to be saved (See 1 Timothy 2:4, 4:10, 2 Peter 3:9, John 3:16-18, 1 John 2:2).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
8
The statement “Jacob I loved but Esau I hated” is “not” a reference to Jacob
and Esau as individuals but rather it is a reference to the nations, which descended
from them, namely, the Israelites from Jacob and the Edomites from Esau.
Therefore, the statement refers to the “national” election of Israel as God’s
covenant people who are descendants of Jacob and the rejection of the Edomites as
His covenant people who were descendants of Esau.
The rejection of Esau’s descendants as His covenant people does “not” mean
that God elected the Edomites and the Gentiles to eternal condemnation and the
Israelites to salvation since that would contradict the biblical doctrine of the
unlimited atonement, which states that God desires all men to be saved.
The election of the nation of Israel, like the choice of Jacob over Esau was
“non-meritorious” meaning that there was nothing that the nation of Israel and
Jacob did that secured God choosing them since many times both sinned and failed
to obey God.
The Birth of Jacob and Esau
Genesis 25:24-26 records Rebekah giving birth to twins, Esau and Jacob.
Genesis 25:24 When her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there
were twins in her womb. 25 Now the first came forth red, all over like a hairy
garment; and they named him Esau. (NASB95)
The parents give the names to twins and not the Lord. But the Lord does predict
their tumultuous relationship with each other and between their future descendants.
The name given to the twins pokes fun at them.
“Red” is the adjective `adhmoni, which describes the older twin anticipating his
rugged nature.
The name given to “Esau” means, “hairy,” implying an animalistic nature and
describes the oldest twin as “the hairy monster.”
“Esau” became the father of the Edomite people according to Genesis 36:1-43
who later became the arch rivals of the Israelites.
The name “Seir,” demarcating the Edomite territory means, “hairy” and may
have been implemented in remembrance of Esau.
Genesis 25:26 Afterward his brother came forth with his hand holding on
to Esau's heel, so his name was called Jacob; and Isaac was sixty years old
when she gave birth to them. (NASB95)
The name given to “Jacob” means, “heel,” implying grasping and describes the
younger twin as “the heel catcher.”
The actions of Jacob at his birth in grasping the heel of his brother Esau was the
first manifestation of the volatile relationship that the Lord predicted would take
place between the two children later and their descendants.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
9
The manner in which the twins were born was a visible omen underlying the
Lord’s prophecy. The actions of Jacob at birth towards his brother where he is
described as desperately trying to catch up to his older brother and their struggle
with each other in their mother’s womb sets the pattern for their relationship in life
and the relationship between their descendants.
Esau and Jacob contrasted in many ways. First of all, each one’s physical
appearance was different for Esau as we noted was a hairy man but Jacob had
smooth skin according to Genesis 25:25 and 27:11.
Secondly, Esau became a skillful hunter and an outdoorsman but Jacob “was a
quiet man, staying among the tents” as a shepherd (Genesis 25:27). Thirdly,
Esau became the favorite son of Isaac but Jacob was loved by Rebekah (Genesis
25:28).
The fact that Jacob stayed among the tents and was the favorite of Rebekah
implies that he was a “momma’s boy” and a “homebody.”
Esau was an unbeliever according to Hebrews 12:16 whereas Jacob was a
believer. Esau agreed to trade his birthright to Jacob in exchange for a bowl of
lentil stew according to Genesis 25:29-34.
Jacob and Rebekah successfully conspired to trick Isaac into giving his blessing
and inheritance to Jacob while Esau was away hunting for his father’s favorite
meal of wild game (Genesis 27:1-40). In order to escape the wrath of Esau, who
wanted to kill him for the deception, Jacob fled to his uncle Laban (Genesis 27:4128:5).
Years later, Esau and Jacob reconciled (Genesis 32:1-22; 33:1-16) but lived in
different regions. Esau settled his family in the land of Seir in the country of Edom
(Genesis 32:3; 33:16; 36) while Jacob lived in the hill country of central Palestine.
The mention of Isaac’s age at the birth of his twin sons is done since the birth of
one’s first child was regarded as a most important milestone in a man’s life (cf.
5:3, 6; 11:12, 14, etc.).
The mention of Isaac’s age at the birth of his twin sons emphasizes that Isaac
was a man of faith and who persevered in his prayers since Genesis 25:21 records
Isaac as being forty when he married Rebekah and started praying for a child and
Genesis 25:26 records Isaac as being sixty when Rebekah had twins.
The fact that it took twenty years for Isaac’s prayer request to be fulfilled
implies that Rebekah and Isaac’s joy outweighed all the problems with Rebekah’s
pregnancy and ominous delivery. Esau and Jacob were an answer to persistent
prayer and the fruit of a difficult pregnancy and the joy over the twins safe arrival
must have been great.
The fact that Isaac prayed for twenty years for his wife to get pregnant
emphasizes that like his father Abraham, Isaac was a man of great faith and a
powerful intercessor.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
10
Chapter Three: The Conflict Between Jacob and Esau
Isaac and Rebekah Fight Over Jacob and Esau
In Genesis 25:27-28, we have the record of the conflict between Isaac and
Rebekah over Esau and Jacob.
Genesis 25:27 When the boys grew up, Esau became a skillful hunter, a
man of the field, but Jacob was a peaceful man, living in tents. (NASB95)
As the twins grew, the difference in their characters, which God in His
omniscience already knew of, began to be apparent through their respective
interests and activities.
“Skillful” is the yadha), which is in the qal active participle form of the verb
meaning, “one who is knowledgeable and therefore, skilled in a particular
endeavor.”
“Hunter” is the noun tsayidh, which refers to the act of hunting wild game.
Therefore, Genesis 25:27 describes Esau as being a man “who was skilled in
hunting wild game.”
Esau is also described as a “man of the field,” which refers to the fact that he
searched for game by roaming the territories situated outside cities and towns
where wild animals roamed. Therefore, we see that the Bible describes Esau as the
rugged outdoor type, which would endear him to his father Isaac who did not
possess these qualities himself.
Hebrews 12:16 describes Esau also as a fornicator and a profane person and an
unbeliever. Therefore, Esau was not qualified to inherit the responsibilities
attached to the Lord’s covenant promises.
The biblical ideal for a leader is symbolized by that of a shepherd (Psalm 23;
Ezekiel 34; John 10:1-18; 1 Peter 5:3-4). True Israel, like his God, behaves like a
shepherd and not as a hunter.
Nahum Sarna commenting on Esau as a hunter, writes, “Near Eastern art often
portrays kings and nobles in pursuit of game, but no Israelite or Judean king or
hero is ever mentioned as indulging in the sport. However, the fact that Leviticus
17:13 legislates concerning the preparation for food of an animal caught in the hunt
and that Deuteronomy 14:5 includes wild animals among those permitted to be
eaten proves that hunting was sometimes an economic necessity even in Israel.
Nevertheless, it is highly significant that sacrifice in Israel was restricted to
domesticated animals” (The JPS Torah Commentary, Genesis, page 181, The
Jewish Publication Society).
In Genesis 27:39-40, Isaac’s predicated that Esau would live by his weapons
and be a wild, restless and undisciplined man, seeking sport and adventure.
Now, we turn to the description of Jacob that appears in Genesis 25:27.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
11
Genesis 25:27 When the boys grew up, Esau became a skillful hunter, a
man of the field, but Jacob was a peaceful man, living in tents. (NASB95)
“Peaceful” is the adjective tam, which means that Jacob was a “quiet” or
“peaceful” man in the sense that in contrast to his outgoing, adventurous brother,
he was a self-contained, detached personality complete in himself who was
sensible, diligent, dutiful and peaceful.
Usually the adjective tam refers to people like Job who were “upright,
righteous, having a clear conscience before God, virtuous” and therefore
“spiritually mature” (See Job 1:1, 8; 2:3; 9:22; cf. Genesis 6:9; Psalm 37:37).
However, this sense is inappropriate for Jacob at this point in his life since his
conduct as recorded in Genesis 27 portrays him as someone who was not “upright,
righteous,” or “virtuous” and certainly not “spiritually mature.”
In order to understand the meaning of tam when used to describe Jacob we must
understand that the writer is presenting a contrast between Jacob with his twin
brother, Esau. Esau was outgoing, athletic, adventurous, who was never home
since he was outdoorsman who loved to hunt wild game. Therefore, the adjective
tam is used to present a contrast with Esau and describes Jacob as being peaceful in
the sense that was he was a self-contained, detached personality complete in
himself who was sensible, diligent, and dutiful.
The word describes Jacob as being a “peaceful” individual who could be
counted on to attend to the responsibilities of the family business because he was
home and not away hunting like Esau. It describes Jacob as being a “cultured” or a
“refined” individual, who was thoughtful.
The adjective tam describes Jacob as being a “homebody,” which made him the
total opposite of his twin brother Esau. Therefore, in Genesis 25:27, the adjective
tam should be translated “homebody,” which is someone whose pleasures and
activities center around the home.
The English noun “homebody” is appropriate since it fits the sense of the
adjective tam in Genesis 25:27, which is designed to express a contrast with Esau
who was never around the home but out hunting wild game.
The fact that Jacob is described as “living in tents” contrasts him with his
adventurous brother Esau indicating that Jacob was a herdsman or pastoralist like
his father and grandfather.
Genesis 25:28 Now Isaac loved Esau, because he had a taste for game, but
Rebekah loved Jacob. (NASB95)
Isaac loved Esau because of his own taste for wild game. Therefore, Esau’s
nature and occupation were favored by Isaac because of the satisfaction of his
palate. On the other hand, Jacob was loved by Rebekah. This was probably due to
the prophecy that she received from the Lord that Esau and his descendants would
serve Jacob’s descendants and that Jacob would be in the line of Christ.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
12
The other reason why Rebekah favored Jacob over Esau was that Jacob was a
homebody. He also appears to have been a “momma’s boy” as demonstrated by he
and Rebekah conspiring together against Esau. Therefore, we see that the Word of
God describes Esau as an outdoor-type man who loved to do the things a father
could take pride in.
He was a skillful hunter, and he knew how to handle himself in the outdoors. In
our culture I believe Esau would have been a football star in high school and
college and might have played in the pros. He was a real macho man, the kind of
son a father would swell with pride to talk about among his friends.
Jacob was entirely different. While Esau seems to have been aggressive, daring,
and flamboyant, Jacob appears to be just the opposite in that he was quiet,
thoughtful and more interested in staying at home than in venturing out and taking
part in great physical endeavors. This is not to say that Jacob had no ambition, on
the contrary. It was that Jacob couldn’t see the sense in roaming the wilderness just
to bag some game.
In the solitude of his tent Jacob could mentally reason out how to get ahead
without getting his hands dirty and without taking dangerous risks. Esau was the
kind of son that Isaac could proudly take with him wherever he went.
Rebekah, on the other hand, favored Jacob. She probably thought Esau was
crude and uncultured. Jacob was a much more refined person, gentle and kind, the
type of son a mother would be proud of. Jacob spent more time at home than Esau
did.
Each parent seems to have identified too much with a particular son, thus
creating divisions which were devastating. This favoritism also brought about
disharmony between Isaac and his wife.
Later Rebekah was to conspire with Jacob to deceive her husband (chapter 27).
This parental favoritism causes a rift in the marriage of Rebekah and Isaac.
Isaac’s love for Esau is based upon the natural senses whereas Rebekah’s love
for Jacob is based upon the Lord’s choice of Jacob and that Jacob was a
responsible individual who took care of the family business and matters around the
home.
Now, remember, Isaac and Rebekah’s marriage was made in heaven since the
Lord’s will was for Rebekah to marry Isaac. Yet, even though the marriage was
made in heaven, it was still dysfunctional since Isaac, Rebekah, Esau and Jacob
possessed old Adamic sin natures.
The marriage and family of Rebekah and Isaac was dysfunctional as
demonstrated by Isaac’s love for Esau over Jacob because Esau’s pursuits satisfied
his palate’s desire for wild game!
Although Isaac was a spiritual man he developed a taste for Esau’s wild game,
which blinded him to the point that he preferred Esau over Jacob.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
13
Rebekah preferred Jacob not only because of the Lord’s choice of Jacob but
also what mother would not prefer a son that was always there when she needed
him, a son who could be counted on to keep the business of tent dwellers going
smoothly and prosperously.
Esau Sells His Birthright to Jacob
Genesis 25:29-34 presents to us Esau selling his birthright to his twin brother
Jacob.
Genesis 25:29 When Jacob had cooked stew, Esau came in from the field
and he was famished; 30 and Esau said to Jacob, “Please let me have a
swallow of that red stuff there, for I am famished.” Therefore his name was
called Edom. (NASB95)
Genesis 25:34 identifies that the food Jacob was boiling was “lentils,” which in
the Hebrew is `adhashim.
A “lentil” is a small annual legume of the pea family and its lens-shaped edible
seed is rich in protein and is one of the most ancient of cultivated foods. The red
pottage of lentils, which Esau sold his birthright for probably was made from the
red Egyptian lentil.
“Famished” is the adjective `ayeph, which describes physical exhaustion
brought on by hunger and great exertion. Therefore, the adjective `ayeph describes
Esau as being physically exhausted as a result of being hungry and greatly exerting
himself in the wilderness hunting.
“Let me have a swallow” is the verb la`at, which is in the hiphil imperative
form meaning “give a gulp” and the first person common singular pronominal
suffix meaning “me.”
“Red stuff” is the adjective `adhom, which refers to the red lentil soup that
Jacob was making.
Esau does not care to know the name of the food that he is requesting from
Jacob indicating his coarseness meaning that he is unrefined and crude, lacking
good manners.
So, Esau is saying, “Please let me have a gulp from that red stuff, this red stuff
here,” which is expressive of his aggressive and inconsiderate nature. Esau’s
request demonstrates his bad manners, selfishness and inconsideration for others
since he makes this request not knowing whether or not Jacob was making the red
lintel soup for himself, his parents or others in the household.
He never takes into consideration that maybe Jacob is making this soup for
others since he only cares that his own need be fulfilled. Esau demonstrates that he
doesn’t put others ahead of himself (cf. Philippians 2:3-4).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
14
“Edom” is the proper noun `edhom, which literally means, “red,” and was the
name given to Esau to mark the occasion in which he exchanged his birthright to
Jacob for some red lintel soup.
Genesis 36 states that Esau became the founder of the Edomite tribes who later
became the arch rivals of the Israelites.
Genesis 25:31 But Jacob said, “First sell me your birthright.” 32 Esau said,
“Behold, I am about to die; so of what use then is the birthright to me?” 33
And Jacob said, “First swear to me”; so he swore to him, and sold his
birthright to Jacob. 34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew; and he
ate and drank, and rose and went on his way. Thus Esau despised his
birthright. (NASB95)
“Birthright” is the noun bekhorah, which refers to the rights of the first-born in
a family (See Exodus 4:22).
The firstborn had a privileged status (See Genesis 43:33; 49:3) and the right of
succession (2 Chronicles 21:3) and received a double portion of his father’s
inheritance (Deut. 21:17).
The father’s inheritance was divided among his sons and the firstborn always
has right to two of these portions. If there are ten sons, the firstborn receives two
portions and the other nine split eight portions. If there are only two sons then the
firstborn inherits everything.
With this privileged status came responsibility in that the firstborn was the
protector of the family and leader. Not only did the firstborn have the
responsibility of providing leadership and material things in Isaac’s family but also
he had the responsibility to provide spiritually for his family.
Spiritual responsibilities were paramount in the family of Abraham and Isaac.
The selling of the birthright demonstrated that Esau rejected those responsibilities
and was thus not only an irresponsible person but also an unbeliever.
Abraham and Isaac were in the line of Christ and the birthright in the family of
Isaac included the promises and blessings given in the Abrahamic Covenant. In the
family of Abraham and Isaac, the birthright included the privilege of carrying on
the line of Christ that would bring salvation and therefore blessing to the entire
world. Jacob knew this and desired these things, thus demonstrating his spiritual
discernment and that he was a believer.
The birthright was transferable where the youngest can displace the eldest as in
the cases of Joseph and Judah, Reuben, and Ephraim and Manasseh, Moses and
Aaron, David and his six older brothers, Solomon and Adonijah.
Since the birthright concerns the future, its value is appropriated by faith.
Therefore, by selling his birthright, Esau was demonstrating his unbelief in the
promises contained in the Abrahamic Covenant and thereby forfeited the blessings
of this covenant (Hebrews 12:16-17).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
15
In Genesis 25:31, Jacob is exploiting Esau’s hunger and exchanging the red
lintel soup for the right to be heir of the family’s estate and assume the family
headship. Jacob erroneously believed that by his own human power that he had
come into possession of the birthright. He erroneously thought he could “merit” the
blessings when in reality he could only receive them according to God’s grace
meaning that he could not earn or deserve the blessings since they would be freely
given to him by God when he exercised faith in Him.
Jacob was on a works program and thought God needed his help. He was
ignorant of God’s method and thus inserted his own way of doing things. This
demonstrated in Jacob that self-confident attitude rather than a dependence upon
the Lord and His provisions and His plan and methods. He desired a right thing but
chose to attain it in a wrong way. A right thing must be done in a right way.
God did not need Jacob’s help since God had chosen Jacob over Esau from
eternity past based upon His sovereign grace and mercy to carry on the line of
Christ and inherit the blessings and privileges and responsibility of the Abrahamic
Covenant (cf. Romans 9:10-13).
Jacob and Esau were simply manifesting attitudes towards God’s plan that God
in His omniscience already knew and predicted to Rebekah they would possess
before they were born as recorded in Genesis 25:23.
Esau’s statement in Genesis 25:32 expresses a worldly viewpoint.
Isaiah 22:13 “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we may die.” (NASB95)
The fact that Esau agreed to sell his birthright to Jacob reveals that Esau did not
value spiritual things since by selling his birthright he was forfeiting the blessings
of the covenant that the Lord made with Abraham and which his father Isaac had
inherited.
The selling of the birthright demonstrated that Esau was a psuchikos, “soulish”
man and not a pneumatikos, “spiritual” man since he was expressing his dislike of
the plan of God for the patriarchs that was expressed in the promises of the
Abrahamic Covenant.
1 Corinthians 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the
Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them,
because they are spiritually appraised. (NASB95)
“Sold” is the verb makhar, which in context means, “to exchange” since Jacob
did not give money to Esau but rather offered him the red lintel soup in “exchange”
for the birthright.
“Despised” is the verb bazah, which means, “to the act of according little worth
to something, to undervalue something” implying contempt.” Therefore, by
exchanging his birthright for a bowl of red lintel soup, Esau was demonstrating
that he valued little his firstborn status in the family of Isaac, which involved
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
16
inheriting the promises, privileges and responsibilities of the Abrahamic Covenant
and thereby expressed his contempt for the plan of God.
The Conspiracy of Isaac and Esau
Genesis 27 records Jacob under the direction of Rebekah, deceiving Isaac in
order to steal the blessing of the birthright from Esau. This thwarted Isaac’s
attempt to bestow upon Esau the blessings of the birthright, which was against the
will of the Lord.
Normally the birthright belonged to the eldest son. This entitled him to a double
share of the property in addition to the privilege of assuming the father’s position
of headship in the family.
For the descendants of Abraham it determined the one through whom the
covenant blessings would be given. With this privileged status came responsibility
in that the firstborn was the protector of the family and leader.
Not only did the firstborn have the responsibility of providing leadership and
material things in Isaac’s family but also he had the responsibility to provide
spiritually for his family, which was paramount in the family of Abraham and
Isaac.
Abraham and Isaac were in the line of Christ and the birthright in the family of
Isaac included the promises and blessings given in the Abrahamic Covenant. In the
family of Abraham and Isaac, the birthright included the privilege of carrying on
the line of Christ that would bring salvation and therefore blessing to the entire
world.
The birthright was transferable so under certain circumstances the possessor of
this birthright could be dispossessed. The youngest can displace the eldest as in the
cases of Joseph and Judah, Reuben, and Ephraim and Manasseh, Moses and Aaron,
David and his six older brothers, Solomon and Adonijah.
In Abraham’s family, the one who possesses the birthright inherits the
Abrahamic Covenant. Since the birthright concerns the future, its value is
appropriated by faith. Jacob desired the birthright because of his faith in the
promises and prophecy of the Lord whereas Esau did not have faith in the promises
of the Lord. Esau was rejected because he did not have faith in the Lord and His
promises contained in the Abrahamic Covenant as demonstrated by the selling of
the birthright.
Now, the “blessing” of the birthright and the birthright itself were inseparable
since Hebrews 12:17 records that after Esau sold his birthright he wanted to inherit
the blessing but was rejected by God. Esau wanted the blessing but not the
prerequisite lifestyle of faith of the patriarchs. Therefore, the Lord did not allow
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
17
Esau to be blessed by Isaac and permitted Rebekah and Jacob’s scheme to deceive
Isaac to be successful.
Esau’s lack of faith in the promises of God is demonstrated in that he
exchanged his birthright with Jacob for a bowl of lintel soup. Therefore, by selling
his birthright, Esau was demonstrating his unbelief in the promises contained in the
Abrahamic Covenant and thereby forfeited the blessings of this covenant (Hebrews
12:16-17).
The fact that Esau agreed to sell his birthright to Jacob reveals that Esau did not
value spiritual things since by selling his birthright he was forfeiting the blessings
of the covenant that the Lord made with Abraham and which his father Isaac had
inherited.
In eternity past, before Jacob and Esau were born God knew in His omniscience
that Esau would possess such a negative attitude towards His plan and that Jacob
would have a positive attitude.
As we saw in Genesis 25:23, the Lord’s prophecy to Rebekah was that the
birthright and the blessings attached to it belonged to Jacob and not Esau.
Therefore, Isaac’s desire to give Esau the blessing of the birthright and not Jacob
was against the will of the Lord.
Unfortunately, Rebekah and Jacob erroneously thought they could accomplish
the will of the Lord by means of the sin of deception. In the end, the family was
separated for Rebekah never saw Esau again after this episode and Jacob and Esau
split and did not reconcile until years later. What we see was that parental
preference destroyed the family of Isaac and Rebekah.
Genesis 27:1 begins a set of dialogues and ends at Genesis 28:5, which give us
the record of Jacob under the instruction of his mother Rebekah, deceiving his
father Isaac and stealing the blessing of the birthright from his twin brother Esau.
These dialogues contained in Genesis 27:1-28:5 are framed by the marriage of
Esau to Hittite women, which is recorded in Genesis 26:34-35 and his marriage to
an Ishmaelite woman, which is recorded in Genesis 28:6-9.
Genesis 27:1-28:5 contains seven dialogues: (1) Isaac and Esau (27:1-4) (2)
Rebekah and Jacob (27:5-17) (3) Isaac and Jacob under guise of Esau (27:18-29)
(4) Isaac and Esau (27:30-40) (5) Rebekah and Jacob (27:41-45) (6) Rebekah and
Isaac (27:46) (7) Isaac and Jacob (28:1-5).
The information provided in Genesis 26:34-35 regarding Isaac and Rebekah’s
displeasure over Esau’s marriage to Hittite women and the information provided in
Genesis 28:6-9 regarding his marriage to an Ishmaelite supply essential data for
interpreting developments recorded in Genesis 27:1-28:5.
Genesis 27 gives us a perfect example of the “overruling will of God” in the
lives of His people where Isaac’s bad decision to give the blessing to Esau and not
Jacob is “overruled” by God.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
18
The sovereign will of God functions three different ways in relation to the will
of angels and men: (1) Directive will of God: God directly states what He desires
of us. (2) Permissive will of God: God permits us to have our own way. (3)
Overruling will of God: God overrules our decisions-not letting them have their
intended results-in order to protect us and the rest of mankind from our own
negative volition and to preserve and perpetuate His own marvelous plan.
A comparison of Genesis 25:23 with Genesis 27 manifests the function of
God’s “directive”, “permissive” and “overruling” will. The “directive” will of God
for the lives of Esau and Jacob is revealed in the Lord’s prophecy to Rebekah prior
to the birth of the twins, which is recorded in Genesis 25:23. The “permissive” will
of God is manifested in Genesis 27:1-4 where the Lord “permits” Isaac to attempt
to give the blessing to Esau rather than Jacob. The “overruling” will of God is
manifested in Genesis 27:5-46 where Jacob deceives Isaac and receives the
blessing rather than Esau.
In Genesis 27:1-4, we have the record of the conspiracy of Isaac and Esau to
secretly secure the blessing of the birthright for Esau rather than Jacob, which was
against the will of God.
Genesis 27:1 Now it came about, when Isaac was old and his eyes were too
dim to see, that he called his older son Esau and said to him, “My son.” And
he said to him, “Here I am.” 2 Isaac said, “Behold now, I am old and I do not
know the day of my death.” 3 Now then, please take your gear, your quiver
and your bow, and go out to the field and hunt game for me; 4 and prepare a
savory dish for me such as I love, and bring it to me that I may eat, so that my
soul may bless you before I die.” (NASB95)
Isaac was one hundred years of age at this point in the narrative since Genesis
25:26 records that Isaac was sixty years of age when he had Esau and Jacob and
Genesis 26:34 records that Esau got married at forty years of age. He would live to
one hundred eighty years of age according to Genesis 35:28.
Genesis 27:1 records that Isaac was already blind as indicated by the phrase
“his eyes were too dim to see.” This blindness is also symbolic of his spiritual
blindness that is expressed in his desire to give Esau the blessing of the birthright
and not Jacob. It appears that Isaac’s blindness caused him to erroneously think
that he might be dying soon. Therefore, as was the custom in his day, he desires to
give his blessing before he died.
The term “savory dish” is the noun mat`ammim, which in the plural means,
“delicacies, gourmet food” and appears six times in Genesis 27 (4, 7, 9, 14, 17, 31)
to emphasize Isaac’s sensuality and not the role the meal played in the blessing
ritual (Genesis, A Commentary, Bruce K. Waltke, page 377, Zondervan).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
19
Isaac’s love for fine foods has superseded his love for doing the will of God and
has regressed spiritually in that he has in fact become like Esau who exchanged his
birthright for a bowl of lintel soup!
This conversation that Isaac had with Esau regarding the blessing of the
birthright was private and was in fact a conspiracy on the part of Isaac to see that
Esau, who was his “favorite”, would get the blessing of the birthright. Normally
the blessing would have been a public affair, given before the entire family
because it was, in reality, an oral will which legally determined the disposition of
all that the father possessed (See Genesis 49:1, 28; 50:24-25; Deuteronomy 33:1).
“From excavations at Nuzi in central Mesopotamia we learn that the oral
blessing or will had legal validity and would stand up even in the courts. Nuzi
tablet P56 mentions a lawsuit between three brothers in which two of them
contested the right of a third to marry a certain Zululishtar. The young man won
his case by arguing that this marriage was provided for in his father’s deathbed
blessing.” (Howard Vos, Genesis and Archaeology; Chicago: Moody Press, 1963,
p. 96. The information cited by Vos comes from Cyrus Gordon, “Biblical Customs
and the Nuzi Tablets,” The Biblical Archaeologist, February, 1940, p. 8; Quote
from Vos cited from The Book of Genesis by Bob Deffinbaugh, pages 194-195,
Bible Studies Press).
Distribution of family wealth and headship would best be carried out in the
presence of all who were concerned, thus we later find Jacob giving his blessing in
the presence of all his sons (Genesis 49). Neither Jacob nor Rebekah was present,
and this was hardly an oversight but rather Isaac conspiring to give the blessing to
Esau who was his favorite and not Jacob who was Rebekah’s favorite and more
importantly, the Lord’s choice. If it were not for Rebekah eavesdropping on the
conversation, the entire matter would seemingly have been completed with only
two parties involved. Therefore, we have a conspiracy and secrecy where Isaac
intended at this clandestine dinner to convey his blessings upon Esau rather than
Jacob, which is why Isaac had no blessing left to convey upon Esau, cf. Genesis
27:37-38.
Here was a premeditated plot to thwart the plan and purpose of God for Jacob.
Isaac was not ignorant of the revelation of God to Rebekah, which we saw
recorded in Genesis 25:23. The fact that the Lord’s choice of Jacob over Esau was
justified was that Esau exchanged his birthright for a bowl of red lintel soup.
Therefore, God’s purposes for His people could never be achieved through such a
person as Esau.
In spite of all these elements, Isaac sought to overrule the verdict of God that
the elder serve the younger. He anticipated doing so by a misuse of the
pronouncement of the blessing before his death. Therefore, it appears that Isaac
intended to manipulate God by reversing the decree of God and the rightful
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
20
ownership of the rights of the first-born as purchased (although unethically) by
Jacob.
This he purposed to do by giving his oral blessing to Esau, which he thought he
was doing but in reality, he was giving it to Jacob (See Genesis 27:29). The fact
that Isaac sought to give Esau rather than Jacob the blessing after Esau
demonstrated his disdained for the plan of God reveals that at this time in his life,
Isaac was putting his personal love and affection for Esau ahead of doing God’s
will.
Unlike his father, Isaac put his relationship with his children ahead of obedience
to the will of the Lord since Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac in obedience to
the will of the Lord.
The Counter Conspiracy of Rebekah and Jacob
In Genesis 27:5-17, we will see counter conspiracy of Rebekah and Jacob to
deceive Isaac and secure the blessing of the birthright, which would thwart the
conspiracy of Isaac and Esau from succeeding. In this passage, we see that Isaac’s
wife, Rebekah is a master of deception and superior to him in clandestine
operations.
Also in this passage, we see the third round of Jacob’s battle with Esau. The
first round was at their birth (See Genesis 25:21-28) and the second round was
Jacob securing the birthright from Esau (See Genesis 25:27-34).
Genesis 27:5 Rebekah was listening while Isaac spoke to his son Esau. So
when Esau went to the field to hunt for game to bring home, 6 Rebekah said
to her son Jacob, “Behold, I heard your father speak to your brother Esau,
saying, 7 ‘Bring me some game and prepare a savory dish for me, that I may
eat, and bless you in the presence of the LORD before my death.’” (NASB95)
Little did Esau and Isaac know that Rebekah was eavesdropping in on their
entire conversation in which they had conspired to secure the blessing of the
birthright for Esau rather than Jacob who was Rebekah’s favorite.
Rebekah is functioning here as a counter spy in the service of her son Jacob.
Here we see Rebekah eavesdropping in on the conversation between Isaac and
Esau. She tells Jacob of the conspiracy between Isaac and Esau and their plot to
secure the blessing of the birthright for Esau rather than Jacob.
The family rivalry and parental favoritism is pointed out by Moses under the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit by designating Esau as Isaac’s son and Jacob as
Rebekah’s son. The blessing that Rebekah is referring to was given at departures or
imminent death in patriarchal times and could not be altered.
Rebekah adds to Isaac’s statement, the phrase “in the presence of the Lord” in
order to impress upon Jacob the significance of this critical moment in the family’s
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
21
history and that it was essential that they act immediately to thwart Isaac’s attempt
to give Esau the family blessing.
She also uses this phrase to manipulate Jacob to take part in a counter
conspiracy, which would thwart the conspiracy launched by Isaac and Esau. Isaac
never used this prepositional phrase since Isaac was going against the will of the
Lord by attempting to give Esau the blessing rather than Jacob.
Rebekah and Jacob erroneously believed that by their own human power that
Jacob could come into possession of the birthright. They erroneously thought
Jacob could “merit” the blessings when in reality he could only receive them
according to God’s grace meaning that he could not earn or deserve the blessings
since they would be freely given to him by God when he exercised faith in Him.
Jacob and Rebekah were on a works program and thought God needed their
help but they were ignorant of God’s method and thus inserted their own way of
doing things. This demonstrated in Jacob and Rebekah that self-confident attitude
rather than a dependence upon the Lord and His provisions and His plan and
methods. Rebekah desired a right thing for his son but she chose to attain it for him
in a wrong way.
Genesis 25:23 teaches that God did not need their help since He had chosen
Jacob over Esau from eternity past based upon His sovereign grace and mercy to
carry on the line of Christ and inherit the blessings and privileges and
responsibility of the Abrahamic Covenant.
Genesis 27:8 “Now therefore, my son, listen to me as I command you.”
(NASB95)
Rebekah commands Jacob and does not suggest for him to do something since
she is using her maternal authority to manipulate Jacob to carry out her plan of
deception.
Genesis 27:9 “Go now to the flock and bring me two choice young goats
from there, that I may prepare them as a savory dish for your father, such as
he loves. 10 Then you shall bring it to your father that he may eat, so that he
may bless you before his death.” (NASB95)
Rebekah knows her husband too well and commands Jacob to get two young
goats from the flock, which would have a similar taste to wild game, which Isaac
loved. She had lived long enough with Isaac to know what kind of food that he
loved and how to prepare it. Notice that Rebekah, like Isaac, believes that Isaac is
about to die.
Genesis 27:11 Jacob answered his mother Rebekah, “Behold, Esau my
brother is a hairy man and I am a smooth man. 12 Perhaps my father will feel
me, then I will be as a deceiver in his sight, and I will bring upon myself a
curse and not a blessing.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
22
Jacob does not complain that his mother’s plan of deceiving his father and her
husband is wrong and is sin but rather he was afraid he would be caught in this
deception and bring down a curse upon himself. Therefore, we see that Jacob has
no reservations about the morality of the plan but only the feasibility of such a
plan.
Jacob could not see how their plan could overcome the fact that he was smooth
skinned and his brother was very hairy. But Rebekah was prepared for this
problem and had undoubtedly thought about it for quite some time and devised a
plan.
Genesis 27:13 But his mother said to him, “Your curse be on me, my son;
only obey my voice, and go, get them for me.” (NASB95)
Gordon J. Wenham, “Rebekah’s reply is as remarkable for what it does not
contains as for what it does. She says nothing about dressing up Jacob in goatskin
and his brother’s clothes. That might have alarmed Jacob even more. Instead she
focuses on the most serious point, that Jacob may be cursed for his efforts. The
word order, ‘let the curse on you fall on me,’ emphasizes that Rebekah is the one,
not Jacob, who will suffer should Isaac pronounce a curse instead of a blessing.
Her remark is hypothetical, for Isaac does not curse Jacob, but it is doubtful
whether she could have diverted any curse onto herself by simply saying so. The
blessing is not transferable even to Esau for whom Isaac intended it, so who could
a curse be diverted? Presumably Rebekah realized this, for her plan depends on the
irrevocability of the blessing, so her remark, ‘let the curse…on me,’ expresses the
ferocity of her desire to make Jacob carry out the plan. Probably, Jacob realized
curses could not be transferred either and his submission to his mother’s will again
underlines his complicity in the scheme. But her closing words, ‘Just obey me. Go
and get it for me,’ repeating her opening injunction (vv 8-9) somewhat more
brusquely, reveal her impatience and urgency. It is a naked appeal to maternal
authority” (Word Biblical Commentary, volume 2, 16-50, page 207).
Genesis 27:14 So he went and got them, and brought them to his mother;
and his mother made savory food such as his father loved. (NASB95)
Moses under the inspiration uses the phrase “his father” rather than “her
husband” to bring out the rift between Rebekah and Isaac.
Genesis 27:15 Then Rebekah took the best garments of Esau her elder son,
which were with her in the house, and put them on Jacob her younger son. 16
And she put the skins of the young goats on his hands and on the smooth part
of his neck. 17 She also gave the savory food and the bread, which she had
made, to her son Jacob. (NASB95)
Notice that Jacob just brings her the materials needed to pull off her scheme and
she does all the preparation of the materials. Rebekah’s plan reveals that she was
not only devious but that her plan was well thought out in advance. There is no
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
23
way that her plan was conceived on the spur of the moment but rather it was a plan
conceived well in advance since she though out every minute detail, using goatskin
gloves and neck coverings.
Also, in a few moments time, she fashioned a costume for Jacob that fooled
Isaac, which also indicates a premeditated plan. Rebekah was too shrewd to leave
these matters to chance or to last minute accomplishment. This production had
been staged far in advance of its performance.
Rebekah promised to assume the negative consequences personally if anything
were to go wrong since she did not consider that there would be any negative
consequences for her scheme since she thought the ends justified the means. She
did not consider the Lord’s attitude towards her insubordination to her husband and
her deception for if she did she would not have attempted the deception.
Rebekah did suffer greatly for the part she played in this scheme. What neither
Rebekah nor her son considered, however, were the consequences for their sin
even if they did succeed, which they did. Their plan went off without a hitch, but
the results were the opposite of what they had hoped for.
There can be no doubt that Rebekah’s desire to secure the blessing of the
birthright for Jacob was according to the will of the Lord (see Genesis 25:23, 2934; 26:35; 27:46) but the means by which she sought to secure it for him, namely,
by deception was wrong. For Rebekah, the ends justified the means.
In this passage, we see Rebekah exploiting her husband’s blindness, which was
against the Word of the Lord (cf. Leviticus 19:14; Deuteronomy 27:18).
Undoubtedly, Rebekah felt justified in deceiving Isaac since the Lord had told her
that Jacob was His choice. But because of a lack of faith she failed to understand
that God’s purposes for Jacob would be accomplished whether or not Isaac
cooperated or not. She failed to understand that Isaac’s blessing of Esau could not
overrule God’s will, which was decreed from eternity past (See Genesis 25:23).
She evidently thought that the Lord needed her help.
The Lord’s will is that Jacob receive not only the birthright but also the blessing
of the birthright since the Lord declared to Rebekah prior to the birth of the twins
that Jacob would be the heir of the Abrahamic Covenant and carry on the line of
the Messiah. He goes against the will of the Lord and secretly conspires to give
Esau the blessing even though Esau has demonstrated that he is indeed not the one
to receive the inheritance since he married Hittite women and exchanged his
birthright with Jacob for a bowl of lentil soup.
So the problem in the family is the result of poor leadership by Isaac. Isaac has
failed to exercise his authority in accordance with the will of the Lord and will reap
the consequences of his failure as the husband of Rebekah and playing favorites
with his twin sons.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
24
Rebekah has failed as Isaac’s wife in that she doesn’t respect her husband’s
authority, which is against the Word of the Lord (cf. Ephesians 5:22). She fails as a
mother in that like her husband, she plays favorites with her twin sons, choosing
Jacob over Esau.
The marriage of Rebekah and Isaac is a mess because of no communication and
terrible leadership from Isaac. Unlike Abraham and Sarah who communicated with
one another and sought each other’s spiritual counsel regarding the inheritance
(See Genesis 15:5-6; 21:8-14), Isaac and Rebekah are not communicating with
each other.
The first thing Rebekah should have done was to confront Isaac respectfully in
love about his contemplated sin. Submission to authority never includes silence
toward evil. We are to “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15), even to those in
authority over us (cf. Acts 16:35-40).
Having fulfilled her responsibility to warn her husband of the consequences of
the evil he had planned, Rebekah should have been content to leave the disposition
of the matter to God, Who is all-powerful and all-wise. Her actions betrayed her
lack of faith in the sovereignty of God.
Rebekah’s Plan Succeeds
Genesis 27:18-29 records the success of Rebekah’s plan where Jacob
successfully deceived his father Isaac into thinking he was Esau so that Isaac
unknowingly bestowed upon him the family blessing rather than Esau.
Genesis 27:18 Then he came to his father and said, “My father.” And he
said, “Here I am. Who are you, my son?” (NASB95)
Isaac’s question, “who are you, my son” indicates also that he has not
identified the voice as being Jacob’s or Esau’s implying that Jacob was
impersonating the voice of his brother Esau.
Being brothers, there was certainly some similarity in their two voices. Isaac
was expecting Esau and not Jacob and he could smell the dinner and so he
presumes that it was Esau.
Genesis 27:19 Jacob said to his father, “I am Esau your firstborn; I have
done as you told me. Get up, please, sit and eat of my game, that you may
bless me.” (NASB95)
We can be sure that Jacob did not want Isaac to question him at all in order to
conceal his true identity. He lies to his father and identifies himself as Esau in
order to assure his father that he had done as he was told and was ready to receive
the blessing.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
25
Notice also that Jacob requests that his father “get up, sit” indicating that Isaac
was lying down in bed and as we noted before, expecting his death would be soon.
Of course, as we noted, he lived another eighty years.
Genesis 27:20 Isaac said to his son, “How is it that you have it so quickly,
my son?” And he said, “Because the LORD your God caused it to happen to
me.” (NASB95)
Isaac was a bit suspicious since he asks another question, namely, how did he
accomplish the task of killing the wild game and preparing it so quickly since Isaac
had just sent Esau out? Jacob is in trouble here but rises to the challenge and
invokes the name of the Lord as being the reason for his quick success in catching
the wild game for his father. This will prompt a further question and investigation
from Isaac.
Jacob excused his sin by claiming that the Lord gave him success. By doing so,
he is using the Lord’s name in vain and compounding his lie with blasphemy.
Jacob’s response does not satisfy Isaac and aroused his father’s suspicions further
since there is no record of Esau ever mentioning the Lord’s name. Isaac’s response
here to Jacob’s impersonation of his brother indicates that Isaac was not out of it
mentally. His response also indicates that he suspected that Rebekah might attempt
to deceive him since she was totally against him blessing Esau rather than Jacob.
Thus, far we have seen that Isaac cannot trust his eyesight because he is blind.
Then, we have seen that he does not trust his hearing, which is indicated by his
next question, which appeals to his sense of touch.
Now, those who have children will know that sometimes it is hard to identify
them by their voices since they can sound similar to each other.
Genesis 27:21 Then Isaac said to Jacob, “Please come close, that I may feel
you, my son, whether you are really my son Esau or not.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s worst fears are coming to pass when Isaac requests that he come closer
so that he might touch him in order to confirm his identity. He expressed this fear
to his mother but as we will see the animal skins that he wore did the trick.
The distinctive quality and inflection of Jacob’s voice put his impersonation of
Esau in jeopardy but the skin disguise does the trick and saves Jacob from being
discovered by his father. So Isaac knows that sometimes Esau can sound like Jacob
and vice versa but now he is thinking to himself that they both cannot feel the same
because he knows that Esau is very hairy and Jacob is not.
Genesis 27:22 So Jacob came close to Isaac his father, and he felt him and
said, “The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” 23
He did not recognize him, because his hands were hairy like his brother
Esau's hands; so he blessed him. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
26
Isaac has identified Jacob’s voice but the skin disguise has made him doubt his
suspicions that Jacob is impersonating Esau. His hearing says that he is talking to
Jacob but his sense of touch tells him it is Esau.
The statement “he blessed him” is “not” a reference to the blessing of the
inheritance but rather it is the blessing to admit Jacob into Isaac’s presence. This is
indicated by Isaac’s statement recorded in Genesis 27:25, “Bring it (the meal) to
me and I will eat of my son’s game, that I may bless you.”
Remember, Genesis 27:3-4 records telling Esau to kill him some wild game and
prepared it the way he likes so that he might bestow upon him the blessing of the
inheritance and at this point in Genesis 27:23, Isaac has not eaten the meal.
Genesis 27:24 And he said, “Are you really my son Esau?” And he said, “I
am.” (NASB95)
Even after blessing Jacob, Isaac expresses his doubts as to the identity of the
son speaking to him by asking Jacob point blank, “are you really my son Esau?”
Isaac still won’t eat the meal until he receives an answer for this point blank
question. It appears that it did not enter his mind that Jacob would attempt to
deceive him but I am sure he knew that Rebekah would.
Genesis 27:25 So he said, “Bring it to me, and I will eat of my son's game,
that I may bless you.” And he brought it to him, and he ate; he also brought
him wine and he drank. (NASB95)
Three times we have seen that Isaac voiced his suspicions (Genesis 27:20, 22,
24) but in the end was deceived by his sense of touch (Genesis 27:16, 23) and
smell (Genesis 27:27) and blessed Jacob instead of Esau. Isaac’s decision was
reached based upon all five senses: hearing, seeing, tasting, touching and smell and
yet he was still deceived.
After Jacob answered this point blank question to his satisfaction, Isaac will
now eat the meal. By demanding to eat the meal, Isaac is imposing the test of taste.
The phrase “my son’s game” implies that Esau prepared Isaac’s favorite meal
in accordance with a special recipe, which was distinctive of Esau’s skill in
cooking, which endeared him to his father in the first place.
Isaac’s judgment is not impaired because of his blindness or poor health since
he asks pointed questions and is suspicious and sensed that Rebekah was trying to
thwart his attempt to bless Esau rather than Jacob. Rather, his judgment is impaired
because of his haste to bless Esau before Rebekah knows about it and he dies.
Isaac’s command to Esau to kill his favorite wild game and prepare his favorite
meal for him expresses his urgency in bestowing the blessing upon Esau. If Isaac
wasn’t in such a rush, he would have requested the presence of Jacob along with
Esau but because of his plan to secretly bless Esau without the presence of the
entire family, he did not do this. Therefore, Isaac will make a poor judgment for
the sake of urgency.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
27
Genesis 27:26 Then his father Isaac said to him, “Please come close and
kiss me, my son.” (NASB95)
The kiss was not only a token of true personal love and affection but of loyalty,
thus making Jacob’s deception and treachery more deplorable. The phrase “my
son” here implies “my favorite” son who of course was Esau.
Genesis 27:27 So he came close and kissed him; and when he smelled the
smell of his garments, he blessed him and said, “See, the smell of my son is like
the smell of a field which the LORD has blessed.” (NASB95)
The smell of Esau’s garments prompts an emotional response and blessing from
him where he recalls the vocation of his son as a hunter. The smell of Esau’s
garments, which Jacob used to deceive his father, fully convince Isaac that Esau is
standing before him. Therefore, he proceeds to unknowingly pronounce the
blessing of the inheritance upon Jacob.
The blessing that Isaac will unknowingly pronounce upon Jacob was inspired
by God the Holy Spirit since he spoke by means of faith according to Hebrews
11:20 even though he was intending to go against the will of God by pronouncing a
blessing upon Esau.
Hebrews 11:20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, even regarding
things to come. (NASB95)
Isaac’s intention was to bless Esau, which was against the will of the Lord and
yet Isaac pronounced a blessing upon Jacob even though he did it in ignorance.
Like Isaac, the prophet Balaam was inspired by the Holy Spirit to bless Israel
against his will (Numbers 23:11-12). Also, the high priest in Jesus’ day spoke
prophetically of the meaning of our Lord’s death, though he himself did not
understand the real import of what he was saying (John 11:49-52).
Genesis 27:28 “Now may God give you of the dew of heaven, and of the
fatness of the earth, and an abundance of grain and new wine.” (NASB95)
When Isaac pronounces the blessing, he uses the term Elohim, “God,” and not
the personal covenant name of God, Yahweh, “Lord” since he knows that Esau is
not concerned about spiritual blessings but rather material blessings.
The first material blessing was the dew of heaven. Dew is of great importance
in Palestine since the area possesses a dry summer subtropical climate. The entire
Mediterranean Basin experiences this climate, in which a stationary high pressure
system does not allow moisture to penetrate the region during the summer. This
system shifts to the south during the winter allowing moisture to penetrate. Thus,
the land is dependent upon dew throughout the summer. Heavy dews are normal
because of the great difference between night and day temperatures.
Bruce K. Waltke, “Dew from westerly and northwesterly Mediterranean winds
plays an important role in the irrigation of crops in many parts of Palestine”
(Genesis, A Commentary, page 379, Zondervan).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
28
The second material blessing was “the fatness of the earth,” which is a
figurative expression referring to the fertility of the land.
These first two material blessings would result in the third material blessing,
namely, “an abundance of grain and new wine,” which refers to rich harvests.
It is interesting to note that these first three material blessings would be of
interest to the settled farmer but of no interest to a nomadic hunter like Esau,
making these blessings more appropriate for Jacob rather than Esau.
Genesis 27:29 “May peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you; Be
master of your brothers, and may your mother's sons bow down to you.
Cursed be those who curse you, and blessed be those who bless you.”
(NASB95)
The blessings contained in Genesis 27:29 are directly related to the nation of
Israel since Jacob who later had his named changed by the Lord to “Israel” is the
progenitor of that nation. Also, they are Messianic in that they find their ultimate
fulfillment in the Person of Jesus Christ who is a descendant of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob.
“Peoples” is the noun `am, which refers to the entire Gentile population of the
earth in contrast with the population of Israel. Therefore, in relation to the nation of
Israel, the blessing “May peoples serve you” refers to the fact that the entire
earth’s population, the Gentiles, shall serve the nation of Israel. In another sense,
this prophecy is Messianic in that the entire earth’s population will serve the Lord
Jesus Christ who is a descendant Abraham, Isaac and Jacob during His millennial
reign (Psalm 22:27-28; Malachi 1:11; Zechariah 14:16).
“Nations” is the noun le’om, which refers to the human race in their unified
groups and reflecting their distinct characteristics. Therefore, in relation to the
nation of Israel, the blessing “May nations bow down to you” refers to the fact
that all the Gentile nations shall serve the nation of Israel.
In another sense, this prophecy is Messianic in that all the Gentile nations will
serve the Lord Jesus Christ who is a descendant Abraham, Isaac and Jacob during
His millennial reign (Psalm 22:27-28; Malachi 1:11; Zechariah 14:16).
The plural form of the nouns le’om, “nations” and `am, “peoples” expresses the
comprehensiveness of Israel and Jesus Christ’s dominion over the Gentile nations
of the earth.
The command “Be master of your brothers” confirms the Lord’s prophecy to
Rebekah recorded in Genesis 25:23 that “the older shall serve the younger.”
In Genesis 25:23, the Lord declares that the “older shall serve the younger”
indicating that the younger son, Jacob would receive the inheritance and not Esau
who was older.
“Master” is the noun gevir, which is a technical term designating the position of
inheritance and legal superiority over another. Therefore, the command to Jacob to
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
29
“be master of your brothers” denotes the fact that Jacob would hold the position
of inheritance in the family and denotes his legal superiority over his brother Esau
and that he would inherit his father’s position as patriarch over his clan.
The blessing “may your mother's sons bow down to you” does not imply that
Rebekah had other children beside the twins. But rather it denotes the fact that
Rebekah’s descendants through Esau who were the Edomites would pay homage
and show honor and respect to Jacob’s descendants who are the nation of Israel
(See Genesis 36:1-43).
The blessing “cursed be those who curse you and blessed be those who bless
you” is a reference to the blessing the Lord pronounced upon Abraham that is
recorded in Genesis 12:3. Therefore, we see that the blessing “cursed be who
curse you and blessed be those who bless you” indicates that Jacob is inheriting
an Abrahamic blessing. This blessing indicates that like his grandfather Abraham,
the Lord would identify Himself with the cause of Jacob. Therefore, this blessing
indicates that like Abraham, blessing Jacob would be equivalent to doing it to God
whereas those who curse Jacob would in effect be cursing God. So like Abraham,
those who curse Jacob and his descendants would be cursed by God and those who
bless him would be blessed by God. The nation of Israel is descended from
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Therefore, those who curse Israel will be cursed by
God and those who bless Israel will be blessed by God.
Isaac Learns of Jacob’s Deception
In Genesis 27:30-40, we see Isaac learning that he had been deceived by Jacob
and Esau attempting in vain to secure a blessing from Isaac but instead his father
pronounces an antiblessing upon Esau.
Genesis 27:30 Now it came about, as soon as Isaac had finished blessing
Jacob, and Jacob had hardly gone out from the presence of Isaac his father,
that Esau his brother came in from his hunting. (NASB95)
This was not an accident that Esau came a moment too late since his late arrival
was according to the providence of God, which expresses the fact that the world
and our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God.
Genesis 27:31 Then he also made savory food, and brought it to his father;
and he said to his father, “Let my father arise and eat of his son's game, that
you may bless me.” 32 Isaac his father said to him, “Who are you?” And he
said, “I am your son, your firstborn, Esau.” 33 Then Isaac trembled violently,
and said, “Who was he then that hunted game and brought it to me, so that I
ate of all of it before you came, and blessed him? Yes, and he shall be blessed.”
(NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
30
The expression “trembled violently” is composed of five words in the Hebrew
text and literally means that Isaac “trembled, a trembling, that was great and
excessive.”
The irony of it all was that since Isaac had tried to give everything to Esau,
there was nothing left that could be considered a blessing to his favorite son, for all
had been given to Jacob. Isaac set his heart on that which was contrary to the
revealed will of God, and because of this his world came crashing down upon him
when God’s purposes prevailed.
The Holy Spirit convicted Isaac that he was going against the will of God by
attempting to secretly bestow the family blessing upon Esau rather than Jacob,
which is indicated by Isaac’s violent emotional reaction to finding out that he had
been deceived into giving the blessing to Jacob rather than Esau. He now realizes
that he was wrong by choosing Esau over Jacob in defiance of God’s revealed will.
Isaac’s statement “Yes, and he (Jacob) shall be blessed” not only indicates the
irrevocability of the blessing but also it indicates that Isaac knows now that he was
wrong to choose Esau rather than Jacob.
Isaac had just encountered the “overruling” will of God where Isaac against the
will of God sought to bestow the blessing of the inheritance upon Esau, who was
not God’s choice, but rather He chose Jacob.
Proverbs 19:21 Many plans are in a man's heart, but the counsel of the
LORD will stand. (NASB95)
Esau’s Anguish
Genesis 27:34 When Esau heard the words of his father, he cried out with
an exceedingly great and bitter cry, and said to his father, “less me, even me
also, O my father!” (NASB95)
Esau was an emotional and irrational person as revealed in the fact that he was
quick to exchange his invaluable birthright and the promises of the Abrahamic
Covenant as the first-born in the family for a bowl of lintel soup but now he wants
the blessing of the birthright, which he rejected by exchanging the birthright.
Isaac and Esau conspired against Jacob and their plan has backfired on them
since they reaped deception because they sowed seeds of deception.
Genesis 27:35 And he said, “our brother came deceitfully and has taken
away your blessing.” (NASB95)
The statement “he has taken away your blessing” indicates that the blessing
that Isaac bestowed upon Jacob unknowingly was “irrevocable” and that Isaac has
come to his senses and realizes that God has chosen Jacob and not Esau.
Genesis 27:36 Then he said, “Is he not rightly named Jacob, for he has
supplanted me these two times? He took away my birthright, and behold, now
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
31
he has taken away my blessing.” And he said, “Have you not reserved a
blessing for me?” (NASB95)
“Supplanted” is the verb `aqav, which means, “to seize by the heel” and is
used a play on Jacob’s name, which is derived from this verb.
The name given to “Jacob” means, “heel,” implying grasping and describes the
younger twin as “the heel catcher.”
Esau was definitely cheated when Jacob stole the blessing but he was definitely
not cheated by Jacob when he exchanged his birthright for a bowl of lintel soup,
rather the latter was a result of his own bad decision. Therefore, Esau fails to take
responsibility for his actions and has himself only to blame for the exchange of the
birthright.
Genesis 27:37 But Isaac replied to Esau, “Behold, I have made him your
master, and all his relatives I have given to him as servants; and with grain
and new wine I have sustained him. Now as for you then, what can I do, my
son?” (NASB95)
The statement “I have made him (Jacob) your (Esau) master” is confirmation
of the command given by Isaac to Jacob to “be master of your brothers,” which
is recorded in Genesis 27:29, which in turn confirms the Lord’s prophecy to
Rebekah recorded in Genesis 25:23 that “the older shall serve the younger.”
The command “be master of your brothers” and the statement “I have made
him your master” denotes the fact that Jacob would hold the position of
inheritance in the family and his legal superiority over his brother Esau and would
inherit his father’s position as patriarch over his clan.
Isaac’s statement “all his relatives I have given to him as servants” echoes
the blessing in Genesis 27:29, “may your mother's sons bow down to you” and
denotes the fact that Rebekah’s descendants through Esau who were the Edomites
would pay homage and show honor and respect to Jacob’s descendants who are the
nation of Israel (See Genesis 36:1-43).
Isaac’s statement to Esau “with grain and new wine I have sustained him”
echoes the blessing bestowed upon Jacob that is recorded in Genesis 27:29, “may
God give you an abundance of grain and new wine,” which refers to rich
harvests.
Isaac’s rhetorical question to Esau, “Now as for you then, what can I do, my
son?” means that since Isaac unknowingly gave everything to Esau, he now has
only an antiblessing to offer Esau, which are prophecies.
Genesis 27:38 Esau said to his father, “Do you have only one blessing, my
father? Bless me, even me also, O my father.” So Esau lifted his voice and
wept. 39 Then Isaac his father answered and said to him, “Behold, away from
the fertility of the earth shall be your dwelling, and away from the dew of
heaven from above. 40 By your sword you shall live, and your brother you
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
32
shall serve; But it shall come about when you become restless, that you will
break his yoke from your neck.” (NASB95)
Since Isaac gave everything to Jacob, all he has to give Esau is an
“antiblessing,” which is a parody on Jacob’s blessing and are also prophecies
concerning the future of Esau’s descendants who were the Edomites.
The antiblessing/prophecy “away from the fertility of the earth shall be your
dwelling” means that Esau and his descendants would be denied the earth’s
fertility unlike Jacob and his descendants.
The antiblessing/prophecy “away from the dew of heaven from above” means
that Esau and his descendants, the Edomites, would be denied dew, which plays
such an essential role in the irrigation of crops in Palestine.
Therefore, we see that Esau’s descendants, the Edomites, would not participate
in the blessing of rich harvests as Jacob’s descendants, the Israelites would and
would live away from fertile places, which implies that his descendants would live
in a dry and barren land-as Edom on the whole actually was.
The antiblessing/prophecy “by your sword you shall live” means that Esau’s
descendants, the Edomites, would live in continuous conflict, always having to
defend themselves from their enemies. Edom appears as a militant nation
throughout the Old Testament Scriptures (Numbers 20:18; 1 Samuel 14:47; 1
Kings 11:14-16; 2 Kings 14:7-10; Obadiah; Psalm 60:10-11).
The antiblessing/prophecy “your brother you shall serve” means that the
descendants of Jacob, the Israelites would prevail over Esau’s descendants, the
Edomites. Esau, the older, did not actually serve Jacob, his younger twin but rather
Esau’s descendants did (see 1 Samuel 14:47; 2 Samuel 8:14; 1 Kings 11:15-16;
22:47; 2 Kings 14:7). This prophecy is a confirmation of the prophecy that was
given to Rebekah and is recorded in Genesis 25:23 that the “older (Esau) would
serve the younger (Jacob).”
The prophecy “But it shall come about when you become restless, that you
will break his yoke from your neck” means that the time would come when the
Edomites would break free from Israel (See 1 Kings 11:14-15; 2 Kings 8:20-22).
From the time of David, Edom was part of the Israelite empire but later
regained its independence (See 2 Kings 8:20-22) but after the fall of Jerusalem,
Edom took revenge on Judah (Obadiah; Psalm 137:7). Therefore, we can see that
this prophecy of future freedom was in a sense a blessing and thus Esau was
blessed as it says in Hebrews 11:20 that Isaac blessed not only Jacob but also Esau.
Now, it might appear on the surface that God rewarded Rebekah and Jacob for
their sin of deceiving Isaac but this is far from the case. Both Rebekah and Jacob
reaped what they sowed. God disciplined both Rebekah and Jacob for their
deception.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
33
For instance, Rebekah and Jacob apparently never saw each other again after
the separation that grew out of this deceit, which was a painful experience for both.
Secondly, Jacob was more cruelly deceived by his own sons when they sold
Joseph into slavery.
Lastly, Jacob went from being a man of means and influence to being demoted
to a position of hard rigorous service for twenty years to Laban.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
34
Chapter Four: Jacob Leaves Home
Isaac and Rebekah Send Jacob Away
Genesis 27:41-46 records Rebekah learning of Esau’s plot to kill Jacob once
Isaac has died and as a result advising Jacob to leave home.
Genesis 27:41 So Esau bore a grudge against Jacob because of the blessing
with which his father had blessed him; and Esau said to himself, “The days of
mourning for my father are near; then I will kill my brother Jacob.”
(NASB95)
“Bore a grudge” is the verb satam, which means, “to hate.”
Esau hated his brother Jacob in both an “active” and “passive” sense for
stealing the blessing of the birthright. By plotting to kill Jacob when his father
died, Esau was being governed by his old Adamic sin nature. The sin nature
produces personal sins when we give in to it.
Just as Cain killed his brother Abel in a jealous rage, so Esau plans to kill his
brother Jacob because of jealousy.
Proverbs 6:34 For jealousy enrages a man, and he will not spare in the day
of vengeance. (NASB95)
Like Cain, Esau was an emotional person who was governed by his emotions.
Esau’s statement “the days of mourning for my father are near” indicates
that he anticipates that his father will not live much longer but as it turns out, Isaac
lived for another eighty years.
His statement “the days of mourning for my father are near, then I will kill
my brother Jacob” also indicates that love for his father and fear that his father
would curse him and disinherit him constrained him from murdering Jacob
immediately.
Genesis 27:42 Now when the words of her elder son Esau were reported to
Rebekah, she sent and called her younger son Jacob, and said to him, “Behold
your brother Esau is consoling himself concerning you by planning to kill
you.” (NASB95)
Rebekah received this information that Esau was plotting to kill Jacob by divine
revelation since Genesis 27:41 records that Esau divulged this plan to no one but in
fact was stating this intention to kill Jacob only to himself.
Genesis 27:43 “Now therefore, my son, obey my voice, and arise, flee to
Haran, to my brother Laban!” (NASB95)
Just as Rebekah commanded Jacob to deceive his father into giving him the
blessing of the birthright so she commands him again to flee from Esau.
The name “Laban” means, “white” and is used elsewhere in the Bible (Isa.
24:23; 30:26; cf. Song. 6:10) as a poetic metonym for the moon.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
35
Laban’s grandfather was Nahor, Abraham’s brother, and of course his sister
was Rebekah. Laban lived in the city of Nahor near Haran along one of the
tributaries of the Euphrates River in what is now modern Syria and his occupation
was a sheep and goat herder. Haran still exists in and is located in northern
Mesopotamian, a commercial city on the Balikh River, sixty miles from its
entrance into the Euphrates. The city was on the busy caravan road connecting
with Nineveh, Asshur, and Babylon in Mesopotamia, and with Damascus, Tyre,
and Egyptian cities in the west and south and was a center of the moon god cult.
Genesis 27:44 “Stay with him a few days, until your brother's fury
subsides, 45 until your brother's anger against you subsides and he forgets
what you did to him. Then I will send and get you from there. Why should I
be bereaved of you both in one day?” (NASB95)
Unknown to Rebekah was that she thought she would see Jacob again in just a
few days, but she never saw him again. She never thought that Jacob’s exile would
be for twenty years as it turned out to be (See Genesis 31:41). Rebekah not only
destroyed her relationship with Esau after conspiring with Jacob to steal the
blessing of the birthright but in the end she also lost Jacob.
Genesis 27:46 Rebekah said to Isaac, “I am tired of living because of the
daughters of Heth; if Jacob takes a wife from the daughters of Heth, like
these, from the daughters of the land, what good will my life be to me?”
(NASB95)
Just as Sarah took the initiative to provide for Isaac by driving out Hagar and
Ishmael (See Genesis 21:10) so Rebekah acts for Jacob by providing for his get
away with a cover of legitimacy.
Rebekah’s desire to get a wife for Jacob among her relatives was not her real
motivation for sending Jacob to her relatives. But rather, it was to spare Jacob from
Esau’s wrath. Rebekah uses Esau’s Hittite wives as a pretext for sending Jacob
away to her relatives.
Esau’s Hittite wives brought grief not only to Rebekah but also Isaac according
to Genesis 26:34-35. Therefore, by appealing to Isaac’s dislike for Esau’s Hittite
wives, Rebekah knows that Isaac will consent to her sending Jacob away to her
relatives in Paddan Aram.
The Hittites were the descendants of Heth who was the son of Canaan (See
Genesis 10:15) and as a result were under a curse according to the prophecy of
Noah, which is recorded in Genesis 9:24-27. At times the Hittites, Girgashites,
Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, were called “Canaanites” but strictly
speaking the nations who dwelt on the coasts or river lowlands were called
“Canaanite” (Nm. 13:29).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
36
Against the will of the Lord, Esau married Hittite women, who were Canaanites
according to Genesis 26:34-35. Therefore, Rebekah had a legitimate reason for
sending Jacob away.
The Aramean women embrace the faith of their husbands, unlike the Canaanite
women who seduce their husbands to join their lifestyles (See Genesis 24:4; 26:3435; 31:50).
Again, we see Rebekah manipulating her husband and whining at him, which
manifests how bad Rebekah and Isaac’s relationship had gotten. As a wife to Isaac,
Rebekah is not conducting herself according to the Word of God.
Rebekah has become a contentious woman as a result of her disobedience. She
states to Isaac that she won’t be fit to live with if Jacob marries a Canaanite like his
brother. She is lying about her true motivation for sending Jacob to her relatives,
indicating that her and Isaac were not communicating on important spiritual
matters. Also, Rebekah is pouring salt on the open wound of Isaac who knew full
well that Esau disobeyed the Lord and betrayed the Abrahamic Covenant by
marrying Hittite women rather than an Aramean woman.
Isaac Blesses Jacob
In Genesis 28:1-5, we have the record of Isaac blessing Jacob and agreeing with
Rebekah’s idea to send Jacob away to her relatives and warning him not to take a
wife among the Canaanites but from Rebekah’s relatives.
Now, the idea of sending Jacob to Paddan Aram and “out of the land of
Canaan” would put Jacob out of the “geographical” will of God, which means that
there is a specific geographical place that God has ordained for the believer to
serve Him. Therefore, we can see that Rebekah’s plan is against the will of the
Lord and Isaac agrees to it and shouldn’t have.
Esau’s plot to kill Jacob shouldn’t have prompted his being sent out of the land
of Canaan but rather if she was concerned about his safety, she simply should have
sent him away to some other place in the land of Canaan.
Isaac should have done what his father Abraham had done and sent a trusted
servant to secure a bride among Rebekah’s relatives. Remember, Isaac never left
the Promised Land, the land of Canaan. However, Abraham left the land of Canaan
by taking a trip to Egypt where he and Sarah were delivered from the hands of
Pharaoh (See Genesis 12). We are going to see Jacob getting into trouble with
Laban in Paddan Aram, which he would never have gotten into if he stayed in the
land of Canaan.
Now, even though, Rebekah and Isaac failed in this area and put their son Jacob
out of the will of God, God was still able to use the situation with Laban to build
the character of Jacob. Therefore, we see that the “directive” will of God was for
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
37
Jacob and all the patriarchs to stay in the land of Canaan but His “permissive” will,
permitted Jacob to leave the land in order to teach him spiritual lessons and build
his character.
Now, Rebekah’s plan to have Jacob marry one of his cousins seems shocking to
us in the twenty-first century but in those days, it happened all the time and was
not yet prohibited by God! As we have noted in our previous studies in the book of
Genesis, since God created only one man and one woman, it was essential for
brothers to marry sisters in order to continue the human race.
In the first generations, all marriages were brother and sister marriages and
there were no mutant genes in the genetic systems of any of these children so that
no genetic harm could have resulted from close marriages. Many, many
generations later, during the time of Moses, such mutations had accumulated to the
point where such unions were genetically dangerous so that incest was thenceforth
prohibited in the Mosaic Law (Lev. 18:6-18). Since earth’s population was still
relatively young in the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, there was as yet no
genetic danger from inbreeding. After many further centuries had elapsed,
however, the accumulation of mutations and the associated danger of congenital
defects had become sufficiently serious to cause God to declare incestuous
marriages illegal (Lev. 18:6-14).
Genesis 28:1 So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him and charged him, and
said to him, “You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan.”
(NASB95)
Isaac agrees to Rebekah’s plan to send Jacob to marry one of his cousins but
does not know that her real reason for sending Jacob away was to avoid Esau’s plot
to kill Jacob once Isaac had died. So Rebekah uses her and Isaac’s dislike of
Esau’s Hittite wives as a pretext for sending Jacob away to her relatives to secure a
bride.
Notice how she manipulates Isaac using a persuasive argument to get Isaac to
do what she wants. She doesn’t relate to Isaac, Esau’s plot to kill Jacob since she
knew that Isaac would have not believed that his favorite son would do such a
thing.
Rebekah let it be known how distressed she was over the Canaanite women
whom Esau had taken as wives (cf. 26:34-35) and then she insinuated that if Jacob
did the same she would not be fit to live with. No wonder Isaac agreed to
Rebekah’s plan since what man wants to live with a bitchy wife!
Proverbs 21:9 It is better to live in a corner of a roof than in a house shared
with a contentious woman. (NASB95)
Isaac “blessed” Jacob in the sense that he publicly honored and acknowledged
and recognized that Jacob is the true heir of the promises, privileges,
responsibilities and blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant. This act on the part of
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
38
Isaac also demonstrates that he is recovered from his folly in attempting to bless
Esau against the will of the Lord.
Genesis 28:2 “Arise, go to Paddan-aram, to the house of Bethuel your
mother's father; and from there take to yourself a wife from the daughters of
Laban your mother's brother.” (NASB95)
The prohibition to not marry a Canaanite woman and the command to marry a
cousin corresponds to the prohibition and command recorded in Genesis 24:2-4
that Abraham gave his servant Eliezer regarding a bride for Isaac. The family of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was prohibited by God from entering into marriage with
the Canaanites and instead were to marry Shemites since Noah prophesied in
Genesis 9:20-27 that Canaan was under a curse and that Shem was in the line of
Christ.
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were Shemites meaning that they were descendants
of Shem and were therefore to marry other Shemites. Rebekah’s family were
Shemites and therefore, Jacob is sent away to marry one of his cousins.
Neither Jacob nor Esau had ever previously been taught by their parents that
marriage to Canaanite women was against the will of God and unsatisfactory to
their parents. We know this to be the case since Isaac’s prohibition to Jacob to not
marry a Canaanite was never in the past given to either Jacob or Esau since
nowhere previously has this instruction been given. This is further confirmed by
Esau’s response to learning that his Canaanite wives were displeasing to his father
when he went and married an Ishmaelite, which is recorded in Genesis 28:6-9.
Therefore, it appears that Isaac and Rebekah failed as parents in the eyes of the
Lord since they did not teach Jacob and Esau Noah’s prophecy recorded in Genesis
9:24-27.
Genesis 28:3 “May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and
multiply you, that you may become a company of peoples.” (NASB95)
The expression “God Almighty” (Hebrew: El Shaddai) was first used by God
of Himself when speaking to Abraham, recorded in Genesis 17:1. The title El
Shaddai, “God Almighty” emphasizes the omnipotence of God and describes the
Lord as being able to make Jacob’s descendants numerous. The title El Shaddai,
“God Almighty” also signifies that the blessing contained in Genesis 28:3-5
recalls the covenant with Abraham recorded in Genesis 17:1-8.
“Bless” is the verb barakh, which means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.” Therefore, the verb barakh indicates Isaac’s
desire for Jacob that he would be endued with power by the Lord for success,
prosperity, fecundity (offspring in great numbers) and longevity.”
Like his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac, the Lord would bless Jacob
in the sense that the Lord would multiply his descendants so that his posterity was
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
39
great in number both, racially and spiritually and multiply his possessions and
livestock and prosper him financially.
Isaac’s desire for Jacob that the Lord would make Jacob “fruitful” means that
the Lord would give Jacob the capacity to be prolific in that he would be the
progenitor of a multitude of children in both a biological and spiritual sense. His
desire for Jacob that the Lord would make him fruitful and multiply him refers to
the Lord enduing Jacob and his descendants with the ability to be prolific in terms
of posterity.
The expression “a company of peoples” refers to a community of nations that
will originate from Jacob and echoes the Lord’s promise to his grandfather
Abraham that he would become “the father of a multitude of nations” (Genesis
17:4-5) and “the father of nations” (Genesis 17:6).
The Lord’s promise to Abraham to make him “the father of a multitude of
nations” and Isaac’s desire that the Lord would make Jacob a “company of
peoples” would be fulfilled in a two-fold sense: (1) Biological (2) Spiritual.
The promise to make Abraham a father or progenitor of many nations was
fulfilled in a “biological” sense through: (1) Hagar where he is the progenitor of
the Ishmaelites (Gen. 17:20; 21:13; 25:12-18) (2) Through Keturah, the Midianites
and others (Gen. 25:1-4) (3) Through Isaac and Rebekah, the Edomites (Gen.
25:23; 36:1-43). This is all substantiated by the genealogies of Keturah (Gen. 25:14), Ishmael (Gen. 25:12-18) and Edom (Gen. 36).
In a “biological” or “racial” sense, the company of peoples that would originate
from Jacob was the nation of Israel and in a “spiritual” sense the company of
peoples would be all those who exercise faith alone in Christ alone who would be
composed of all nations and races, both male and female, slave and freeman.
The Lord’s promise to make Abraham a father or progenitor of many nations
was fulfilled and continues to be fulfilled in a “spiritual” sense through those
individuals who exercised faith alone in Christ alone (John 3:1-7; 1 Cor. 12:13;
Gal. 3:26-28). This is how the Lord’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3 that in
him “all the families of the earth would be blessed” would be accomplished.
In the same way, that Abraham became a father in a “spiritual” sense to those
individuals who exercised faith in Christ so also Jacob would become the father in
a “spiritual” sense to all those who exercised faith in Christ.
Genesis 28:4 “May He also give you the blessing of Abraham, to you and to
your descendants with you that you may possess the land of your sojournings,
which God gave to Abraham.” (NASB95)
By making this statement, Isaac is agreeing with the Lord that Jacob is the
rightful heir and will inherit the privileges, responsibilities, promises and blessings
of the Abrahamic Covenant.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
40
“The blessing of Abraham” refers to the fact that Jacob would inherit the
promises, privileges, responsibilities and blessings of the covenant that the Lord
established with Abraham, which are recorded Genesis 12:2-3, 7; 13:14-17; 15:1-6,
18; 17:1-8; 22:15-18; 24:7.
The “Abrahamic” covenant included not only “personal” (Isaac and land of
Canaan) and “national” (Israel) promises to Abraham but also contained the
“universal” promise of eternal salvation to all mankind through faith in Jesus
Christ who is a descendant of Isaac, the son of Abraham and Sarah.
“The blessing of Abraham” also means that Jacob would be in the line of
Christ, the Promised Seed.
The possession of the land refers to the “Palestinian” Covenant, which was a
confirmation and enlargement of the original “Abrahamic” covenant and amplified
the land features of the “Abrahamic” covenant (Gen. 13:14-15; 15:18). The
“Palestinian” Covenant stipulated that the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob who exercise faith alone in Christ alone would not only come into permanent
possession of the land of Canaan but also most of the land in Turkey, East Africa,
Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and Red Sea, Syria, Iraq, Jordan. The boundaries of
this land grant are on the Mediterranean, Aegean Sea, Euphrates River and the Nile
River (See Genesis 15:18).
The Lord promises that this land would be given to Abram’s descendants and
this promise was fulfilled to a certain extent by Israel under Joshua (Josh. 21:4345; cf. 13:1-7) and David and Solomon (1 Kgs. 4:20-25; Neh. 9:8).
The “Palestinian” covenant will have its literal and ultimate fulfillment during
the millennial reign of Christ (Isa. 11:11-12; Jer. 31-37; Ezek. 34:11-16; Hos. 1:1011; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Micah 4:6-7; Zeph. 3:14-20; Zech. 8:4-8).
Genesis 28:5 Then Isaac sent Jacob away, and he went to Paddan-aram to
Laban, son of Bethuel the Aramean, the brother of Rebekah, the mother of
Jacob and Esau. (NASB95)
The journey to be taken by Jacob to Paddan Aram would be the same one taken
by Eliezer to secure a bride for Isaac and would be approximately a seven hundred
mile journey. Jacob’s name is listed first followed by Esau to demonstrate that both
Isaac and Rebekah are now unified in their recognition that Jacob will receive the
blessings of the birthright and the promises, privileges, responsibilities and
blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant and not Esau. Esau’s name is listed in order
to establish a smooth transition with the information about Esau recorded in
Genesis 28:6-9.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
41
Chapter Five: Jacob Receives Direct Revelation from the Lord
Genesis 28:10-13 records Jacob’s departure from Beersheba. In this passage we
see Jacob receiving direct revelation from the preincarnate Christ who reconfirms
to him the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant and reassures him of His presence
and protection while in exile in Paddan Aram. Thus far in our study of this chapter,
we have seen in Genesis 28:1-5 that Isaac agrees with Rebekah’s plan to send
Jacob away to her brother Laban in Paddan Aram in order to secure a wife for
Jacob.
Her real reason for sending Jacob away was to protect him from Esau’s plot to
kill him and not really to secure a bride for Isaac. This is clear since Rebekah did
not provide Jacob with money and materials to give to Laban her brother, which
would constitute the “price” to secure a bride.
Evidently, Isaac assumed that Rebekah would see to it that she would provide
Jacob everything he would need to secure a bride since Jacob was her favorite. His
assumption proved wrong and costly since Rebekah never sees Jacob again.
Rebekah’s conspiracy to deceive her husband Isaac so that he would bless
Jacob her favorite rather than Esau his favorite son, would come back to haunt her.
By not seeing Jacob again she has reaped what she has sowed.
Genesis 28:10 Then Jacob departed from Beersheba and went toward
Haran. (NASB95)
The journey from Beersheba to Haran was approximately a seven hundred mile
journey and was the same one taken by Abraham’s servant Eliezer when he went
to secure a bride for Isaac among Abraham’s relatives.
Genesis 28:11 He came to a certain place and spent the night there, because
the sun had set; and he took one of the stones of the place and put it under his
head, and lay down in that place. (NASB95)
What a difference a day makes. Not too long ago we saw Jacob living under the
comfort and protection of his parents’ tents but now we see that this has been
replaced by a rock.
Up to this point in his life, Jacob had spent most of his life as a homebody,
living in the family home at Beersheba (Genesis 22:19; 26:33; 28:10). Now, Jacob
would have to grow up in a hurry since he is about to enter the school of hard
knocks but at the same time will grow closer in his relationship to God.
Back in Beersheba, Esau waits to kill him and ahead of him in Haran, and
unknown to Jacob, Laban waits to exploit him. Bruce K. Waltke commenting on
this passage, writes, “He is situated between a death camp and a hard-labor camp”
(Genesis, A Commentary, page 388, Zondervan).
Jacob is retracing the long and difficult journey that Abraham traveled
approximately one hundred twenty-five years earlier. However, his situation was
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
42
much more difficult than that of his grandfather because back in Beersheba, Esau
waits to kill him and ahead of him in Haran is Laban waiting to cheat him.
The “certain place” in which Jacob camped and spent the night was “Bethel,”
which used to be called “Luz” according to Genesis 28:19. “Bethel” literally
means, “house of God” and is identified with modern Beiten, approximately ten
miles north of Jerusalem, which became one of the two capitals and cult centers of
the northern kingdom and only Jerusalem is mentioned in the Old Testament more
than Bethel.
If you recall, it was near Bethel that Abraham built an altar and worshipped the
Lord in prayer just before and after his ill advised trip to Egypt with Sarah (See
Genesis 12:8; 13:3, 4). Bethel would be the place that Jacob would later return to
from his exile according to Genesis 35:1. It would become to him a lifelong
memorial of God’s promises to him and of His ability to fulfill those promises.
The trip from Beersheba to Bethel was approximately a sixty to seventy mile
journey north and was very difficult and arduous journey since it was over rough,
mountainous country.
In the Scriptures, sunset symbolizes distress and adversity (See Genesis 15:12,
17; 19:1) whereas sunrise symbolizes deliverance from God. The setting sun
symbolizes the beginning of Jacob’s dark journey to Paddan Aram where he will
struggle with humans and with God but will prevail whereas the “day-break” for
his soul will not come until the end of his twenty-year exile (See Genesis 32:26).
The terrain in Bethel is limestone and so there were plenty of stones to choose
from. Jacob decided to use one of these stones as a pillow to rest his head. He was
no doubt feeling alone and forsaken and was feeling anxious about his future. The
fact that Jacob was by himself sleeping out in the open air using a rock for a pillow
indicates that he was alone with no caravan for protection and did not even have a
tent under which he could rest.
There were no armed servants to protect him against beasts or bandits and he
was not a hunter like Esau, which would have enabled him to live off the land. No
doubt, his mother packed food and supplies for him along with money to purchase
necessities along the way but otherwise from the human perspective and his at the
time, he is alone in a strange and dangerous country. But as he will soon find out,
he is not alone since God is with him and elect angels are protecting the father of
the nation of Israel.
Genesis 28:12 He had a dream, and behold, a ladder was set on the earth
with its top reaching to heaven; and behold, the angels of God were ascending
and descending on it. (NASB95)
In Genesis 28:12-13, the interjection hinneh, “behold, look” is used after the
verb of perception chalam, “to dream” and marks out three images in Jacob’s
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
43
dream: (1) A stairway touching heaven and earth (2) Angels ascending and
descending on the ladder (3) The Lord as Master.
“Ladder” is the noun sullam, which does “not” refer to a ladder but rather to a
broad and high flight of stairs since the latter would be better suited for angels
ascending to and descending from the third heaven.
There were many angels on the staircase with some ascending and others
descending at the same time and so what Jacob sees is a “stairway to heaven.”
“Angel” is the noun mal’akh, which means, “messenger” is used in the Old
Testament with reference to “elect” angels (Gen. 19:1; Ps. 91:11) and men (Deut.
2:26; Josh. 6:17) and of the “preincarnate” Christ (Gen. 22:11; Zech. 3:1). The
context indicates that mal’akh in Genesis 28:12 is a reference to elect angels.
The fact that these angels are ascending to and descending from the throne
room of God indicates that these angels had uninterrupted, continuous
communication with God. The angels were first of all said to be ascending to God
meaning they were coming to God from protecting Jacob. Then, the passage says
that they were descending from the throne room of God to Jacob in order to protect
him. Therefore, unknown to Jacob was that these elect angels had been with Jacob
all the time on this trip.
Also, the fact that these angels were protecting Jacob indicates they were of
course “elect” angels. We have seen in our past studies in the book of Genesis that
the elect angels are employed by God to guard (Genesis 3:24), to communicate
with God’s people (Genesis 18:1) and to protect God’s people (Genesis 19:1-22).
Therefore, the presence of these elect angels would suggest to Jacob that the
preincarnate Christ who appeared to him in this dream at Bethel would also be
present with him through these elect angels. This revelation would be a great
encouragement to Jacob as he made his way into exile.
Also, the Lord wanted Jacob to know that even though he had to flee his home,
he was not leaving the God of Abraham and his father Isaac behind. This vision of
angels would reassure Jacob that God cares for him and was also still accessible to
him even though he had left his parents.
The Lord Jesus uses this incident with Jacob in John 1:51 as an illustration of
the fact that the believer has access to the Father through Him (See John 14:6; Acts
4:12). Therefore, the Lord Jesus is telling Nathaniel that He is the high and broad
staircase that extends from earth to heaven, which implies that He is the
“Mediator” between heaven and earth or in other words, between God and man.
Genesis 28:13 And behold, the LORD stood above it and said, “I am the
LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac; the land on
which you lie, I will give it to you and to your descendants.” (NASB95)
As Jacob laid his head to rest on the stones of Bethel, the Lord appeared to him
in a “theophany,” or “Christophany,” which are theological terms used to refer to
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
44
either a visible or auditory manifestation of the Son of God before His incarnation
in Bethlehem (Gen. 32:29-30; Ex. 3:2; 19:18-20; Josh. 5:13-15; Dan. 3:26). This
theophany or Christophany was in the form of a dream, which was one of the
means by which the Lord appeared to His people prior to His First Advent.
The Lord identifies Himself to Jacob as “the Lord, the God of your father
Abraham and the God of Isaac” in order to reassure Jacob that he will be
protected by Him.
Jacob Receives Reconfirmation of the Promises of Abrahamic Covenant
In Genesis 28:13-15, we will see Jacob receiving from the Lord reconfirmation
of the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant and reassurance that the Lord would
protect and prosper him in exile in Paddan Aram.
Genesis 28:13 And behold, the LORD stood above it and said, “I am the
LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac; the land on
which you lie, I will give it to you and to your descendants. 14 Your
descendants will also be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to
the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and in you and in
your descendants shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (NASB95)
The promises to Jacob that are recorded in Genesis 28:14 echo the promises
given to his father Isaac, which are recorded in Genesis 26:4. They also echo the
blessing that his father Isaac pronounced upon him before he left home, which is
recorded in Genesis 28:3-4.
The Lord’s promises to both Jacob and Isaac and the blessing of his father
bestowed upon him before he left home were a “reconfirmation” of the promises
made to Abraham that are recorded in Genesis 12:2-3, 7, 13:14-18, 15:1-6, 18,
17:1-8 and 22:17.
In Genesis 26:3-4, Isaac received reconfirmation of the promises of the
Abrahamic Covenant by means of a theophany. In Genesis 26:23-25, the Lord
appeared in a theophany to Isaac at Beersheba and gave him reassurance by
reconfirming to him the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant. In Genesis 28:3-4,
the blessing that Isaac bestowed upon Jacob before he left home echoes the
promises of the Abrahamic covenant. In Genesis 28:14-15, God’s reiteration of the
promises to Abraham and Isaac assures Jacob of God’s faithfulness.
The Lord is reassuring Jacob in his time of adversity that like his grandfather
Abraham and his father Isaac, that he would receive divine protection and would
be prospered by the Lord. The Lord’s reiteration to Jacob of the promises He made
to his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac would reassure Jacob that the very
God who protected his grandfather and father and prospered them would do so for
him. The Lord’s reiteration to Jacob of the promises He made to his grandfather
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
45
and father would confirm to Jacob that he was in the Messianic line. So these
promises to Jacob would reassure him that the God of his grandfather Abraham
and that of his father Isaac would not abandon him.
“Your descendants” refers to Isaac’s “biological” descendants, which would
be the nation of Israel and it refers to his “spiritual” descendants, which would be
anyone, Jew or Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ as their Savior.
In a “near” sense “Your descendants” refers the nation of Israel (saved and
unsaved) and in a “far” sense it refers to saved Israel during the millennial reign of
Christ.
The comparative clause “like the dust of the earth” echoes the Lord’s
promises to Abraham in Genesis 13:10 to multiply his descendants “as the dust of
the earth” and “as the sand on the seashore” in Genesis 22:17 as well as the
promise to Isaac in Genesis 26:4 to multiply his descendants “as the dust of the
earth.”
The comparative clause “like the dust of the earth” drives the point home to
Jacob regarding the Lord’s promise to greatly multiply his descendants and would
indicate quite clearly to him that the Lord has a plan for his life and would give
him assurance during his time of adversity!
The prophecy that Jacob’s descendants would be as the dust of the earth in a
“near” sense was fulfilled in the days of Solomon (see 1 Kings 4:20) and will be
fulfilled in a “far” sense during the millennial reign of Christ (see Hosea 1:10).
Like his grandfather Abraham, Jacob receives these promises of numerous
descendants while he was childless. In fact, at this time, he wasn’t even married!
The Lord’s promise to Isaac that he “will spread out to the west and to the
east and to the north and to the south” echoes the Lord’s promise to his
grandfather Abraham that is recorded in Genesis 13:14-15 and pertains to the
“Palestinian Covenant.
The Lord’s promise to Jacob that he and his descendants would spread over the
land of Canaan would reassure him that he would be returning to Canaan. The
Lord is promising Jacob that He would bring him back to Canaan even though he
is fleeing from it at this particular time.
“Spread out” is the verb parats, which is a military term meaning “to break
out” and implies that the descendants of Jacob who would be the nation of Israel
would through military conquest take possession of the land of Canaan. This
military conquest of the land of Canaan was accomplished to a certain extent in
Israel’s history under Joshua. But it will find its ultimate fulfillment when the Lord
Jesus Christ at His Second Advent who at that time will destroy anti-Christ, the
false prophet, and the Gentile armies surrounding Israel during the Tribulation
period (aka Daniel’s 70th week) and will establish His millennial reign.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
46
The Lord’s promise to Jacob that in him, “all the families of the earth be
blessed” is a “universal” promise and indicates that Jacob would be in the
Messianic line meaning that the Lord Jesus Christ in His human nature would
descend from him.
The promise “in your descendants shall all the families of the earth be
blessed” should be translated “in your Seed or Descendant all the families of the
earth shall be blessed” since the word for “descendants” in the Hebrew text is in
the singular making the promise Messianic. This promise is a “reconfirmation” of
the “universal” promise the Lord made to Abraham, which is recorded in Genesis
22:18.
The Lord statement in Genesis 22:18 that “in your seed (Christ) all the
nations of the earth will be blessed” and the promise to Jacob in Genesis 28:14
that “in Your Seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed” echoes the
Lord’s promise in Genesis 18:18. It is an enlargement upon the Lord’s promise to
Abraham in Genesis 12:3 that in Abraham “all the families of the earth will be
blessed.”
Galatians 3:8-16 reveals that the promises in Genesis 18:18, “in (Abraham) all
the nations of the earth will be blessed,” Genesis 22:18, “in your seed (Christ)
all the nations of the earth will be blessed,” Genesis 26:4, “by your descendants
all the nations of the earth shall be blessed,” Genesis 28:14, “in Your Seed
shall all the families of the earth be blessed” refers to the Lord Jesus Christ who
would bring salvation to the Gentile nations through faith in Him.
Jacob Receives Personal Promises from the Lord
Genesis 28:15 records the “personal” promises that the Lord made to Jacob.
Genesis 28:15 “Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go,
and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done
what I have promised you.” (NASB95)
The Lord’s promise to Jacob that “I am with you” echoes the promise the Lord
made to his father Isaac “I will be with you” recorded in Genesis 26:3 and is a
guarantee to Jacob of the Lord’s presence in his life.
The Lord’s promise “I will keep you wherever you go” guarantees Jacob
divine protection while he is abroad.
These guarantees of the divine presence and protection would encourage Jacob
and calm his fears while being exploited by his uncle Laban and while hiding from
his brother Esau who was seeking to kill him.
The Lord’s promise “I will bring you back to this land” is the Lord’s
guarantee of a “homecoming” to Jacob in that He will bring Jacob back to the land
of Canaan.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
47
The Lord’s promise that “I will never leave you” guarantees Jacob that the
Lord would be present with him and would protect and preserve him while he lived
abroad with his uncle Laban.
The Lord’s promise “for I will not leave you until I have done what I have
promised you” does “not” mean that God’s protection of Jacob will end some day
but rather that the Lord’s presence and protection will outlast Jacob’s exile in
Paddan Aram since the promises given to Jacob are eternal in nature.
All the promises that the Lord made to Jacob that are recorded in Genesis
28:13-15 reassured Jacob that the Lord had a plan for his life.
Jacob’s First Response to the Dream
In Genesis 28:16-17, we have Jacob’s first response to the dream, which was to
worship the Lord with his lips.
Genesis 28:16 Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the
LORD is in this place, and I did not know it.” (NASB95)
The fact that the Lord “appeared” to Jacob is a “theophany,” or “Christophany,
which are theological terms used to refer to either a visible or auditory
manifestation of the Son of God before His incarnation in Bethlehem (Gen. 32:2930; Ex. 3:2; 19:18-20; Josh. 5:13-15; Dan. 3:26).
“Lord” is the proper noun Yahweh, which is the covenant name of God
indicating that Jacob had a covenant relationship with God. The term “Lord” also
emphasizes the “immanency” of God meaning that the Lord was involving Himself
in and concerning Himself with and intervening in the life of Jacob and would
bless him in fulfillment of His promises to him.
Just a few hours before, Jacob was feeling alone and abandoned and isolated
and forsaken but with this theophany and divine promises, he is now aware that he
was never alone and that the God of his grandfather and father was present with
him.
According to Genesis 28:19 “this place” was called “Luz” but was renamed by
Jacob to “Bethel” according to Genesis 28:19. “Bethel” literally means, “house of
God” and is identified with modern Beiten, approximately ten miles north of
Jerusalem, which became one of the two capitals and cult centers of the northern
kingdom and only Jerusalem is mentioned in the Old Testament more than Bethel.
If you recall, it was near Bethel that Abraham built an altar and worshipped the
Lord in prayer just before and after his ill advised trip to Egypt with Sarah (See
Genesis 12:8; 13:3, 4). Bethel would be the place that Jacob would later return to
from his exile according to Genesis 35:1. It would become to him a lifelong
memorial of God’s promises to him and of His ability to fulfill those promises.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
48
Genesis 28:17 He was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is
none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” (NASB95)
The Hebrew term translated “fear” and “awesome” is the verb yare, which
denotes the concept of worshipping God and does “not” refer to being afraid as a
result of a threat to one’s life but rather it means, “to have reverence and respect”
for the Lord and to be in “awe” of Him and expresses Jacob’s “wonder” towards
Him. Therefore, we see that Jacob is responding to the theophany and divine
promises by having “reverence” and “respect” for God and is in “awe” of Him and
is expressing his “wonder” towards Him.
These four English words, “reverence,” “respect,” “awe,” and “wonder” convey
the idea behind the verb yare in Genesis 28:17 and also express the concept of
worshipping the Lord.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines the noun “reverence”:
“A feeling or attitude of deep respect tinged with awe; veneration.”
Therefore, paraphrasing this definition we would say that Jacob’s response to
the theophany and divine promises was to possess an attitude of deep respect and
awe for the Lord.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines the noun “respect”:
“esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or
trait, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or trait.”
Jacob’s response to the theophany and divine promises was to esteem the
excellence of the Person of God as manifested through His personal qualities or
attributes such as love, faithfulness, mercy, compassion, justice, righteousness,
truth, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, immutability, and sovereignty.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines the noun “awe”: “an
overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration, fear, etc. produced by that which is
grand, sublime, extremely powerful or the like.”
Jacob’s response to the theophany and divine promises was to possess an
overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration for the Lord, which was produced
by the vision of angels and theophany and divine promises in his dream.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines the noun “wonder”:
“to be filled with admiration, amazement or awe; marvel.”
Jacob’s response to the theophany and divine promises was one of being filled
with admiration, amazement and awe.
Warren Wiersbe writes, “True wonder reaches right into your heart and mind
and shakes you up. It not only has depth, it has value; it enriches your life. Wonder
is not cheap amusement that brings a smile to your face. It is an encounter with
reality, with God, which brings awe to your heart. You’re overwhelmed with an
emotion that is a mixture of gratitude, adoration, reverence, fear-and love. You’re
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
49
not looking for explanations; you’re lost in the wonder of God” (Real Worship,
page 43, Baker Books).
Therefore, paraphrasing this comment by Wiersbe on wonder we would say that
Jacob’s response to the theophany and divine promises reached right into his heart
and shook him up and enriched his life. Jacob’s encounter with the Lord brought
awe to his heart and overwhelmed him with an emotion that was a mixture of
gratitude, adoration, reverence, fear and love for the God of his grandfather
Abraham and his father Isaac. Jacob wasn’t looking for explanations since he was
lost in the wonder of God.
Therefore, the phrase “He (Jacob) was afraid” and Jacob’s statement “How
awesome is this place” expresses the fact that Jacob is worshipping God in the
sense that he is manifesting an attitude of deep reverence, respect and awe of the
Lord for revealing Himself in the dream and giving him reassurance.
Jacob’s statement “How awesome is this place” indicates that he is
worshipping the Lord. Worship is adoring contemplation of God as He has been
revealed by the Holy Spirit in the Person of Christ and in the Scriptures and is also
the loving ascription of praise to God for what He is, both in Himself and in His
ways and is the bowing of the soul and spirit in deep humility and reverence before
Him.
Warren Wiersbe defines worship, “Worship is the believer’s response of all that
they are –mind, emotions, will and body-to what God is and says and does. This
response has its mystical side in subjective experience and its practical side in
objective obedience to God’s revealed will. Worship is a loving response that’s
balanced by the fear of the Lord, and it is a deepening response as the believer
comes to know God better” (Real Worship, 26).
If we paraphrase Wiersbe’s definition, we could say the following: Jacob is
worshipping the Lord in that he is responding in his mind (his thoughts), emotions
(excitement), and body (rising early and setting up a pillar to memorialize the
theophany) to what God is (omnipotent and sovereign and faithful) and did in
revealing Himself to Jacob by means of a theophany and what the Lord said in His
promises to Jacob.
Genesis 28:17 He was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is
none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” (NASB95)
The expression “house of God” anticipates the name Jacob is about to give to
the place, which according to Genesis 28:19 is “Bethel.” The expression “the gate
of heaven” appears only once in the Bible, here in Genesis 28:17. “The house of
God” refers to the abode of God, which is located in the third heaven and “the
gate of heaven” is the place where Jacob entered heaven in his dream.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
50
The original languages of Scripture teach that there are three levels of heaven:
(1) first heaven: Earth’s atmosphere. (2) second heaven: Stellar universe. (3) third
heaven: Abode of God, the angels and the dead believers.
This multiplicity of heavens is indicated in Hebrews 4:14 where our Lord at His
ascension is said to have “passed through the heavens” (accusative masculine
plural noun ouranos). The first and second heaven are not specifically mentioned
but the third heaven is.
2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago -whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God
knows -- such a man was caught up to the third heaven. (NASB95)
Logically speaking, it is evident that there cannot be a third heaven without also
a first and second heaven.
Although it is true that the Scriptures teach that “the heaven of heavens cannot
contain God” (1 Kings 8:27) and that God is omnipresent in the universe,
nevertheless, they clearly affirm that the third heaven is in a particular way the
abode of the Trinity (Gen. 14:19, 22; 23:3, 7; 1 Kings 8:30, 49; 2 Chron. 6:21, 30;
Neh. 1:4-5; 2:4, 20; Psa. 11:4; 20:6; 33:14; 103:19; Isa. 63:5; 66:1; Matt. 5:34;
Luke 16:9; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:11; 7:56; 2 Cor. 12:2; Heb. 2:10; Rev. 19:14).
The present third heaven is also the abode of the elect angels as well as all
believers throughout human history in every dispensation and is the present
location of the appeal trial of Satan and all the fallen angels before the Supreme
Court of heaven.
The Lord Jesus Christ during His First Advent repeatedly stated that He came
from heaven (John 3:13, 27, 31; 6:38, 41-42, 50-51, 58) and is in heaven now
seated at the right hand of God (Psa. 110:1; Acts 2:33; Rom. 8:34; Col. 3:1; Heb.
1:3, 13; 1 Pet. 3:22).
The Lord Jesus Christ is the Creator of the three levels of heaven.
Genesis 1:1 In eternity past, God created out of nothing the heavens and
the earth. (Author’s Translation)
The third heaven is the place where the resurrected Christ conducts the
government of the kingdom of God as the ruler of all creation (Psa. 110:1-2; Matt.
22:44; 26:64; Mark 12:36; 14:62; 16:19; Luke 20:42; 22:69; Acts 2:33-34; 7:5556; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 3:20-22; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; Rev. 4-5).
Heaven is served by innumerable angels, their hosts and families and is the
sphere of their existence (Matt. 18:10; Mark 12:25; 13:32; Eph. 3:15), coming
from heaven and returning to it either individually (Matt. 28:2; Luke 22:43), or in
hosts (Luke 2:15).
Also, Satan and the fallen angels still have access to heaven because of their
appeal trial (Job 1; Zech. 3; Rev. 12:7-9).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
51
Old Testament saints are now located in the third heaven with the Lord Jesus
Christ as a result of His trip to a compartment of Hades called Paradise (Luke
23:43; Eph. 4:8-10).
The Lord Jesus Christ will create a new heavens and a new earth for the eternal
state, which immediately follows the Great White Throne Judgment at the
conclusion of the appeal trial, which is the conclusion of human history itself (See
Revelation 20:11-21).
In fact, Hebrews 1:10-11 quoting Psalm 102:25-27 states that the present
heaven and earth “will perish...will become old as a garment” and “as a mantle”
the Lord Jesus Christ “will roll them up...as a garment they (the present
heavens and earth) will be changed.”
The new heaven and new earth will be the real place of perfect happiness, peace
and righteousness because no form of evil and unrighteousness will be allowed
into it (2 Pet. 3:10-13; Rev. 21:1-8). The presence of evil in the universe as a result
of Satan and the fallen angels rebellion resulting in the appeal trial require that the
Lord Jesus Christ create a new heavens and a new earth.
Jacob’s Second, Third and Fourth Response to the Dream
Genesis 28:18-19 records Jacob’s second, third and fourth responses to the
dream. His second response was to construct a pillar to memorialize his encounter
with the preincarnate Christ.
Also, in this passage, we see Jacob’s third response, which was to worship the
Lord by pouring oil on top of the pillar, which expressed his dedication, devotion,
consecration and gratitude towards the Lord. His fourth response is also contained
in this passage, which was to worship the Lord by naming the place where he
encountered Him.
Also, Genesis 28:20-22 records Jacob’s fifth and final response to the dream,
which was to make a vow, which expressed for the first time his faith in the Lord.
Genesis 28:18 So Jacob rose early in the morning, and took the stone that
he had put under his head and set it up as a pillar and poured oil on its top.
(NASB95)
The next act of worship that Jacob performs is that he erects a limestone pillar
to memorialize the Lord appearing to him and giving him assurance that he would
inherit the blessings, promises, responsibilities, and privileges of the Abrahamic
Covenant and would return to the land of Canaan. As an expression of his worship
towards the Lord, Jacob sets up a memorial to mark the spot where the Lord
appeared to him and made promises to reassure him of his safe return to the land of
Canaan.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
52
“Pillar” is the noun matstsevah, which denotes a single upright stone pillar set
up as a monument and a memorial to mark the spot where the Lord had appeared
to him and made promises to him.
The terrain in Bethel is limestone and so Jacob takes the stone he used for a
pillow and sets it up as a monument, a memorial to mark the spot that the Lord
appeared to him in a dream.
Notice that Jacob did not build an altar as Abraham had done since he had no
animals to sacrifice. This would be the first of three times that Jacob would erect a
pillar to memorialize an event.
In Genesis 31:45, Jacob erected a memorial a second time to stand as a witness
to the oral contract between him and his uncle Laban and called it “Galeed,” which
is the Hebrew term for “witness heap.”
In Genesis 35:14, after returning from his exile in Paddan Aram, Jacob erected
a memorial a third time to mark the occasion when the Lord appeared to him again
and fulfilled His promises to bring him back to the land of Canaan..
Memorials like the one set up by Jacob were set up to recall divine visitations
so that others might learn about God when they ask, “What do these stones mean?”
(See Joshua 4:6).
The third act of worship that Jacob performs is that he pours oil on top of the
limestone pillar. The pouring of oil on top of the limestone was an expression of
Jacob’s dedication, devotion, consecration and gratitude to the Lord and
recognition of the gracious promises that the Lord made to him in the dream (See
Exodus 30:25-29; Leviticus 8:10-12).
The parallel structure in Hebrew text between the two sections, Genesis 28:1013 and 16-19, shows that the worship was a response to the vision. For example,
the Hebrew noun matstsevah, “pillar” forms a word play with the Hebrew
mutstsav, “set on,” which appears in Genesis 28:12 and nitstsav, “stood,” which
appears in Genesis 28:13. Mutstsav is the hophal participle form of the verb natsav
and nitstsav is the niphil participle form of the same verb.
There is also another wordplay where the Hebrew noun re’sh appears in
Genesis 28:12 for the “top” of the stairway and then again in Genesis 28:18 for the
“top” of Jacob’s pillar, linking the memorial with the vision in his dream. These
parallels demonstrate that Jacob’s miniature altar represented the vision.
Genesis 28:19 He called the name of that place Bethel; however, previously
the name of the city had been Luz. 20 Then Jacob made a vow, saying, “If
God will be with me and will keep me on this journey that I take, and will give
me food to eat and garments to wear, 21 and I return to my father's house in
safety, then the LORD will be my God.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
53
At the beginning of Genesis 28:20, the Hebrew text literally means that “Jacob
vowed a vow” since the text contains the verb nadhar, “to make a vow” and its
cognate noun nedher, “vow.”
The verb connotes the act of voluntarily and verbally dedicating and devoting
oneself to the service of the Lord whereas the noun form of the word represents the
thing offered to fulfill a vow.
Jacob’s vow is the longest vow in the Old Testament. Vows were not contracts
or limited agreements but rather they were verbal and voluntary acts of submission
to the Lord and the reorientation of one’s life to meet the Lord’s standards.
Therefore, we see that Jacob’s vow will reorient his journey.
Remember, he left home because of Esau’s desire to kill him but now Jacob’s
journey takes on a whole new different meaning since God has revealed to him that
He has a plan for his life. Since the Lord has revealed Himself to Jacob through the
theophany and guaranteed him divine protection and prosperity while in exile in
Paddan Aram, Jacob has committed himself to living according to the standards of
the living God. Therefore, we see that Jacob has had a life changing experience. He
went from being on the run and in doubt about his future to possessing assurance
that God had a plan for his life and would make him successful.
“If” is the conditional particle `im, which introduces the protasis of a first class
condition, which indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument. It
should “not” be translated simply “if” since that would indicate that Jacob is
striking a bargain with the Lord. The context indicates that Jacob is not striking a
bargain with the Lord since he has already responded to the divine revelation by
worshipping the Lord with his lips, erecting a memorial, pouring oil on the top of
the pillar expressing his dedication and devotion to the Lord and naming the place
“house of God.”
Therefore, the conditional particle should be translated either “since” you will
be with me and will protect me on this journey that I take and will give me food to
eat and garments to wear and I return to my father’s house in safety, and I believe
you that I will, then, the Lord will be my God. Or, the word can be translated “if
and let us say for the sake of argument” that you will be with me and will protect
me on this journey that I take and will give me food to eat and garments to wear
and I return to my father’s house in safety, “and I believe you that I will,” then, the
Lord will be my God.
Genesis 28:22 “This stone, which I have set up as a pillar, will be God's
house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You.” (NASB95)
The tithe Jacob proposed to give the Lord was a form of taxation levied by
rulers and became a definite obligation of the Mosaic Law to maintain the armies
of Israel, the tabernacle or temple worship (Leviticus 27:30; Numbers 18:21, 24).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
54
Jacob proposes to give this tithe to the Lord because he now recognizes the Lord’s
authority over him and does this willingly rather than from obligation.
Also, this tithe that Jacob proposes to give the Lord would provide the means to
build and maintain the altar he would build, which the pillar began. Genesis 35:1-7
records that Jacob fulfilled his vow to build an altar at Bethel.
Church age believers are “never” commanded to tithe but are to give to the
Lord like Jacob, willingly and in thanksgiving rather than from obligation (cf. 2
Corinthians 9).
The fact that Jacob proposes to give the Lord a tenth of all that the Lord
prospers him with indicates that Jacob recognized the Lord’s authority and rank
and expressed his appreciation and gratefulness to the Lord for guaranteeing his
safe return home.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
55
Chapter Six: Jacob’s Stay with Laban
Jacob Meets Rachel
Genesis 29:1 records Jacob excited and confident about his future after
encountering a vision of angels and the preincarnate Christ who revealed the
Father’s plan for his life. God’s plan for Jacob’s life involved inheriting the
privileges, promises, responsibilities and blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant as
well as carrying on the Messianic line.
Genesis 28:10 records Jacob leaving Beersheba and Genesis 29:1-12 records
him arriving in the city of Nahor where his uncle Laban lived, which is called in
Genesis 29:1, “the land of the sons of the east.” The journey from Beersheba to
Haran was approximately a seven hundred mile journey.
Now, we must remember when approaching Genesis 29 that initially Jacob was
running from Esau, which was the real reason why his mother sent him to her
brother Laban. The reason Rebekah gave Isaac for sending away Jacob was to
secure a wife for him but this was a lie since she did not give Jacob the bride price
needed to secure a bride. In fact, Genesis 28:44 records that Rebekah was planning
on Jacob being a way for only a “few days.”
So initially when Jacob set out on his journey to see his uncle Laban, he was not
intending to find a wife for himself. But rather he was simply looking for a place to
hide out, biding his time, far away from the wrath of his brother Esau who he just
took advantage of. However, the purpose of his journey changed when the Lord
appeared to him at Bethel and made promises to him of numerous descendants
(See Genesis 28:10-15).
Therefore, Jacob is seeking a wife in order to fulfill the Lord’s promise of
numerous progeny. As we noted the excuse that Rebekah gave Isaac for sending
away Jacob to her relatives to get a wife was used as a pretext to protect Jacob
from Esau. What originally was the false purpose for Jacob’s journey has become
the real purpose of the trip as a result of Jacob encountering the Lord at Bethel.
Also, remember, we saw that in Genesis 28:2-4, Isaac stipulated to Jacob that
he was to take a wife from among the daughters of Rebekah’s brother, Laban. This
has become the purpose of Jacob’s trip now that the Lord has appeared to him at
Bethel and confirmed his father’s stipulation.
At this point in his life, Jacob is forty years of age.
Genesis 29:1 Then Jacob went on his journey, and came to the land of the
sons of the east. (NASB95)
Jacob finally arrives in the city of Nahor or Paddan Aram in what is now known
as northern Syria, which is near the city of Haran and is part of a territory called
“Mesopotamia,” which extends east to the Persian Gulf.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
56
The expression “the land of the sons of the east” is a general designation for
the territory east of Palestine and suggests both that Jacob is unaware of his precise
whereabouts and is in a place of danger.
The expression “Jacob went on his journey” in the Hebrew text literally
means, “Jacob lifted up his feet” and is a unique expression, which means, “to put
into action (his original journey).” This expression indicates that Jacob went on his
journey encouraged and joyful, after the Lord appeared to him at Bethel and gave
him reassuring promises and now confident that the Lord had a plan for his life.
This expression indicates that Jacob had a life changing experience at Bethel
where he encountered a vision of elect angels, the preincarnate Christ, receiving
promises from Him that revealed the Father’s plan for his life, which was to inherit
the promises, privileges, responsibilities and blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant
and to carry on the line of Christ.
After his encounter with the Lord at Bethel, Jacob went from being a scared,
lonely, isolated individual with doubts about his future to an individual who was
courageous, confident about the future and God’s love for him, aware that he is not
alone. His doubts about his future have been replaced by confidence in the future
because he has encountered the living God.
Genesis 29:2 He looked, and saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks
of sheep were lying there beside it, for from that well they watered the flocks.
Now the stone on the mouth of the well was large. (NASB95)
The expression “He looked and saw (hinneh, “behold”)” brings the reader
alongside of Jacob, capturing the scene for us emphasizing the parallel between
Jacob arriving seeking a wife for himself and Eliezer seeking a bride for Isaac who
was of course, Rebekah.
Genesis 29:3 When all the flocks were gathered there, they would then roll
the stone from the mouth of the well and water the sheep, and put the stone
back in its place on the mouth of the well. (NASB95)
“Cisterns and sometimes wells were covered in by a broad and thick flat stone
with a round hole cut in the middle, which in its turn is often covered with a heavy
stone, which it requires tow or three men to roll away, and which is removed only
a particular times” (S.R. Driver, The Book of Genesis, London: Methuen 1916,
page 269, cited by Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis, A Commentary, Zondervan, page
400).
The large stone covering the well indicated that the well was private property.
The large stone would not only keep the well clean and to protect against anyone
accidentally falling into it but it would also restrict the use of the well to a select
group of shepherds who were authorized by the owner of the well to move it.
The fact that Genesis 29:2 describes the stone as being large emphasizes
Jacob’s great strength since Genesis 29:10 records him moving it all by himself
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
57
without any help from the shepherds after being told that Laban’s daughter Rachel
was arriving with her flock.
Nahum Sarna, “The prominence given to ‘the stone” in this episode provides a
link with the important stone of Bethel, a reminder that the God who there
promised Jacob protection now endows the weary fugitive with superhuman
strength” (The JPS Torah Commentary, The Jewish Publication Society, page
202).
The stone that Jacob used as a pillow became a part of his encounter with the
Lord and this stone plays a role in his meeting his wife Rachel. The former rock
speaks of God’s presence in the life of Jacob whereas this stone speaks of the
power of God who is able to direct him providentially to his wife and help him
fulfill the Lord’s will for his life to be the progenitor of the nation of Israel and to
carry on the Messianic line.
Genesis 29:4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers, where are you from?” And
they said, “We are from Haran.” (NASB95)
Jacob addresses these shepherds as “my brothers,” which is broad Hebrew
term and is used by Jacob as a general greeting meaning, “my friends.” His
question “where are you from” indicates he does not know that he has arrived at
his destination.
Genesis 29:5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?”
And they said, “We know him.” (NASB95)
Jacob describes his uncle Laban as the “son of Nahor” even though he was the
grandson of Nahor because in the Hebrew and Aramaic languages there is no
specific word for grandson so that the word “son” can refer to any descendant
down the line.
Jacob asks the shepherds if they knew his uncle Laban even though they were
from Haran since Laban lived in the city of Nahor, which was located near Haran.
Genesis 29:6 And he said to them, “Is it well with him?” And they said, “It
is well, and here is Rachel his daughter coming with the sheep.” (NASB95)
In typical oriental style, Jacob asked about Laban’s health. Then, we see Rachel
providentially arriving on the scene with a flock of sheep just like Jacob’s mother
Rebekah arrived at the well to meet Abraham’s servant Eliezer who was
commissioned by Abraham to secure a wife for Jacob’s father Isaac (See Genesis
24).
“Rachel” is the proper noun rachel and in the Hebrew means, “ewe” meaning
the female of the sheep, especially of the mature.
Genesis 29:17 describes Rachel as being beautiful in both form and face. Unlike
Abraham’s servant Eliezer who tested the character of Rebekah, Jacob does not do
so. From what is related to us concerning her character there does not seem much
to claim any high degree of admiration and esteem. In a marked manner Rachel's
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
58
character shows the traits of her family, cunning and covetousness, so evident in
Laban, Rebekah and Jacob.
Though a believer in the true God (30:6, 8, 22), she was yet given to the
superstitions of her country, the worshipping of the teraphim, etc. (31:19). The
futility of her efforts in resorting to self-help and superstitious expedients, the love
and stronger faith of her husband (35:2-4), were the providential means of
purifying her character.
Although Rachel was Jacob's favorite wife, the line of David and the Messianic
line passed through Rachel’s sister, Leah and her son Judah and not Rachel. Leah
bore Jacob six sons, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulon and one
daughter Dinah (See Genesis 29:32-35; 30:17-21) whereas Rachel bore only two
children, Joseph and Benjamin and she died giving in Bethlehem giving birth to
the latter.
The Word of God indicates that Leah and not Rachel was Jacob’s right woman
as indicating by the following. First of all, when we take into consideration of the
providence of God, which expresses the fact that the world and our lives are not
ruled by chance or fate but by God, we must acknowledge that, in spite of the
deceptiveness of Laban, Leah was Jacob’s wife. Furthermore, it was Leah, not
Rachel, who became the mother of Judah, who was to be the heir through whom
the Messiah would come (cf. 49:8-12).
Also it was Levi, a son of Leah, who provided the priestly line in later years. It
seems noteworthy that both Leah and her handmaid had at least twice the number
of children as compared to Rachel and her maid (cf. 29:31-30:24; 46:15, 18, 22,
25). The firstborn was always to have a double portion and so it would seem Leah
did, so far as children are concerned.
The fifth factor, which reveals the superiority of Leah to Rachel is that Rachel
died at an early age, yet she was the younger sister. When she died, she was buried
on the way to Bethlehem (35:19) and yet when Leah died later, she was buried
with Jacob in the cave at Machpelah (49:31).
Lastly, the Word of God reveals that Jacob chose Rachel based solely upon
looks and did not take into consideration her character as Abraham’s servant
Eliezer did when selecting Rebekah for Isaac.
The fact that Rachel is arriving with a flock of sheep indicates that she was a
shepherdess.
Genesis 29:7 He said, “Behold, it is still high day; it is not time for the
livestock to be gathered. Water the sheep, and go, pasture them.” (NASB95)
The term “high day” refers to noon time. Jacob knew the shepherding business
since he was one himself and therefore knew that noon time was not the time to
gather the livestock so he tells them to water the sheep and go pasture them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
59
Now on the surface, it appears that either the shepherds are lazy or young boys
waiting for adults to move the stone but neither is the case. It appears that Jacob
thought they were lazy as well since it made little sense to him for these shepherds
to be sitting around the well waiting until later to water their sheep when they
could water them now and take them back to pasture for several hours.
The practical thing to do was to water the sheep now and not to wait until later.
Jacob’s question was foolish to the shepherds because he was ignorant of the fact
that the owner of the well had established certain procedures for the use of the
well. Jacob was right that the procedure was impractical but he is ignorant that this
procedure was set by the owner of the well, which he in the end disregards
demonstrating his impatience and lack of respect for the property of others.
The shepherds knew that sheep grew faster grazing on the grassland rather than
standing about the well where the grass had long before been consumed. However,
the well, it seems, was not theirs to be used at their convenience.
In the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, a well was a valuable resource, much
as an oil well would be today. As such, it had to belong to somebody, and that
person would prescribe how and when the well was to be used, and probably at
what price. The agreement between the well owner and the shepherds seems to be
that the well could be used once a day.
The shepherds must first be gathered at the well with their flocks. Then the
owner or his hired servants (“they,” verse 8) would roll the large stone away and
the sheep could be watered, perhaps in the order that the flocks arrived. This would
explain why the shepherds and their flocks were there so early. In this way, what
was most profitable (this is what Jacob’s question was getting at) was not practical.
The owner’s stipulations must be adhered to.
Undoubtedly, the shepherds disliked Jacob since he is a stranger to them who
has just insinuated that they were lazy and was telling them what to do. They were
saying to themselves, “who does this jerk think he is telling us what to do and
insinuating that we are lazy?”
Genesis 29:8 But they said, “We cannot, until all the flocks are gathered,
and they roll the stone from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.”
(NASB95)
The response of the shepherds to Jacob’s command indicates that there was a
local regulation stipulated by the owners (“they”) of the well that the large stone
could not be moved until a certain time in the evening at which time all the flocks
of the area were to be watered in turn, in order of arrival. Apparently, in order to be
the first to water their flocks, shepherds would frequently come in rather early in
the afternoon and there lie awaiting their turn, when they might yet have been out
pasturing their flocks. Those that arrived first would get to water their flocks first
and so some would get in line early.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
60
Genesis 29:9 While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her
father's sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10 When Jacob saw Rachel the
daughter of Laban his mother's brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother's
brother, Jacob went up and rolled the stone from the mouth of the well and
watered the flock of Laban his mother's brother.” (NASB95)
The expression “his mother’s brother” appears three times and links the
incident with the instructions from Isaac (Genesis 27:43; 28:2) and implies that
Rachel is to become Jacob’s wife. Jacob’s reaction in moving the large stone by
himself upon seeing Rachel for the first time not only indicates his great strength
but that this encounter with Rachel was “love at first sight.” He is so excited and
overcome with emotion and filled with adrenaline knowing that the Lord has
providentially led him to one of the daughters of his mother’s brother, Laban that
he single handedly moves the large stone from the well.
Jacob knows that this is no coincidence but that the Lord has fulfilled His
promise to him and has providentially directed him to come to the right place at the
right time to meet who he thinks is his right woman.
Genesis 29:11 Then Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted his voice and wept.
(NASB95)
A kiss was a customary greeting among relatives since in Genesis 29:13, Laban
kisses Jacob upon meeting him. In the Middle East, men are less reserved than men
in the West so it was not unusual for a man to publicly display his emotions as
Jacob does here.
The fact that Jacob kisses Rachel without first identifying himself and weeps
audibly expresses the fact that Jacob is overcome with emotion as a result of seeing
the providence of God at work in his life.
The fact that Jacob moves the large stone by himself upon seeing Rachel and
his kissing her without first identifying himself to her not only indicates that the
Lord is working in his life but also indicates “love at first sight.”
Further confirming this interpretation is that in his first interview with Laban
recorded in Genesis 29:14-20, Jacob agrees to work seven years for Laban as the
“bride-price” so that he can marry Rachel and which seven years were said to be
“like a few days because of his love for her.”
We can be sure that Rachel must have been stunned by this strong, selfconfident and bold stranger who kisses her without identifying himself first.
Genesis 29:12 Jacob told Rachel that he was a relative of her father and
that he was Rebekah's son, and she ran and told her father. (NASB95)
Rachel’s reaction upon hearing Jacob explain that he was her cousin expresses
her great emotion and excitement upon this first encounter with her future husband.
She would have also been excited for her father since Jacob was the son of her
father’s mother or in other words, his nephew.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
61
Undoubtedly, Rachel had heard the stories of his father’s sister, Rebekah,
meeting Abraham’s servant Eliezer at a well and her marriage to Isaac and was
thinking that maybe her marriage would come about in similar fashion.
Jacob Meets Laban
In Genesis 29:13-14, we will see Jacob meeting Laban for the first time and
staying with Laban for a month.
Genesis 29:13 So when Laban heard the news of Jacob his sister's son, he
ran to meet him, and embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his
house. Then he related to Laban all these things. (NASB95)
The name “Laban” means, “white” and is used elsewhere in the Bible (Isa.
24:23; 30:26; cf. Song. 6:10) as a poetic metonym for the moon.
The accounts of Laban are found in Genesis 24 and 29-31 and whose
grandfather was Nahor, Abraham’s brother, and of course his sister was Rebekah
and his daughter was Rachel, the wife of Jacob. Laban lived in the city of Nahor
near Haran along one of the tributaries of the Euphrates River in what is now
modern Syria and his occupation was a sheep and goat herder.
Genesis 24:29-31 gives us some insight into the character of Laban implying
that he was a greedy individual.
Just as the gold jewelry that his sister Rebekah received from Abraham’s
servant Eliezer impressed Laban and attracted his attention as recorded in Genesis
24:30 so the thought of Jacob doing the same and his strength would have attracted
Laban.
The statement that Laban “heard the news of Jacob his sister’s son” means
that Laban was informed of his daughter Rachel’s encounter with Jacob and his
great strength in moving the great stone from the well by himself and watering his
flocks.
This news of Jacob would have impressed Laban since it took several men to
move this large rock. Jacob’s strength would attract his attention because Laban
was always looking to make money. Therefore, he would be thinking of ways to
exploit that strength for his own profit.
Laban runs out to meet Jacob for a couple of reasons. One, Jacob is his sister
Rebekah’s boy and so news of her and her family would have obviously interested
him. Laban hadn’t received any information about his sister since the day she left
home to marry Isaac so he would be interested to see how things have been with
her.
Also, Laban ran to meet Jacob because he is thinking of material gain since he
would recall that years ago, Abraham’s servant Eliezer arrived at his home and
bestowed great wealth on his family in order for Isaac to marry his sister Rebekah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
62
Therefore, in Genesis 29:13, we see that Laban is seeing dollar signs so to speak
since he is hoping that Jacob will have a lot of wealth for him as the bride-price for
one of his daughters just as Abraham’s servant Eliezer did decades before when
came for a bride for Isaac. But Laban would be disappointed in the fact that Jacob
comes to his home without great gifts as Abraham’s servant Eliezer did decades
before as the bride-price so that Isaac could marry Rebekah.
Laban will clearly see and from talking to Jacob that he is on the run and has
come empty handed but he will still find a way to make money off of Jacob. So
right from the beginning the relationship between Jacob and Laban is flawed since
Laban is a greedy individual who lusted after material gain.
The statement “he (Jacob) related to Laban all these things” indicates that
Jacob informed Laban of the circumstances surrounding his visit and providential
encounter with Rachel at the well.
Undoubtedly, Jacob and Laban spoke well into the night with Laban asking
questions. Jacob would have entertained Laban with the story of the deception of
Esau and Isaac by him and his mother to secure the blessing of the birthright. He
would have provided information to Laban about the marriage of his parents and
how the Lord had blessed them as well as information about his grandfather
Abraham.
Also, Jacob would have reported to Laban his encounter with the Lord at Bethel
and that he has a new purpose in life as a result. He would have informed Laban
that after this encounter with the Lord, he was indeed seeking a wife in order to
fulfill the divine promises.
As we noted, initially, Jacob was just biding his time and hiding from Esau until
his anger subsided but the encounter with the Lord at Bethel changed all that. This
report was sufficient for Laban to be convinced that Jacob was who he claimed to
be and, therefore, a blood relative.
Genesis 29:14 Laban said to him, “Surely you are my bone and my flesh.”
And he stayed with him a month. (NASB95)
After Jacob gave his report to Laban, Laban responds to Jacob by saying,
“surely, you are my bone and my flesh,” which was a welcome corresponding to
the English saying, “You are my own flesh and blood” and meant acceptance of
Jacob as a member of Laban’s household.
Jacob stayed with Laban a month, which would be plenty of time to
demonstrate to Laban his great strength. During this month, Jacob would have
undoubtedly helped Laban in the family business by taking care of the flocks,
which would have kept him near Rachel who was a shepherdess. This time spent
with Rachel would have convinced Jacob that she was his right woman and as we
will see, it did. Laban would have also seen that Jacob was a hard worker, which
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
63
he demonstrated by moving the large rock and watering his flocks that Rachel was
tending. He would have thought of ways to exploit this fact.
Also, during this month, Laban would have observed that Jacob was in love
with his daughter Rachel and would seek to exploit this for personal and material
gain.
The fact that Jacob was strong and a good worker would convince Laban that
Jacob would make a fine son-in-law and could stay on to work for him in place of
the traditional bride-price.
This month brought both Laban and Jacob to the conclusion that a continuing
relationship between them could be of mutual advantage.
Jacob Agrees to Work for Laban
Genesis 29:15-20 presents to us the record of Jacob agreeing to work for Laban
for seven years in exchange for being betrothed to Rachel.
Genesis 29:15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my relative,
should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages
be?” (NASB95)
Laban’s question is motivated by his knowledge of several factors. One, Laban
could obviously see that Jacob was in love with his daughter Rachel and the
second was that Jacob did not have the means to pay Laban for the bride-price in
order to marry Rachel.
The “bride-price” refers to the compensation paid to the family of the bride for
the loss of the bride’s presence and services and her potential offspring and would
demonstrate proof to Laban’s family that Rachel would be well cared for by Jacob.
The “bride-price” must not be confused with a “dowry,” since the latter was
provided by the bride’s family whereas the former was provided by the groom.
Laban would know from Jacob’s report that initially Jacob came to visit him
because he was on the run from Esau but his encounter with the Lord has changed
his purpose and now he is seeking a wife. Since Jacob left home simply to avoid
Esau and was not anticipating securing a bride from Laban, he did not have the
financial means to offer Laban as the bride-price for Rachel. So Laban figures that
Jacob’s only alternative would be for Jacob to work for him as the bride-price or
compensation to marry Rachel.
Laban also is reported to not have any sons at this point in the narrative to help
him with his flocks and herds. This is why Rachel was a shepherdess. So the fact
that Laban does not have a man around to help him with his business would have
further motivated him to find a way to have Jacob stay with him. He does not have
to worry about keeping Jacob around since his daughter’s beauty has solved this
problem for him.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
64
Also, Laban exploited the fact that he and Jacob were related since he knew that
Jacob would not mind working for a relative.
Laban’s proposal is very clever. We read in Genesis 29:15: “Laban said to him,
‘Just because you are a relative of mine, should you work for me for nothing? Tell
me what your wages should be.’” In other words: “Since you are my relative, I am
under no obligation to pay you for your work, which should be considered
payment for room and board. But since I am generous, I am offering you a salary.”
Laban sounds very concerned about the well-being of his nephew but his use of
the terms “serve” and “wages” reveal his true intentions with Jacob, which was to
exploit Jacob’s love for his daughter Rachel for personal profit. Laban is smooth
talking Jacob and has reduced him to a laborer under contract.
Laban wanted to bind Jacob to him in some way and very craftily lets Jacob
name the terms of the agreement, knowing full well that because of Jacob’s love
for his daughter Rachel, he would get a great bargain by approaching him this way.
Bruce K. Waltke, “Laban is degrading the blood relationship between himself
and Jacob into an economic arrangement. What Laban should have done as a
loving relative is to help Jacob get a start on building his own home, as Jacob asks
of Laban in 30:25-34 (esp. vv. 26, 30, 33). Instead, Laban keeps Jacob as nothing
more than a laborer under contract, as Jacob bitterly complains in 31:3842…Laban’s smooth talk reduces Jacob to a lowly laborer under contract. Their
relationship for the next twenty years is that of an oppressive lord over an
indentured servant paying off a bride price, not of an uncle helping his blood
relative…He would rather give any wage than give Jacob the dignity and help due
a relative” (Genesis, A Commentary, pages 404-405, Zondervan).
Genesis 29:16 Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was
Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. 17 And Leah's eyes were
weak, but Rachel was beautiful of form and face.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s response to Laban’s question is delayed in Genesis 29:16-17 in order to
provide necessary background information regarding Leah and Rachel, which is
essential for a full understanding of subsequent developments in the narrative.
“Leah” whose name means, “cow” and “Rachel” whose names means, “ewe”
meaning the female of the sheep, especially of the mature.
Rachel’s name is mentioned again since it was necessary to introduce Leah and
to explain the order of birth, which is of vital importance to the plot. These names
were not unusual or derogatory but rather appropriate in a family of shepherds.
However, in the case of Laban, he actually does treat these two young women like
animals.
As we will see as we go further into the story, Leah was later given to Jacob
contrary to his consent since he served Laban for seven years in order to marry
Rachel.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
65
Also, as we will see, Leah, though comparatively unloved by Jacob, produced
more offspring than her sister and their servants combined. Her fertility was
compensation for her unloved status (Gen. 29:31ff.). Little in the narratives sheds
insight into Leah’s personality, aside from her competition with her sister
concerning producing offspring.
Both were consulted by Jacob upon his desire to leave Laban’s household. Both
were upset of their father’s demands upon Jacob and treating him deceptively.
Genesis 29:17 And Leah's eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful of
form and face. (NASB95)
Genesis 29:17 contrasts the appearance of these two sisters. The statement
“Leah’s eyes were weak” does “not” refer to the fact that she had poor eyesight
but rather that her eyes were dull in color meaning they were probably light blue or
gray and not deep dark brown, which was the preferable color for standard of
beauty in the Middle East.
The statement “Leah’s eyes were weak” implies that Rachel’s eyes were a
deep dark brown in color, which men of the Middle East prized and this is
confirmed by the description of her as being “beautiful in face.”
The expression “beautiful in face” refers to the appearance of Rachel’s face
with emphasis upon her eyes since the noun mar’eh, “face” is related to anything
having to do with seeing, including not only the act of seeing but the eyes
themselves.
The statement “Leah’s eyes were weak” does “not” mean that she was homely
looking since her sister Rachel was beautiful but rather it means it was her only
specific weakness in the eyes of men in Middle East in that day.
Rachel is described as being “beautiful in form” refers to the fact that she had
a beautiful “figure” and does “not” imply that Leah did not have a nice figure but
that Rachel’s was outstanding and superior to her sister’s.
Genesis 29:18 Now Jacob loved Rachel, so he said, “I will serve you seven
years for your younger daughter Rachel.” (NASB95)
The statement “Jacob loved Rachel” confirms what has been implied since the
beginning of the story of Jacob’s visit to Laban’s home in Paddan Aram.
Jacob’s statement “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter
Rachel” expresses the intensity of his love for Rachel and the extent to which he
valued her. The seven years’ service is to be in lieu of the usual “bride-price,”
known as the mohar in Hebrew. By making this offer to Laban, Jacob will now
possess the status of an indentured laborer working to pay off the bride-price.
Since Jacob did not have the financial means necessary for the “bride-price,” he
offers to work for Laban for seven years, which was a handsome marriage gift in
exchange for Rachel’s hand. Jacob makes Laban an offer he can’t refuse because
he does not want to risk Laban refusing him and then losing Rachel.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
66
Genesis 29:19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than to give
her to another man; stay with me.” (NASB95)
Now, it is important to understand for our future studies of Laban and Jacob
that Jacob specifically offered to exchange seven years of service to Laban for
Rachel and Laban’s response indicates clearly that he agrees to Jacob’s offer.
There is therefore, no ambiguity in his response as suggested by commentators
since Jacob has made clear he wants Rachel and Laban agrees. The fact that Laban
is quick in accepting Jacob’s proposal indicates that he had anticipated such an
offer from Jacob as a result of understanding fully Jacob’s situation of being on the
run from Esau and without the necessary finances to secure a bride.
Laban’s statement “It is better that I give her to you than to give her to
another man” is a deception since he later deceives Jacob by sending Leah into
Jacob’s tent on his wedding night when he agreed to marry Rachel.
In those days, marriage between relatives was regarded as very desirable in that
it safeguarded purity of blood, property of the family and the welfare of the
daughter but this is not what Laban is thinking when he says, “It is better that I
give her to you than to give her to another.”
Unknown to Jacob was that Laban had no intention of giving Rachel to him
before his older daughter Leah. First he would give Leah and then Rachel in order
that he might exploit Jacob to the maximum and profit greatly. Jacob’s love for
Rachel has blinded him as to the true character of Laban.
In order to train Jacob, the Lord has permitted him to reap what he sowed in the
sense that because he deceived his father Isaac, now his uncle Laban will deceive
him. The Lord’s plan was for Jacob to be served by his younger brother but now he
will serve his uncle.
Genesis 29:20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to
him but a few days because of his love for her. (NASB95)
Genesis 29:20 records that Jacob held up to his end of the agreement with
Laban by doing what he said he would do, which was to serve Laban seven years
for Rachel. Of course, as we will later see in the narrative, Laban does not hold up
to his end of the agreement by sending Leah rather than Rachel into Jacob’s tent on
his wedding night.
The statement that the seven years seemed to Jacob but a “few days” because of
his love for Rachel reveals that his love for Rachel was so intense that the seven
years seemed to him but a few days.
The fact that Jacob served Laban seven years for Rachel reveals how foolish his
mother Rebekah was for thinking Jacob would only be away but a “few days” until
the anger of his brother Esau had subsided.
Those “few days” have now become seven years and eventually twenty!
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
67
Rebekah, like Jacob, will be permitted by the Lord to reap what she sowed in
the sense that because she deceived Isaac, now Jacob will be deceived by his uncle
Laban and Rebekah will never see Jacob again.
The statement that the seven years seemed to Jacob but a “few days” because
he loved her so intensely sets the reader up to experience Jacob’s agony and
heartbreak at Laban’s later deceiving him by having Leah rather than Rachel go
into Jacob’s tent on his wedding night.
Laban’s Treachery
In Genesis 29:21-24, we see that the seven years have been completed and
Jacob demands that Laban give him Rachel to consummate their marriage. But
instead of giving Jacob Rachel, Laban deceives Jacob on his wedding night by
sending into his tent her older sister Leah.
Genesis 29:21 Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife, for my time is
completed, that I may go in to her.” (NASB95)
Even though Jacob is only betrothed or engaged to Rachel, she is reckoned as
his wife according to Deuteronomy 20:7 and 22:23-25 and among the heathen in
Mesopotamia.
Jacob makes this demand since he has completed his end of the agreement and
has completed seven years of service for Laban as the “bride-price” to marry
Rachel.
Notice that Jacob takes the initiative and not Laban who should have since
Jacob has fulfilled his end of their agreement and Laban has yet to. Laban is
dragging his feet since he has profited greatly from Jacob’s service according to
Genesis 30:29-30. Laban is reluctant to face the prospect of losing Jacob’s services
after his marriage, so therefore, he said nothing. Therefore, Jacob had to remind
him to fulfill his part of their agreement.
Genesis 29:22 Laban gathered all the men of the place and made a feast.
(NASB95)
Notice that there is no record of a response to Jacob’s demands, which suggests
Laban’s reluctance to consummate and celebrate the marriage. However, without
answering he prepares a feast to celebrate the marriage, not the marriage of Rachel
and Jacob but of Leah and Jacob.
“The place” refers to the city of Nahor since Genesis 24:10 identifies it as the
home of Laban. Laban gathered all the men from the city of Nahor not only
because it was the custom of the day but also because when the prank he is about
to play on Jacob becomes known by all, it will not be easy for Jacob to rid himself
of Leah. It was the custom of the day that a wedding involved processions to and
from the bride’s house, a reading of the marriage contract, and a large banquet
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
68
attended by both families and neighbors. Of course, Jacob’s family cannot attend,
which makes Jacob very vulnerable to deception and exploitation.
The first day’s celebration ended with the groom wrapping his cloak around the
bride who was veiled throughout the ceremony, and taking her to his bedroom
where the marriage was consummated. The feasting and celebration continued for
an entire week after the marriage was consummated on the first day.
“Feast” is the noun mishteh, which means, “drinking” and therefore implies
that Laban was putting on a drinking party indicating that one of the reasons why
Jacob did not know that he was making love to Leah and not Rachel was that he
was drunk.
This word indicates that Jacob was not in control of his faculties on his wedding
night because he was drinking with all the men of the city. Therefore, we see that
Laban uses this “beer-bash” or “wine-fest” to dull Jacob’s senses in order to
deceive Jacob so that he doesn’t notice that he is having sex with Leah rather than
Rachel.
Genesis 29:23 Now in the evening he took his daughter Leah, and brought
her to him; and Jacob went in to her. (NASB95)
Leah would have veiled herself in order to identify herself to Jacob that she is
the bride, which was customary to do in the marriage ceremony (See Genesis
24:65). Laban not only uses the booze and bridal veil to pull off his deception of
Jacob but also employs the cover of darkness as well.
Just as Jacob took advantage of his father’s blindness so Laban uses the cover
of darkness to outwit Jacob. Just as his sister Rebekah deceived her husband Isaac
by putting the goat skins and Esau’s clothing on Jacob, and preparing a gourmet
meal to deceive Isaac into bestowing the blessing of the birthright upon Jacob
rather than Esau so Laban uses the booze, the bridal veil and the cover of darkness
to deceive Jacob into sleeping with Leah. Jacob pretended to be his older brother
Esau and now Leah is pretending to be her younger sister Rachel.
It would be safe to assume that while Leah was sleeping with Jacob, that Rachel
would have been very jealous of her sister Leah and angry at her father.
Now, Leah obviously obeyed her father and agreed to his scheme to deceive
Jacob, which was wrong of her to do. Yes, she was under her father’s authority and
yes she should obey her father’s authority but not to commit sin as we see here.
She could have at least sent someone secretly to Jacob to warn him of the plot but
she never does.
Undoubtedly, she was jealous of Rachel because Rachel was more beautiful
than her and Jacob loved Rachel rather than herself. Therefore, she agreed to take
part in the scheme because she too appears to be in love with Jacob.
Laban knows that once Jacob recognizes that he has been deceived and has yet
to consummate his marriage to Rachel that he will work for another seven years
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
69
since his love for Rachel is so intense. By executing this scheme to deceive Jacob,
Laban would also solve his problem of finding a wife for Leah.
At worst, if Jacob refused to work another seven years for Rachel, Laban knew
that it would not be too difficult to find a husband for her since she had a great
figure and big beautiful brown eyes as men of the Middle East love.
Also, even if Jacob eloped with Rachel, Laban would not have lost anything
and so it was worth the effort from Laban’s perspective to attempt this deception of
Jacob.
Genesis 29:24 Laban also gave his maid Zilpah to his daughter Leah as a
maid. (NASB95)
It was customary in the ancient world for the bride’s father to give her a large
wedding present, a dowry. Ancient marriage contracts demonstrate that dowries
usually were composed of clothing, furniture and money and served as a nest egg
for the wife in case her husband died or she was divorced.
The Old Testament does not mentioned dowries except in cases where
something very valuable like a slave girl is given. It was customary in the days of
the patriarchs for a father to present his daughter with a personal servant on her
wedding day. So we see that even though Laban is unfair in his treatment of Jacob,
he does give Leah a dowry in the form of his personal servant, Zilpah.
“Zilpah” is the proper noun zilpah, whose name means, “intimacy” and who
later bore Jacob two sons, who were named “Gad” and “Asher.”
Amazingly, the grace of God was manifested by Laban sending Leah in to the
tent of Jacob rather than Rachel since Jacob did not recognize it at the time but
Leah was in reality a gift from the Lord to him and was in fact his right woman and
not Rachel.
In Genesis 29:25-30, we see that Jacob discovers the next morning that he has
been deceived by Laban and is trapped by him into agreeing to another seven years
of service as the bride-price for marrying Rachel. The fact that Jacob is trapped
into another seven years of service was a manifestation of divine discipline in the
life of Jacob for his deception of his father Isaac and cheating Esau.
Genesis 29:25 So it came about in the morning that, behold, it was Leah!
And he said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Was it not for
Rachel that I served with you? Why then have you deceived me?” (NASB95)
Just imagine the scene, it is early the next morning and Jacob awakes from the
most restful sleep of his life after a night of making love to who he assumed was
Rachel. Jacob would open his eyes and say to himself “what a beautiful day, what
a wonderful night and what an exciting future there is for me with my wife!” But
what a shock it must have been as the first ray of sunlight burst into the tent to
reveal that the woman that was in his arms was Leah, not Rachel!
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
70
The expression “behold it was Leah” describes the shock from Jacob’s
perspective in his thinking.
The question “What is this you have done to me,” expresses verbally Jacob’s
shock as to Laban’s deception.
Jacob’s next question “Was it not for Rachel that I served with you” reminds
Laban of the terms of their agreement.
Jacob’s third and final question “Why then have you deceived me” echoes the
words of Esau upon learning that Jacob had deceived their father and cheated him
out of the blessings of the birthright (See Genesis 27:35-36).
Just as Jacob deceived his father in order to cheat his older brother Esau from
receiving the blessing of the birthright, so now Jacob is deceived by Laban so that
Jacob sleeps with Laban’s oldest daughter Leah rather than the younger daughter
Rachel.
The shoe is now on the other foot; the deceiver has now been deceived. Jacob
has reaped what he has sowed.
Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man
sows, this he will also reap. (NASB95)
Jacob sowed the seeds of deception by obeying his mother Rebekah and
deceiving his blind father Isaac into cheating Esau out of the blessing of the
birthright. Jacob has reaped the seeds of deception which he sowed by being
deceived by Leah and Laban.
It is interesting that in both deceptions, Jacob and Rebekah’s and Laban and
Leah’s, the deception had been commanded by a parent and in both cases the
purpose of the deception was to acquire something desperately desired. In their
case with Esau and Isaac, Jacob and Rebekah were convinced that their deception
was a case of the ends justifying the means. In the case of Jacob and Rachel, Laban
and Leah were convinced that their deception was also a case of the ends justifying
the means since the custom was that the older daughter be married first and not be
preceded by the younger.
So Jacob is understandably shocked as to what has happened to him and
demands an explanation for the deception.
Genesis 29:26 But Laban said, “It is not the practice in our place to marry
off the younger before the firstborn.” (NASB95)
If Laban was an honorable and honest man he should have informed Jacob of
this local custom. Notice that Laban’s response to Jacob demand for an explanation
as to why Leah was in his tent and not Rachel was not to deny that he had deceived
Jacob but simply refers to the local tradition of marrying off the firstborn before
the younger. There are no apologies from Laban and in fact he attempts to turn the
tables on Jacob and make him out to be the bad guy.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
71
Laban’s response to Jacob feigns moral outrage and makes Jacob out to be the
guilty one for asking such questions. Hypocritically, Laban hides behind local
tradition to mask his guilt and dishonorable conduct. Laban’s response reveals that
he thought that the ends justify the means.
The terms “younger” and “firstborn” are unknowingly employed by Laban
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to remind Jacob of the deception of his
older brother Esau and stunned Jacob into silence so that he does not reprove
Laban for not having informed him of the local custom in the first place.
Jacob knows now first hand what it feels like to be deceived and cheated. Here
we see that the Lord is teaching Jacob that the ends does “not” justify the means!
This, the Holy Spirit convicts Jacob of since Jacob’s anger subsides and he agrees
to work another seven years for Laban to consummate his love for Rachel.
Now, he knows how his brother Esau and his father Isaac felt. God the Holy
Spirit has rebuked and disciplined Jacob for deceiving his father Isaac and cheating
his brother Esau in order to advance him to further spiritual growth. This discipline
was a demonstration of the Lord’s love for Jacob.
God disciplines His disobedient children by permitting adversity, trials, and
irritations to come into their lives that are beyond their capacity to handle in order
to get their attention and to focus upon their number one priority in life as children
of God, which is conformity to the Father’s will.
God disciplines His disobedient children by permitting them to reap the fruits of
their bad decisions so that they might learn that conformity to His will is the only
way to true joy and happiness and blessing in life (Ezek. 16:43; Gal. 6:7-8).
Genesis 29:27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other
also for the service which you shall serve with me for another seven years.
(NASB95)
“Complete the week of this one” refers to fulfilling Leah’s week and “the
other” refers to Rachel. The fact that Laban does not use their names reveals that
Laban was not a very good father since he is treating daughters like property rather
than his children.
Laban proposes that Jacob fulfill the week with Leah and then he will give
Rachel to him as well in exchange for another seven years of service. He is trying
to make himself appears generous by offering to give Jacob Rachel and then letting
him fulfill the seven years of service.
There are several reasons why Jacob agrees to Laban’s ridiculous and
unreasonable and unjust proposal. The first is that Jacob turns Laban down he will
lose Rachel whom he loves. Secondly, he was isolated and therefore without
family support. Thirdly, Jacob recognizes at this point that the Lord is disciplining
him through this injustice. The fourth reason that Jacob does not object to Laban’s
proposal was that he would only have to wait a week before he could consummate
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
72
his marriage to Rachel. Lastly, Jacob does not object to Laban’s proposal out of
respect for Leah and does not want to dishonor her and himself before the men of
the city of Nahor.
Although, Jacob was prone to deception and lying, it can be said that he
fulfilled his family responsibilities and honored his agreements. The fact that he
honored his agreements is indicated in that Laban trusts Jacob to honor his contract
with him by first giving him Rachel before he had fulfilled the seven year contract
(See Genesis 29:30).
Genesis 29:28 Jacob did so and completed her week, and he gave him his
daughter Rachel as his wife. (NASB95)
The only good thing about Laban’s proposal was that Jacob did not have to wait
another seven years to finally consummate his love for Rachel but only had to wait
until the week with Leah was over.
The fact that Jacob did not have to wait another seven years until he could
consummate his marriage with Rachel is indicated by a comparison of Genesis
29:28 and 30, which records that he consummated his marriage to Rachel first and
then he served Laban for another seven years.
Genesis 29:29 Laban also gave his maid Bilhah to his daughter Rachel as
her maid. (NASB95)
The name “Bilhah” is the proper noun bilhah whose name means, “carefree”
and who later bore Jacob two sons, who were named “Dan” and “Naphtali.”
Genesis 29:30 So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and indeed he loved Rachel
more than Leah, and he served with Laban for another seven years.
(NASB95)
So after finally consummating his marriage with Rachel, Jacob served Laban
another seven years. However, this would result in a bitter rivalry and unhappiness
in Jacob’s home for years to come since he loved Rachel more than Leah.
The fact that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah would be a cause of jealousy
and bitterness between the two women resulting in division and unhappiness in the
home of Jacob for years to come.
Notice, that the Word of God does not say that Jacob did not love Leah but
rather he loved Rachel “more” than Leah implying obviously that he did have love
for Leah but it was not as passionate as his love for Rachel. Throughout all of the
problems that Jacob had with Laban and Rachel and Leah, the Lord was still
accomplishing His purposes to bring in the Savior of the world and fulfilling His
promises to Abraham, Isaac and now Jacob.
The Lord promised Jacob that he would have numerous descendants and this
would be fulfilled through both Leah and her maid Zilpah, from whom eight of the
twelve tribes traced their descent. Thus not even the deceitfulness of Jacob and
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
73
Laban could overrule or prevent the fulfillment of the divine promises and plan of
salvation.
Not only was the additional seven years of service a manifestation of divine
discipline in the life of Jacob for his deception of his father Isaac and cheating
Esau but also this discipline was to prepare Jacob to be a leader of God’s people.
In Genesis 25:23, the Lord prophesied that Esau’s descendants, the Edomites
would serve Jacob’s descendants, the Israelites and then Genesis 27:29, Isaac
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit prophesied that the Gentile nations would
serve Jacob’s descendants the Israelites. But in Genesis 29:30, we see no one
serving Jacob but rather Jacob serving others, which would prepare him to occupy
a position of spiritual leadership as the head of twelve tribes that would be named
after him.
Through this adversity with Laban, the Lord is going to teach Jacob how to be a
true spiritual leader of His people. But at this point in his life, Jacob is more
concerned about the benefits and pleasures he can extract from life rather than the
service he can render God and his fellowmen. At this point in his life, Jacob aims
to take more out of life than aims to put into it.
The Lord prophesied that Jacob would be the leader of His people but the Lord
is going to teach him through this adversity with Laban that leadership in His
kingdom is based upon love and humility and putting others ahead of oneself and
not hate, and arrogance and selfishness.
In Matthew 20:20-28, the Lord Jesus taught His disciples that in the kingdom of
God, those who are great and occupy positions of spiritual leadership serve others
rather than be served.
In John 13:1-17, the Lord Jesus Christ provided His disciples with a visual
illustration concerning the spiritual principle that leadership in the kingdom of God
is based upon love and humility and putting others ahead of oneself and not hate,
and arrogance and selfishness.
In Philippians 2:1-4, Paul commanded the Philippians to put each other ahead
of themselves as Christ did.
The Lord Jesus Christ was rewarded for His service at the Cross, which He
accomplished by humble obedience to the Father’s will and which obedience was
motivated by His love for the Father (Philippians 2:9-11). In the same way that our
Lord Jesus Christ was rewarded for His service so too will our Christian service be
rewarded by the Lord Jesus Christ at the Bema Seat Evaluation of the church if it
has been properly motivated by our love for the Lord, which expresses itself in
obedience to His command to love one another as He has loved (1 Cor. 3:11-14; 2
Cor. 5:10).
Now another lesson that we can learn from Genesis 29 is that Jacob’s physical
attraction to Rachel blinded him to the fact that Leah was his right woman and not
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
74
Rachel. It is interesting to note how different was the process by which Isaac
obtained Rebekah as a wife from that means through which Jacob acquired Rachel.
Isaac was subject to his father, and it was through the wisdom of his father and
his servant Eliezer, through the financial means of Abraham and through prayer
that she was obtained. Jacob went off on his own with none of his father’s
resources. He chose the woman with the greatest beauty and bargained with Laban
for her.
To me there is no doubt that Jacob was guided more by his physical attraction
for Rachel and his sex drive than any other factor. Unlike Abraham’s servant
Eliezer, Jacob did not pray about this matter, so far as we are told. \Unlike
Abraham’s servant Eliezer, Jacob did not give any consideration to matters of
character. He did not seek counsel. In fact, he sought to overturn the customs of the
day and the preferences of Laban.
We live in a very sex driven, romance oriented day. We find ourselves cheering
for Rachel and booing Leah. God seems to have been on the other side. What is
romantic is not always right and in fact is often it is wrong. Just because you are in
love with someone does not mean that God approves!
Jacob’s physical attraction towards Rachel caused him to use the well when and
how he saw fit, regardless of the rules set by the owner.
Physical attraction led Jacob to choose Rachel, not Leah. We must beware of
those decisions which are determined by romantic impressions or feelings or
physical attraction.
Few things are as important to women today as beauty. Perhaps nothing is more
important to men today than beauty. Rachel was a wonderfully-endowed woman
and there is nothing wrong with that. Sarah was beautiful, and so was Rebekah but
outward beauty must always be considered a secondary consideration. Jacob
looked at Rachel’s exterior and investigated no further into her character.
The writer, King Lemuel, was not in error when he gave this counsel: Charm is
deceitful and beauty is vain, But a woman who fears the LORD, she shall be
praised (Proverbs 31:30). This same principle is prominent in the New Testament
(cf. I Timothy 2:9-10; I Peter 3:1-6).
Men and boys, we all want to be seen with the beautiful girls and we all have
dreamed of dating them. Some have made great sacrifices to marry a showpiece
but let us look first for character, and if we find it, let us look no further. If we find
character with charm and beauty, let us consider ourselves fortunate and blessed by
the Lord.
Proverbs 12:4 A wife of noble character is her husband's crown, but a
disgraceful wife is like decay in his bones. (NASB95)
Proverbs 31:10 A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far
more than rubies. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
75
Ladies, I realize that our society has placed a premium on glamour and beauty. I
understand that much of your sense of self-worth is based upon your outward
attractiveness and “sex appeal.” However, that is wrong.
Our ultimate worth is that estimation which comes from God. God was not
impressed with Rachel’s good looks. After all, He gave that to her in the first
place. God looked upon the heart and blessed Leah. Her worth, while never fully
realized by her husband, was great in the eyes of God. Remember the principle the
Lord taught the prophet Samuel when selecting a king over Israel.
1 Samuel 16:7 “Do not look at his appearance, or at the height of his
stature, because I have rejected him; for God sees not as men sees, for man
looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”
(NASB95)
The Birth of Jacob’s Children
Genesis 29:31-35 contains the record of Leah bearing Jacob four sons whose
names are Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah. Genesis 29:31 actually begins a
section that ends in Genesis 30:24 and contains the story of the birth of Jacob’s
children who would later become the progenitors of the twelve tribes of Israel,
from whom the Messiah Jesus Christ in His human nature would descend. This
section is basically a study of love, sex, marriage and children and sounds like a
“soap opera,” with Jacob hopping from bedroom to bedroom and his wives
competing with each other for his love and affection.
Unlike today’s modern soap operas on television, the soap opera found in
Genesis 29:31-30:24 is not designed to entertain us or encourage us to sin but
rather, quite the opposite, it is designed to encourage us to live righteously before
the Lord.
Genesis 29:31-30:24 can be divided into six sections: (1) The Lord opens
Leah’s womb (29:31-35). (2) Rachel’s desire for children achieved through Bilhah
(30:1-8). (3) Leah responds to Rachel by giving Jacob Zilpah who bears him two
boys (30:9-13). (4) Leah desires sex from Jacob (30:14-15). (5) Jacob has sex with
Leah (30:16-21) (6) God finally opens Rachel’s womb (30:22-24).
The whole episode is driven by Leah’s longing for Jacob’s love and Rachel’s
craving for children. Leah’s frequent pregnancies only aggravate Rachel’s
frustration at her own childlessness. It is interesting that the struggle of the sisters,
Leah and Rachel, mirrors the struggle between the brothers, Esau and Jacob of
trying to out do one another.
This account is written like a soap opera so that we might be able to identify
with these two women, both of whom desperately fight for Jacob’s love and
affection. The circumstances surrounding the birth of Jacob’s children demonstrate
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
76
the graciousness of God towards His people and in particular the nation of Israel
who descended from the twelve sons of Jacob.
The record of the birth of Jacob’s children is important since it emphasizes the
fulfillment of the Lord’s promise to Jacob to provide him with numerous
descendants. Therefore, this passage demonstrates the faithfulness of God in
providing descendants as He had promised to Jacob even though he was unfaithful
to God.
2 Timothy 2:13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny
Himself. (NASB95)
Psalm 145:13 The LORD is faithful to all his promises. (NASB95)
Jacob’s Family
Bilhah
Dan
Naphtali Gad
Zilpah
Asher
Leah
Rachel
Benjamin Joseph
Reuben Simeon Levi Judah Issachar Zebulun Dinah
Genesis 29:31 Now the LORD saw that Leah was unloved, and He opened
her womb, but Rachel was barren. (NASB95)
The statement “the Lord saw that Leah was unloved and He opened her
womb” expresses the Lord’s compassion towards Leah and that He acted
decisively on her behalf by giving her children. God’s love is “compassionate”
meaning that God intensely desires and will act to alleviate the pain and suffering
of another or remove its cause (1 John 3:16-17).
Psalm 116:5 Gracious is the LORD, and righteous; Yes, our God is
compassionate. (NASB95)
The expression “the LORD saw” often is used in the Old Testament of the
Lord acting decisively, often for the weak and oppressed (cf. 6:5; 7:1; 18:21;
31:12; Ex. 2:25; 4:31).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
77
“Unloved” is the verb sane, which means, “hate” in the sense that Jacob
rejected Leah as the sole object of all his love and affection and loved her less than
Rachel. The word does “not” mean that he was hostile and antagonistic towards
her or was cold, and indifferent towards her since Genesis 29:30 records that Jacob
“loved Rachel more than Leah” indicating that Jacob did have love for Leah but
it wasn’t as intense as his love for Rachel.
Genesis 29:32 Leah conceived and bore a son and named him Reuben, for
she said, “Because the LORD has seen my affliction; surely now my husband
will love me.” (NASB95)
The first child that Leah bore to Jacob was “Reuben” whose name means,
“behold or see, a son.” In the Hebrew, his name honors the Lord and is a play on
the consonants of the name having a similar sound to the Hebrew for “He (the
Lord) looked (with concern) on my misery.”
Leah recognized the grace of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and hoped
that Jacob would recognize the Lord’s hand in this and that her bearing a son
would not only raise her in Jacob’s esteem but also cause him to love her but it did
not.
“The Lord has seen my affliction” echoes the similar remark made by Hagar
recorded in Genesis 16:13 “You are a God who sees (my affliction).” (NASB95)
Leah’s firstborn Reuben, like all children, was a gift from the Lord.
Genesis 29:33 Then she conceived again and bore a son and said, “Because
the LORD has heard that I am unloved, He has therefore given me this son
also.” So she named him Simeon. (NASB95)
The second child that Leah bore to Jacob was “Simeon” whose name means,
“the Lord has heard.”
The name “Simeon” in the Hebrew is from “the Lord has heard that am
hated,” which echoes the similar remark made by the Lord to Hagar recorded in
Genesis 16:11.
The first two names of Leah’s children replicate a pair of verbs (“to see” and
“to hear”) express the Lord’s providential concern and care for the unfortunate.
Genesis 29:34 She conceived again and bore a son and said, “Now this time
my husband will become attached to me, because I have borne him three
sons.” Therefore he was named Levi. (NASB95)
The third child that Leah bore to Jacob was “Levi” whose name means,
“attached, joined.” This name is from “My husband will be attached to me.” In
spite of the Lord bestowing His grace upon her in giving her a third child, Leah
does not have her hope realized and must learn to find her emotional fulfillment in
her relationship with the Lord. This child would be a blessing since the Aaronic
priestly line in Israel and the tribe of Levi who ministered in the music and worship
of the Temple were descended from Leah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
78
Genesis 29:35 And she conceived again and bore a son and said, “This time
I will praise the LORD.” Therefore she named him Judah. Then she stopped
bearing. (NASB95)
The fourth child that Leah bore to Jacob was “Judah” whose name means, “I
will praise the Lord.” By naming this fourth child yehudhah, “Judah,” Leah is
again honoring the Lord and expressing the fact that she is able to transcend her
distress that her husband Jacob does not prefer her over Rachel. This child would
be a blessing since King David and the Lord Jesus Christ would descend from the
tribe of Judah.
Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah.
(NASB95)
Though Leah was not the sole object of Jacob’s affections, the Lord blessed her
in the sense that He gave her the privilege of being the mother of Jacob’s first four
sons: Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah who was the ancestor of David and the
Lord Jesus.
Levi’s descendants were given the honor of being the priestly tribe in Israel
whereas King David and the Lord Jesus Christ were both from the tribe of Judah.
Each of the names of her first four children honor the Lord and express the
depth of her pain as being the rejected and not the preferred woman in Jacob’s life.
Leah names three of her first four children in honor of the Lord (29:32-33, 35)
and by giving these names she confesses her faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob, not the gods of her father Laban.
The Lord permitted Leah to remain in this difficult marriage situation with
Jacob in order to test her faith.
Jeremiah 20:12 Yet, O LORD of hosts, You who test the righteous, who see
the mind and the heart. (NASB95)
The faith of Leah was tested in order to produce endurance in her (cf. James
1:2-4). The Lord rewarded the faith of Leah by giving her children and a more
intimate fellowship with Himself, which was much more important than her
relationship with her husband Jacob (James 1:12).
The Lord permitted Leah to remain in this difficult marriage in order to teach
her about perseverance in prayer, which is the capacity to continue to bear up
under difficult circumstances (Matthew 7:7). The faith of Leah in praying for a
child demonstrates the spiritual principle that you appropriate the omnipotence of
God by operating in faith (cf. Matthew 17:20). The fact that Leah was permitted by
the Lord to remain in this difficult marriage with Jacob was to demonstrate His
power in her weakness and suffering (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:1-12). Therefore, if you
are in a difficult marriage or you are not married and yet desire to be married or
you are childless and want to have children, the Lord has permitted you to remain
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
79
in your circumstances in order to demonstrate His power in your human weakness
and give you a more intimate fellowship with Himself.
In Genesis 30:1-8, we have Rachel’s maid Bilhah bearing Jacob two more sons,
Dan and Naphtali.
Genesis 30:1 Now when Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she
became jealous of her sister; and she said to Jacob, “Give me children, or else
I die.” (NASB95)
“Jealous” is the verb qana and to be “jealous” is to desire to have the same or
the same sort of thing for oneself and so therefore, Rachel is jealous of Leah in the
sense that she desires to have children just like Leah.
Jealousy is a mental attitude sin directed toward another, which is resentful,
intolerant and suspicious of another’s success, possessions or relationships and is
vigilant in maintaining or guarding something.
Rachel was jealous of Leah in the sense that she desired to have children like
her and was resentful and intolerant and suspicious of Leah and her success having
children and she was also guarded over her relationship with Jacob and did not
tolerate Leah and considered her a rival.
Jealousy is included in the list of sins produced by the old sin nature in both the
believer and unbeliever (Rom. 1:29; Gal. 5:21; Titus 3:3; 1 Pet. 2:1).
Rachel was not satisfied with Jacob’s love and affection and attention and
wanted sons just as Leah was having them. She blames Jacob for her problem of
not be able to get pregnant since she fails to understand that children are a gift
from the Lord.
The Lord had prevented her from getting pregnant in order to test her faith and
to teach her perseverance and produce endurance in her (See Jeremiah 20:12;
James 1:2-4).
Rachel is impatient with the Lord and the fact that Rachel gives Jacob her maid
Bilhah demonstrates that she is not operating in faith at this point.
The Lord prevented Jacob from having children with Rachel in order to teach
them about perseverance in prayer, which is the capacity to continue to bear up
under difficult circumstances (See Matthew 7:7).
At this point in the narrative, Rachel is not persevering in prayer but is taking
things into her own hands and trying to solve her problems independently of the
Lord.
The fact that Rachel was barren gave the Lord an opportunity to demonstrate
His power in her life (See Jeremiah 32:27).
Rachel’s demand of Jacob that he give her children reveals that Jacob has been
reduced to a stud in the rivalry between Rachel and Leah.
Her statement “I’ll die” expresses her extreme grief over the matter of being
childless. Even though she is the object of Jacob’s love and affection and attention,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
80
she does not consider life worth living without children. Ironically, she dies giving
birth to Benjamin (See Genesis 35:16-19).
The sight of Leah’s children filled Rachel with jealousy. Rachel’s jealousy of
her sister Leah is rooted in her social disgrace as a barren wife.
Gordon J. Wenham, “It was a serious matter for a man to be childless in the
ancient world, for it left him without an heir. But it was even more calamitous for a
woman: to have a great brood of children was the mark of success as a wife; to
have none was ignominious failure” (Word Biblical Commentary series, Genesis
15—50; Waco: Word Books, 1994).
She wants to gain respect and publicly to validate her marriage to Jacob.
Ironically, Rachel is jealous of a sister who has been pawned off to a husband
who does not love her exclusively. Each woman wants what the other has and
neither treasures what she has been given for its own value.
Rachel’s demand of Jacob to give her children is ridiculous since he has proven
himself to be fertile in that he has fathered four boys with Leah at this time. It is
also unreasonable since the Lord must enable Rachel to get pregnant and He has
not seen fit to do so at this time in her life for reasons we have noted earlier.
Genesis 30:2 Then Jacob's anger burned against Rachel, and he said, “Am
I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?”
(NASB95)
Jacob deals with Rachel’s impatience by being impatient with her. Jacob’s
anger is not justified and therefore, is not “righteous indignation” as the Lord Jesus
Christ displayed with the Pharisees in calling them “hypocrites” and “white
washed sepulchers that are filled with dead men’s’ bones” (See Matthew 23:1329).
Even though Jacob’s response to Rachel’s demands is accurate theologically, it
was misapplied and was motivated out of frustration, impatience with her and a
lack of compassion for her situation rather than love. Jacob’s response is a classic
example of a believer “not” speaking truth in love to someone.
His response demonstrates a lack of sensitivity to Rachel’s situation of not
having children, which as we noted was calamitous for a woman in the ancient
world and brought on public ridicule from other women. Jacob should have been
compassionate towards her by offering words of encouragement and speaking truth
to her in love and not in frustration.
Unlike his father Isaac who interceded in prayer for his wife Rebekah to get
pregnant, Jacob does not follow his example demonstrating that he is a spiritual
child at this time.
Genesis 30:3 She said, “Here is my maid Bilhah, go in to her that she may
bear on my knees, that through her I too may have children.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
81
Rachel deals with her problem of being barren just as Sarah dealt with the same
problem, namely, by employing a concubine. Just as Sarah resorted to a custom
acceptable in her culture, though contrary to God's will, to secure an heir for
Abraham (cf. 16:1-2) so Rachel does the same in order to secure a child for Jacob.
On the contrary, Isaac prayed that God would open Rebekah's womb and waited
(25:21). Rachel and Jacob followed the example of Sarah and Abraham.
The people in Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s culture regarded a concubine as a
secondary wife with some, but not all, of the rights and privileges of the primary
wife so in effect Bilhah became Jacob’s concubine. Not only was using a
concubine an option, but in Hurrian culture husbands sometimes required that if
their wife could not bear children she had to provide a concubine for him. This
custom helps explain why Jacob was willing to be a part of Rachel’s plan that
seems so unusual to us and though using a woman other than one's wife was a
custom of the day it was never God's desire (2:24; Matt. 19:4-5).
Rachel is not trusting in the Lord at this point in the narrative since she chooses
to solve her problem of being barren by following the custom of the cosmic system
of Satan in that day in offering her maid Bilhah to Jacob in order to produce
children for her.
Psalm 27:14 Wait for the LORD; be strong and take heart and wait for the
LORD. (NASB95)
Rachel’s command “go in to her” is a euphemism for sexual intercourse and
demonstrates that Rachel was demanding immediate action from Jacob and was
“wearing the pants” in the marriage and was out of the will of God since the wife’s
responsibility is to be obedient to her husband (Eph. 5:22-25; Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:17).
At this point in the narrative, Rachel is a contentious woman.
Proverbs 25:24 It is better to live in a corner of the roof than in a house
shared with a contentious woman. (NASB95)
The phrase “that she may bear on my knees” signifies that the child that
Bilhah will bear for Jacob will be adopted by Rachel as her child.
Nahum Sarna commenting on this expression makes the following comment:
“The key to this phrase lies in a symbolic gesture, widely attested in Near Eastern
sources, especially Hittite, as well as in the cultures of ancient Greece and Rome.
The placing or reception of a child on or by the knees of another signifies
legitimation, whether in acknowledgement of physical parenthood or by adoption.
This practice is again referred to in the Bible in Genesis 48:12 and 50:23 and in
Job 3:12. Its origin is in the idea of the knee as the seat of generative power” (The
JPS Torah Commentary, pages 207-208, The Jewish Publication Society).
Genesis 30:4 So she gave him her maid Bilhah as a wife, and Jacob went in
to her. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
82
The statement “Jacob went in to her (Bilhah)” reveals that Jacob had failed
not only spiritually by operating in unbelief but also failed in his authority in the
marriage as Rachel’s husband. His response should have been no and he should
have explained to Rachel in love that the Lord would give her a child in His
timing.
Notice that Jacob and Rachel are never said to consult the Lord in prayer
because they have decided to take things into their own hands.
Genesis 30:4 records that Rachel gave Bilhah to Jacob “as a wife” whereas
Genesis 35:22 describes Bilhah as Jacob’s “concubine.” This apparent
contradiction is reconciled when we understand that a concubine was considered in
Abraham’s day to be a “second-class wife,” acquired without payment of bridemoney and possessing fewer legal rights.
In the Old Testament period, a concubine was a legal wife but one of secondary
rank and she could be sent away with a small gift. Therefore, the children of a
concubine did not have the same legal rights as the wife and so the inheritance
would go to the child of the wife rather than the concubine.
Genesis 30:5 Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son. 6 Then Rachel said,
“God has vindicated me, and has indeed heard my voice and has given me a
son.” Therefore she named him Dan. (NASB95)
Rachel’s use of the term Elohim, “God” demonstrates her awareness that God
has sovereignly intervened in her life by enabling Bilhah her maid to get pregnant
by Jacob.
Rachel’s idea worked according to plan and Bilhah conceived and bore a son
who Rachel named “Dan.” The name “Dan” means, “God has vindicated me.”
Notice that Rachel does not consider the birth of Dan merely as a blessing from
the Lord but rather as the justice due her as a hopeless victim. On the surface, it
appears that Rachel is spiritual by giving credit to God for Bilhah’s pregnancy but
in reality Rachel is using the Lord’s name in vain since the use of concubines by
God’s people to solve barrenness in contrast to waiting on God is never authorized
by God. She ascribes the success of her plot to God, but in reality God did not give
her the child based on her prayer but rather He gave her the child as a result of his
permissive will since the directive will of God rules out concubines but the
permissive will permitted the birth of this child.
How could God bless the ugly vindication of a jealous woman over her sister?
Rachel must have had very little idea Who she was talking about.
She says that the birth of Dan was an answer to prayer but she is in error since
God would never answers a prayer that is against His will and Rachel’s use of a
concubine rather than waiting on God to solve her problem of barrenness was
against the will of God (See 1 John 5:14; James 4:3).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
83
Genesis 30:7 Rachel's maid Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a
second son. 8 So Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with
my sister, and I have indeed prevailed.” And she named him Naphtali.
(NASB95)
The name “Naphtali” explains Rachel’s naming of the first child “Dan,” which
means, “God has vindicated me.” The name “Naphtali” means, “my wrestling”
indicates that Rachel viewed her relationship with her sister Leah to be like a
wrestling match.
“With my wrestlings I have wrestled” in the Hebrew text literally reads
“wrestlings with God, I have wrestled (with my sister)” since the Hebrew contains
the noun naphtulim, “wrestlings,” which is followed by the noun Elohim, “God”
and the verb pathal, “to wrestle.”
Rachel’s statement means that she wrestled in prayer with God to give her a
child through Bilhah in order to be victorious over Leah.
Of course, God did not give Bilhah a child based on Rachel’s prayer because it
was offered with wrong motivation and was against His will but rather God gave
Bilhah a child based upon His permissive will. The statement made by Rachel on
the occasion of the birth of Bilhah’s second son is reflective of her true spiritual
state at this time since it appears that she saw herself in a great wrestling match,
not with God, but with her sister.
She states that she has triumphed over Leah by Bilhah giving birth to Naphtali.
This is a ridiculous statement by Rachel since how can two adopted sons win out
over four of Leah’s sons? Therefore, Rachel’s statement in Genesis 30:8 indicates
that she erroneously believed that God was on her side with the birth of these two
boys, Dan and Naphtali and has given her the victory over her sister Leah.
Genesis 30:9-13 presents the record of Leah’s maid Zilpah bearing two more
children for Jacob, namely, Gad and Asher.
Genesis 30:9 When Leah saw that she had stopped bearing, she took her
maid Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. (NASB95)
Rachel’s victory is short-lived. Anything that Rachel does, Leah seeks to do
better. It is tit for tat with these two. Leah has lowered herself to the level of
Rachel. She is now seeking revenge against Rachel and is therefore sinning and out
of fellowship at this point in her life.
The rivalry between Rachel and Leah escalates as Leah gives Jacob her maid
Zilpah as a concubine in response to Rachel giving Bilhah as a concubine for
Jacob. There was no need for Leah to do this since she already had four children of
her own with Jacob. There was no need to give her maid Zilpah to Jacob for a wife.
Other than the fact that this was what Rachel had done.
If Rachel can employ her maid in this contest, Leah feels that so can she. The
situation has completely gotten out of hand now. Jacob could have found an excuse
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
84
to accept Bilhah from Rachel, but there is none for his taking Zilpah. He must have
known that he was the tool of his wives’ jealousy, but evidently he does not care.
Through Zilpah, Gad and Asher are added to the family. Leah seems to have
given up on God now. While she praised the Lord at the birth of Judah, she does
not ascribe the birth of Gad to divine intervention.
Just as Bilhah was a concubine so is Zilpah.
Genesis 30:10 Leah's maid Zilpah bore Jacob a son. 11 Then Leah said,
“How fortunate!” So she named him Gad. (NASB95)
The name “Gad” comes from “What good fortune” and indicates that Leah
attributes this child to fortune or good luck rather than God.
Genesis 30:12 Leah's maid Zilpah bore Jacob a second son. 13 Then Leah
said, “Happy am I! For women will call me happy.” So she named him Asher.
(NASB95)
The name “Asher” is from “women will call me happy” and indicates that Leah
thinks she is to be envied by other women. The name of this child demonstrates
that Leah’s happiness is based upon her success over her sister Rachel.
Leah’s speech betrays her here. Not once is God mentioned. In the heat of this
battle between two wives, little thought is given to the ethics of their actions, only
to the expected results. She who previously had viewed her children as a gift from
the Lord now sees these sons as merely good fortune—“How lucky I am,” “How
fortunate,” and “How happy am I.” Devotion to the Lord has been thrown to the
wind by Leah. The focus of her thinking has shifted from God’s estimation of her
actions to the praise she would be given by other women (verse 13).
In Genesis 30:14-21, we have Leah bearing Jacob two more sons, namely,
Issachar and Zebulun and a daughter whose name was Dinah.
Genesis 30:14 Now in the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found
mandrakes in the field, and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel
said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son's mandrakes.” 15 But she said
to her, “Is it a small matter for you to take my husband? And would you take
my son's mandrakes also?” So Rachel said, “Therefore he may lie with you
tonight in return for your son's mandrakes.” (NASB95)
The Gezer calendar gives us insight as to when the wheat harvest took place.
The Gezer calendar dating about 925 B.C was discovered by R. A. S. Macalister in
his excavations at Gezer, which guarded the primary route into the Israelite hill
country and was one of the most strategic cities in the Canaanite and Israelite
periods. Gezer is a prominent 33-acre site that overlooked the Aijalon Valley and
the road leading through it to Jerusalem. The Gezer calendar reveals that the wheat
harvest took place from mid-April to mid-May. Therefore, during the spring time,
Genesis 30:14 records the oldest son of Leah and Jacob roaming the fields and
finding some mandrakes for his mother.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
85
The fact that he is roaming the fields alone indicates that Reuben is old enough
to be left alone and he must have been somewhere between six and ten years of
age.
“Mandrakes” is the noun dudha’im, which were plants common to southern
Palestine and other areas of the world and were used as an aphrodisiac in the
ancient world and were thought to promote fertility.
The mandrake has been called the “love-apple” and in the West, the “Mayapple.” Mandrakes are from the nightshade family, the mandrakes leaves are dark
green and the flowers are purple or greenish yellow. The plant bears a reddish or
orange colored fruit that resembles a small tomato and which has a strong smell
and sweet, though poisonous, taste.
The mandrake is grown in fields and rough ground of Palestine and the
Mediterranean region and is reputed to have emetic, purgative, narcotic qualities.
Its fruit exudes a heady, distinctive fragrance.
Mandrakes can interfere with the transmission of nerve impulses and the
ancient world considered the plant an aphrodisiac and was thought to promote
fertility. The plant’s thick root is often forked with extra side roots giving the
appearance of arms and legs.
Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love, beauty and sex, was called “Lady of the
Mandrake.”
In Song of Solomon 7:10-13 the female spouse enticed her husband to
lovemaking by describing the preparations she had made, including the pleasant
fragrance of the mandrake.
Therefore, Genesis 30:14 records Jacob and Leah’s oldest son Reuben roaming
the fields in the spring time during the wheat harvest and coming upon the
mandrake, whose leaves and fruit would be appealing to the eye of a child.
Reuben’s innocent discovery of an ancient “love-producing potion” provided
the occasion for another confrontation and contest between Jacob’s two wives,
Rachel and Leah. When Rachel sees that Reuben has found some mandrakes that
were considered an aphrodisiac and fertility drug in her day, she requests the
mandrakes thinking they would solve her problem of infertility.
Leah’s strong retort reminds us that, in her mind, it was Rachel who had stolen
her husband from her. She viewed herself as Jacob’s legitimate wife rather than
Rachel, who was merely his romantic preference.
Rachel proposed an exchange with Leah, believing that the mandrakes would
enable her to get pregnant. Leah exploited Rachel’s desperate desire to get
pregnant by offering to give her the mandrakes in exchange for a night with Jacob.
The expression “lie with you” is a euphemism of sexual intercourse. The fact
that Rachel was willing to make such an offer with Leah reveals how much Jacob
favors her over Leah in that she is prepared trade a night of sex with Jacob for the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
86
mandrakes, which she hopes will enable her to conceive. It also reveals how
desperate Rachel is to have children in that she would make a deal with Leah,
exchanging a night of sex with Jacob for the mandrakes.
Leah’s response is not recorded indicating that she grudgingly agrees to
Rachel’s proposal, which backfires on Rachel since Leah conceives again. Also,
the fact that Rachel could make a proposal to Leah, exchanging a night with Jacob
for the mandrakes indicates that Rachel was deciding which of Jacob’s wives or
concubines would sleep with him on any given night. Rachel is again
demonstrating a lack of faith in the Lord who alone can cause women to conceive.
The fact that Rachel believes that the mandrakes will enable her to conceive and
have a child indicates that she still is not free from her pagan background since
only the Lord can enable her to have children. Rachel was so lacking in faith that
she put her trust in mandrakes rather than the God Who made them.
Genesis 30:16 When Jacob came in from the field in the evening, then Leah
went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have surely
hired you with my son's mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night. (NASB95)
Outside of the home of Jacob, Laban has degraded Jacob to a shepherd under
contract to him and now inside his own home, this has taken place.
This is actually the fourth exchange that has taken place in the life of Jacob: (1)
Exchange of birthright with Esau for a bowl of red lintel soup (2) Exchange of
blessing (3) Exchange of wives, Rachel and Leah (4) Exchange of Jacob as a
husband between Rachel and Leah for sex by hire.
In the first two exchanges, Jacob is the victimizer but in the last two, he is the
victim.
Leah’s statement to Jacob “I have surely hired you” indicates that Jacob has
been reduced to a “stud for hire.”
The expression “He lay with her” is a euphemism of sexual intercourse.
“Lay” is the verb shakhav, which is used as a euphemism for sex and is never
used for loving marital intercourse in Genesis but only for illicit or forced sex:
Lot’s daughters with Lot (19:32-35); the Philistines with Rebekah (26:10);
Shechem with Dinah (34:2, 7); Reuben with Bilhah (35:22); Potiphar’s wife with
Joseph (39:7, 10, 12, 14).
We can be sure that Jacob not only accepted the offer because of the sex
involved but also to keep the peace in his own home.
Genesis 30:17 God gave heed to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a
fifth son. (NASB95)
The statement “God gave heed to Leah” emphasizes the omnipotence of God
indicating that God alone enabled Leah to get pregnant, and thus dismisses the
notion that such pagan superstitions about the mandrakes have any validity.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
87
Psalm 113:9 He makes the barren woman abide in the house as a joyful
mother of children. Praise the LORD! (NASB95)
Genesis 30:14-16 clearly reveals that Rachel placed her faith in the pagan
superstition about the mandrakes whereas Leah placed her faith in God.
Remember, the mandrakes were thought to enable barren women to get pregnant,
which would draw the interest of Rachel who was barren whereas the mandrakes
were also an aphrodisiac, which would have attracted a woman like Leah who was
looking for ways to attract Jacob. Rachel embraced the pagan superstition about
the mandrakes and Leah did not.
Rachel’s faith in the pagan superstition about the mandrakes is indicated by the
fact that she was willing to exchange a night with Jacob for the mandrakes in the
hopes that the mandrakes would help her get pregnant. On the other hand, Leah
placed her faith in God, which is indicated by the statement that “God gave heed
to Leah,” implying that Leah prayed to God to enable her to get pregnant.
The fact that God is said to have given heed to Leah clearly implies that she
prayed to get pregnant by Jacob again and God answered her. The fact that Leah
placed her trust in God to enable her to get pregnant whereas Rachel placed her
faith in a pagan superstition is another indication that Leah and not Rachel was
Jacob’s right woman.
Genesis 30:18 Then Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave
my maid to my husband.” So she named him Issachar. (NASB95)
Leah’s use of the term Elohim, “God” emphasizes the omnipotence of God and
demonstrates her awareness that God alone has enabled her to get pregnant again
and not the mandrakes.
The noun Elohim, “God” emphasizes to the reader that God is omnipotent or
all-powerful and is able to bring to pass that which He has determined to take
place.
The name “Issachar” means “reward.”
Leah’s statement “God has given me my wages because I gave my maid to
my husband” indicates that she views Issachar’s birth as a reward for her giving
Zilpah to Jacob. This statement implies that she viewed this as a costly sacrifice,
though at the time the births of Gad and Asher were joyful occasions. She has
misinterpreted the reason why God enabled her to get pregnant.
Leah’s has erroneously interpreted the meaning of her fifth son since the birth
of Issachar was a gift of God’s grace and a demonstration of His compassion in
response to her adverse circumstances. Leah erroneously chose to interpret this son
as evidence of God’s approval and blessing of her giving her maid Zilpah to Jacob.
In actuality, God “rewarded” Leah’s faith in Him. Therefore, God in His grace
heard Leah’s prayer for a child and rewarded her faith in Him by giving her
another son by Jacob.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
88
Grace is all that God is free to do in imparting unmerited blessings to us based
upon on our faith in the merits of the Person and Work of Jesus Christ.
Genesis 30:19 Leah conceived again and bore a sixth son to Jacob. 20 Then
Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good gift; now my husband will dwell
with me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she named him Zebulun.
(NASB95)
Leah’s statement that “God has endowed me with a good gift” expresses her
acknowledgment that God alone by means of His omnipotence has empowered her
to get pregnant and bear another child and that this child is a gift from Him.
“Dwell” is the verb zaval, which does “not” mean, “to dwell” with someone but
rather means, “to honor in the sense of acknowledging (a woman) as one’s lawful
wife” thus indicating that Leah thought that the birth of Zebulun would cause
Jacob to honor her as the sole object of his love and affection.
Leah bore Jacob a sixth son who she named “Zebulun” whose name means,
“honor” as indicated by the verb zaval, “to honor in the sense of acknowledging (a
woman) as one’s lawful wife and sole object of one’s love and affection.”
Genesis 30:21 Afterward she bore a daughter and named her Dinah.
(NASB95)
Dinah is the seventh child that Leah bore to Jacob and only girl. The name
“Dinah” means, “judgment” since the name is the feminine form of the word din
meaning “judgment.”
The record of Dinah’s birth is intended to introduce her to us in preparation for
the tragic events of Genesis 34 where she is raped by Shechem who was the son of
Hamor the Hivite the prince of the land (See Genesis 34:2). Jacob did not have
other daughters besides Dinah (cf. 37:35 and 46:7) since the term “daughters” can
be used to describe a “granddaughter” and not just a “daughter.”
In Genesis 46:7-19, the term “daughters” is used with reference to Jacob’s
“granddaughters” and not to other daughters besides Dinah since Dinah is singled
out as being his only daughter and the daughters of Jacob’s son are listed.
Genesis 30:22-24 completes the section of the book of Genesis containing the
record of the birth of Jacob’s children, and which section began in Genesis 29:31.
In this passage we will see the Lord remembering Rachel and enabling her to
finally bear Jacob a boy who they named Joseph.
Genesis 30:22 Then God remembered Rachel, and God gave heed to her
and opened her womb. (NASB95)
When Genesis 30:22 says that “God remembered Rachel” it does “not” mean
that He had forgotten her but rather it signifies that God according to His timetable
is about to act on Rachel’s behalf by giving her the capacity to get pregnant.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
89
The framework of the story of Jacob’s children implies that Rachel had to wait
at least seven years after marrying Jacob to bear her first child and fourteen years
since their betrothal (See Genesis 29:18, 27).
The statement “God remembered Rachel” expresses the Lord’s compassion
towards Rachel and that He acted decisively on her behalf by giving her a child.
God’s love is “compassionate” meaning that God intensely desires and will act to
alleviate the pain and suffering of another or remove its cause (1 John 3:16-17).
The statement “God gave heed to her (Rachel)” implies that Rachel prayed to
God to enable her to get pregnant and expresses her faith in God. At this point in
her life, Rachel stopped trusting in the pagan superstition that mandrakes could get
her pregnant and instead trusted in God who honored her faith in Him by
answering her prayer for a child of her own. After all of Rachel’s devices and
schemes have been exhausted, God grants her the desire of her heart.
Genesis 30:23 So she conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken
away my reproach.” (NASB95)
Rachel’s statement that “God has taken away my reproach” reveals that in
her day it was calamitous for a woman to be childless and marked her as an
ignominious failure in the eyes of others.
Genesis 30:24 She named him Joseph, saying, “May the LORD give me
another son.” (NASB95)
The name “Joseph” literally means, “He adds,” which is a play on the verb
yasaph, “to add” and is also a prayer for another child, foreshadowing the birth of
Benjamin.
Rachel refers to God with the personal covenant name of God Yahweh, “Lord,”
which emphasizes the “immanency” of God who intervened in the life of Rachel
providing her with a child in order to fulfill His covenant promises to Jacob.
Up to this point in Genesis 30, the term Elohim, “God” has been used
exclusively and not the covenant name of God Yahweh, “Lord” in order to
emphasize the omnipotence of God which enabled Rachel and Leah to conceive
and bear children for Jacob in fulfillment of His covenant promise to Jacob to give
him numerous progeny.
The fact that Rachel refers to God with the covenant name of God, Yahweh
indicates that she is a believer.
The jealousy, bickering, superstition, and weak faith demonstrated by Jacob and
his wives Rachel and Leah stand out in Genesis 29:31-30:24. God's gift of children
was gracious since He gave them in spite of, rather than because of, the behavior of
the parents, which Rachel acknowledged finally as did Jacob.
This account of the origin of the twelve tribes of Israel must have proved to be
most humbling to the nation of Israel who first read the book of Genesis since it
was hardly a story which would have inspired national pride. This story would
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
90
serve to remind them that their “roots” were no basis for pride whatsoever. They
must never trust in their heritage, as the Jews of Jesus’ day did (cf. John 8:33, 39),
but in the God of their heritage. This is why God instructed them to recite their
origins at the presentation of the first-fruits (Deuteronomy 26:5).
Jacob’s Business Proposal to Laban
In Genesis 30:25-34, we have the record of Jacob’s proposal to Laban regarding
flocks, which Laban agrees to. Genesis 30:35-36 records Laban’s mistrust of
Jacob. As we noted in Genesis 28:10-15, the Lord promised Jacob His presence
and protection while he was in Paddan Aram.
In Genesis 29:31-30:24, we saw that the Lord has prospered Jacob in the sense
that He has given him eleven sons and one daughter while in Paddan Aram.
Therefore, in this passage, we see the Lord building Jacob’s house but in Genesis
30:25-43, we see the Lord building Jacob’s property.
Proverbs 27:23-27 teaches that one should prudently build up his property
before his family, but Laban has prevented Jacob his own nephew from acting
prudently. During the first seven years of their marriage contract, Laban should
have allowed Jacob to prepare his own household but instead he left him with
nothing. Now we see in Genesis 30:25-43, Jacob building up his own property
without the help of Laban.
Genesis 30:25-43 takes place over the last six years of Jacob’s exile in Paddan
Aram (See Genesis 31:41).
Genesis 30:25 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. 26 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.” (NASB95)
Jacob requests that Laban let him leave and go back home to his father in
Canaan since he has fulfilled his fourteen year marriage contract (See Genesis
29:41; 31:41). All told, Jacob will spend twenty years in Paddan Aram with Laban
according to Genesis 31:38. Jacob worked seven years for Rachel but Laban
deceived him and sent Leah into his tent on his wedding night (See Genesis 29:2125).
After Jacob voiced his displeasure over Laban’s deception, Laban proposed that
Jacob work another seven years for Rachel, which he agreed to (See Genesis
29:26-30). So all told, Jacob worked fourteen years for both Leah and Rachel.
The conversation between Laban and Jacob that is recorded in Genesis 30:2534 takes place after he has fulfilled the seven years of service to Laban to secure
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
91
Rachel as his bride. Therefore, Jacob has been in Paddan Aram for fourteen years
when the events of Genesis 30:25-43 are recorded.
Genesis 30:25 implies that Rachel gave birth to Joseph at the end of the
fourteen years of Jacob’s labor to Laban. Jacob had eleven sons at this time and
one daughter, all of whom were born during the last seven years. Of course, the
children were born of four different mothers (Leah, Bilhah, Rachel and Zilpah), but
still it shows that the succession of births went much more rapidly than the story
would suggest.
Now, that Jacob has fulfilled his contract with Laban, thus paying for his two
wives, he then asks Laban to let him go home with his wives and children. As
before, after the first seven years of service were concluded, it was Jacob who had
to remind Laban of the agreement made. Just as Jacob had to remind Laban that it
was time for him to fulfill his end of the contract and give Rachel to him as his
wife (29:21) so Jacob must remind Laban again that he has fulfilled his end of the
contract for Rachel and thus seeks his release so that he might return to his
homeland and family.
Laban had not lost count but had intentionally not taken the initiative in
reminding Jacob that his seven years of service for Rachel were concluded since he
was not ready to let his son-in-law go because he recognizes that he has been
blessed by God due to his association with Jacob according to Genesis 30:27.
Several factors would have contributed to Jacob’s desire to leave. First, his
attitude toward Laban would not have been positive at this point since Laban had
deceived him by sending Leah and not Rachel into his tent on his wedding night,
thus delaying his return to the land of Canaan seven years longer than he had
expected. Undoubtedly, Jacob wanted to return home to his family.
Also, Jacob would be itching to leave Laban because the Lord had promised
him that he would someday return to the land of Canaan (28:10-22). Jacob
demands that Laban release to him his wives and children since he has fulfilled his
end of the contract by paying the “bride-price” for both Leah and Rachel through
his fourteen years of service for Laban as payment.
The “service” to which Jacob is referring to is of course, the fourteen years that
he served Laban, which constituted the “bride-price” or the payment to secure both
Leah and Rachel as his wives.
The “bride-price” refers to the compensation paid to the family of the bride for
the loss of the bride’s presence and services and her potential offspring and would
demonstrate proof to Laban’s family that both Leah and Rachel would be well
cared for by Jacob.
The “bride-price” must not be confused with a “dowry,” since the latter was
provided by the bride’s family whereas the former was provided by the groom.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
92
Genesis 30:27 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.” (NASB95)
Laban’s polite and flattering response to Jacob’s demands indicates that Laban
acknowledges that indeed Jacob has fulfilled his responsibility in the contract to
marry Rachel and Leah. Laban’s flattering response to Jacob’s demands reveals
that Laban acknowledges that he has been blessed by the Lord due to his
association with Jacob.
“I have divined” is the verb nachash, which does “not” mean “to practice
divination,” since God would never communicate to Laban by this evil means.
Divination presumes that other spiritual forces control the world and are
therefore not under God’s sovereign authority and was prohibited in Israel since it
causes people to trust in evil demonic forces instead of trusting in God.
Leviticus 19:26 You shall not eat anything with the blood, nor practice
divination or soothsaying. (NASB95)
Therefore, the context indicates that the verb nachash means that Laban
“discerned through circumstances” that he had been prospered by God on account
of Jacob since prior to Jacob’s arrival he had not been prospered.
Laban’s reference to God as Yahweh, “Lord,” was merely a case of Laban
accommodating himself to Jacob’s references to God.
Just as the Philistine kings had to acknowledge God’s blessing on Abraham
(21:22) and Isaac (26:28-29), so Laban has to acknowledge God’s blessing on
Jacob and thus he has by association with Jacob, been blessed.
Genesis 30:28 He continued, “Name me your wages, and I will give it.”
(NASB95)
Laban was willing to make almost any bargain with Jacob that would keep him
working for him since he profited so much from Jacob. Seven years prior Laban let
Jacob name his own wages and had gotten the better end of the bargain and now he
does the same by letting Jacob name his own wages. All Jacob would have to do is
name his price and Laban assured him that he would meet it, if Jacob would only
keep working for him. Since Laban had no other daughters to offer Jacob, the
agreement between himself and Jacob would have to be an actual payment of
money or property. The latter of which they agree to, but of course later on we see
that Laban had no intention to let Jacob leave with any property according to
Genesis 31.
Laban’s statement “name your wages” reveals that he is always occupied with
money and echoes the first deal that he made with Jacob and anticipates that he
intends to deceive Jacob once again. This statement also indicates that Laban is
proposing a change of status for Jacob, going from an indenture servant to a
partner since he lets Jacob name his terms and yet it reveals that Laban views his
relationship with Jacob on a purely economic level rather than a blood relationship.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
93
The fact that Laban lets Jacob name his terms provides Jacob an opportunity to
build his estate and provide for his family so that he does not leave for home
penniless.
Genesis 30:29 But he said to him, “You yourself know how I have served
you and how your cattle have fared with me. 30 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?” (NASB95)
The possession of livestock in the patriarchal period was a sign of wealth. The
little Laban had has now multiplied because of Jacob’s service on behalf of him.
In Genesis 30:29-30, Jacob drives the point home to Laban that he had been
prospered by the Lord because of being associated with him.
Jacob’s statement “you yourself know” emphasizes that Laban is well aware of
the fact that he has been prospered by the Lord due to his association with Jacob
since prior to his arrival in Paddan Aram, Laban was not prospering.
Jacob’s statement “the Lord has blessed you wherever I turned” means that
Laban was blessed by association with him and is an expression of his humility in
that he ascribes these blessings to God, acknowledging that the Lord has been
fulfilling His promises to bless him while in exile (See Genesis 28:10-13). By
making this statement Jacob is giving glory to God by bearing witness to Laban
that the Lord is the cause of his increase in wealth and not himself. Though, Jacob
states that he was faithful and honest in his service to Laban, he still points out to
Laban that the Lord was the ultimate cause of his increase of livestock.
Now, in Genesis 30:31-33, Jacob names his terms.
Genesis 30:31 So he said, “What shall I give you?” And Jacob said, “You
shall not give me anything. If you will do this one thing for me, I will again
pasture and keep your flock.” (NASB95)
Laban’s question to Jacob, “what shall I give you” sounds reasonable but it is
actually a question used to deceive Jacob since later on we see that Laban had no
intention of letting Jacob leave with anything of his.
Jacob’s response to Laban’s question, “You shall not give me anything”
reveals not only that he has learned by experience that the Lord would provide for
him what he needed but also that Jacob did not wish to be indebted to Laban who
he has learned through experience was a selfish, deceptive and wicked schemer.
Therefore, in Genesis 30:32-33, Jacob makes a proposition to Laban, which
would give the Lord an opportunity to bless him materially as the Lord had blessed
Laban materially through his association with Jacob.
This proposal would bring blessing to Jacob without taking anything belonging
to Laban and thus would give God the glory and would also demonstrate Jacob’s
great faith in the Lord.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
94
Genesis 30:32 “let me pass through your entire flock today, removing from
there every speckled and spotted sheep and every black one among the lambs
and the spotted and speckled among the goats; and such shall be my wages.”
(NASB95)
Normally goats in that land were black or dark brown, seldom white or spotted
with white (See Song of Solomon 4:1; 6:5) while sheep were nearly always white,
infrequently black or spotted (See Song of Solomon 4:2; 6:6; Isaiah 1:18; Daniel
7:9). Jacob proposes that all speckled and spotted among the sheep and goats and
the dark colored lambs was to be his wages and the pure white sheep, the dark
goats were to be considered Laban’s property. Any spotted or speckled lambs or
goats and dark colored sheep born in the future will be Jacob’s property.
The removal of these spotted and speckled lambs and goats and dark colored
sheep would “not” later be considered Jacob’s property since he has already
stipulated in Genesis 30:31 that he wants nothing that is Laban’s! Therefore, Jacob
is not changing his mind but is referring to all “future” speckled or spotted lambs
and goats and dark colored sheep, which would be his property and so he is
actually proposing to start with nothing from the outset.
The removal of these spotted and speckled colored animals was to ensure that
Jacob received nothing that was Laban’s. The agreement was solidified, and the
flocks were divided, with Jacob tending the white sheep and dark colored goats
while Laban’s sons would tend the speckled and spotted goats and sheep and black
sheep that were removed from the flock and segregated from the flock that Jacob
would be shepherding.
Undoubtedly, Laban expected Jacob to ask for a certain number of animals to
begin his own flocks and herds but Jacob does the unexpected since he did not ask
to take any property that was Laban’s. Instead, Jacob proposes that he work for
Laban to again supervise and shepherd his flocks and herds as he had been doing
for the previous fourteen years. His pay would consist of only those animals yet
unborn that would be less desirable to Laban because of their markings. Therefore,
it would be entirely up to the Lord as to how many animals would become Jacob’s.
Jacob’s proposal put himself entirely at the mercy of the Lord and was a great
act of faith in the Lord on his part.
Genesis 30:33 “So my honesty will answer for me later, when you come
concerning my wages. Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the
goats and black among the lambs, if found with me, will be considered stolen.”
(NASB95)
Jacob also proposes that if anything appears in his flocks, which is not speckled
or spotted among the goats or black among the lambs was to be considered as
stolen by him and Laban could promptly remove it and claim it as his own.
So the issue will be clear-cut and deceit will be out of the question.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
95
Genesis 30:34 Laban said, “Good, let it be according to your word.”
(NASB95)
Laban agrees to Jacob’s proposal without hesitation because he cannot see how
he could possibly lose out and not profit from it. In fact, he would lose nothing of
his flocks and it appeared from his human perspective that it was very unlikely that
Jacob would acquire any future animals by this process either. Jacob would have
no breeding stock of his own and none of the animals from which his pay was to
come would be likely to produce spotted and speckled progeny of their own
without a spotted and speckled population with which to interbreed. The only way
that Jacob could possibly succeed and prosper was if the Lord intervened for
Jacob.
Genesis 30:35 So he removed on that day the striped and spotted male
goats and all the speckled and spotted female goats, every one with white in it,
and all the black ones among the sheep, and gave them into the care of his
sons. 36 And he put a distance of three days' journey between himself and
Jacob, and Jacob fed the rest of Laban's flocks.” (NASB95)
Notice that Laban removes the “striped,” animals, which were not mentioned
by Jacob but obviously were considered by Jacob to be included with the
“speckled” and “spotted” animals.
Also, Laban removed all the animals “with white” on them, which were
considered by Jacob to be included with the “speckled” and “spotted” animals.
Notice that Laban removes the striped and spotted animals from his flocks and
the dark colored ones from among his sheep when Jacob is recorded in Genesis
30:32 as saying that he would do this himself. The fact that Laban removes these
animals and does not allow Jacob to do so demonstrates his mistrust of Jacob.
Jacob’s proposal was so unbelievably fantastic from Laban’s point of view that
he felt that there must be some catch to it. Laban’s mistrust of Jacob is further
manifested in that he put a distance of three days’ journey between himself and
Jacob because he wants to prevent Jacob from tampering with the animals that
were removed from his flock.
Now, this mistrust of Jacob was not warranted since Jacob had never dealt
falsely or deceitfully with Laban but rather this was a mistrust of a man who is
himself not to be trusted. Therefore, Laban is projecting onto Jacob his
deceitfulness and is insulting Jacob by demonstrating such a mistrust in him.
The Lord Intervenes on Jacob’s Behalf
In Genesis 30:37-43, we see the Lord intervening in the life of Jacob rendering
him justice for being mistreated by Laban for the past fourteen years by instructing
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
96
him regarding selective breeding techniques among Laban’s flocks, which
produced for him numerous offspring.
Genesis 30:37 Then Jacob took fresh rods of poplar and almond and plane
trees, and peeled white stripes in them, exposing the white which was in the
rods. (NASB95)
“Rods” is the noun maqqel, which is used of cut branches.
“Poplar” is the noun livneh, which refers to the storax tree and is a play upon
Laban’s name, which is lavan, “white.”
“Almond” is the noun luz, which was valued for the nut it bears, which is used
not only for food but also to produce flavoring oil.
“Plane trees” is the noun `ermon, which flourishes in wet areas and can grow
to massive size, reaching sixty feet and the circumference of its trunk can become
forty feet.
Genesis 30:38 He set the rods which he had peeled in front of the flocks in
the gutters, even in the watering troughs, where the flocks came to drink; and
they mated when they came to drink. (NASB95)
“Mated” is the verb chamam, which means, “to be hot, to be in heat, to be
aroused sexually.”
Genesis 30:39 So the flocks mated by the rods, and the flocks brought forth
striped, speckled, and spotted. 40 Jacob separated the lambs, and made the
flocks face toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban; and he
put his own herds apart, and did not put them with Laban's flock. 41
Moreover, whenever the stronger of the flock were mating, Jacob would place
the rods in the sight of the flock in the gutters, so that they might mate by the
rods 42 but when the flock was feeble, he did not put them in; so the feebler
were Laban's and the stronger Jacob's. 43 So the man became exceedingly
prosperous, and had large flocks and female and male servants and camels
and donkeys.” (NASB95)
The selective breeding techniques employed by Jacob here in Genesis 30:37-43
are known today as “Mendelian genetics,” named after the Austrian botanist,
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) who made his experiments in the latter part of the
nineteenth century regarding the laws of heredity. Of course, the Lord created
these laws of heredity and revealed them to Jacob in a dream so that he could take
advantage of these laws in breeding his flocks as we will note in Genesis 31:10-13.
“Under these laws of heredity, even though a species of animal may have
certain ‘dominant’ traits such as the white color of sheep, there are, in each
generation, certain individual animals that manifest one or more ‘recessive’ traits
such as the brown color among the sheep. Actual physical vigor and usefulness for
man’s needs are quite independent of this matter of coloration. The Lord simply
increased the statistical proportion of animals in future generations of Laban’s
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
97
flocks that would appear with these recessive traits. He knew that if Jacob would
then use these for future breeding in the flock that this would increase their
numbers. A certain proportion of the solid-colored animals he knew would be
‘homozygous’ and if mated with the other homozygous animals, would appear
only solid color offspring. The ‘heterozygous’ animals, which did contain in some
proportion the genes for off-colored offspring would be the ones, which would
have to supply Jacob’s own future flocks. But by selective breeding, under the
direction of the Lord, Jacob could eventually develop a flock of predominately
spotted and speckled animals” (Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Record, pages 474477, Baker Book House).
Some commentators believe that Jacob is acting deceitfully in Genesis 30:37-43
but this emphatically is not the case if we start from the premise that the Lord gave
him these instructions! Furthermore, remember that in his proposal to Laban,
which Laban agreed to, Jacob proposed that he start with nothing!
Jacob made the proposal in such a way that the only way he could successfully
have a flock of multicolored animals was if the Lord intervened and supernaturally
guided him and instructed him and prospered him.
Also, some criticize Jacob’s techniques here as not being accurate scientifically
and nothing but an old wives tale. However, scientists have not been able to work
out concerning the transmission of hereditary factors.
In a certain population there are multitudes of different characteristics, which
may appear in different individual animals of that species. The potential for
variation in the DNA molecular structure is tremendous. Exactly what it is that
determines the actual characteristics a particular individual may have, out of all the
potential characteristics that are theoretically available in the gene pool is not yet
known in any significant degree.
Some critics of Jacob breeding techniques state that it is scientifically
impossible to achieve the results that he did when these techniques are predicated
on the belief that visual impressions at the time of conception affect the outcome at
birth
Henry M. Morris, “Though it is very unlikely that an external image can be
transmitted through the visual apparatus to the brain and thus in some way as a
signal to the DNA structure to specify certain characteristics to be triggered in the
embryo. However, it is true that certain chemicals can and do have a significant
prenatal influence if they can reach the embryo or prior to conception, the DNA in
the germ cells. It is possible that certain chemicals in the wood of these trees,
peeled rods of which were actually in the water, which the flocks came to drink,
were capable somehow of affecting the animals. The water treated with these
peeled rods must have served as an aphrodisiac and promoter of fertility among the
flocks. At least one such chemical substance found in these trees has been used for
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
98
such a purpose in both ancient and modern times. The mere sight of the striped
rods may have served as an aphrodisiac to the flocks when they came to drink,
much like the effect of pornographic pictures have in stimulating the sexual
apparatus” (Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Record, pages 474-477, Baker Book
House).
This is implied by the verb chamam, which the NASB translates “mated” in
Genesis 30:38 and is more accurately translated by the NIV “were in heat” since it
means, “to be hot, to be in heat, to be aroused sexually.”
Henry M. Morris, “So in some way not understood but apparently confirmed by
many practical animal raisers since, the sight of white-streaked rods seems to
stimulate these animals to sexual activity” (Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Record,
pages 474-477, Baker Book House).
Now, in Genesis 30:40, the identification of some of the striped and dark
colored animals as belonging to Laban is confusing since according to the terms of
the contract these animals belong to Jacob. But it seems clear that Laban has
changed the contract to give himself some of the streaked animals (see Genesis
31:7-8).
In Genesis 30:41-42, the Lord directed Jacob to employ certain techniques that
would strengthen Jacob’s flocks and weaken Laban because Laban had mistreated
Jacob for fourteen years.
Henry M. Morris, “First of all, the Lord had Jacob divide his flocks into two
shifts, composed of stronger and weaker animals, respectively. He used the rods in
the troughs when the stronger animals drank but not when the weaker ones came
there. Therefore, the stronger animals were stimulated to mate, and the others were
not” (Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Record, pages 474-477, Baker Book House).
This meant that a greater and greater percentage of the animals in Jacob’s flock
were strong animals and in increasing percentage in Laban’s were weaker animals.
In Genesis 30:43 that within a space of perhaps four or five years, Jacob’s
flocks had grown so large so that he prospered greatly from it so that he had to
employ many servants, both male and female and had purchased many camels and
asses. With the Lord’s help, Jacob had quickly become a very prosperous rancher
and had not acted deceitfully at all towards Laban. With the Lord’s guidance,
Jacob had become prosperous by means of sound practices of animal breeding.
The selective breeding techniques that Jacob employs that are recorded in
Genesis 30:37-43 were given to him by the Lord in a dream which is implied in
Genesis 31:10-13 since the Lord states to Jacob that He is responsible for these
techniques being successful.
During the time that the animals were in heat and mating by the water troughs
Jacob saw in the dream that the males that were impregnating the females were
described as “striped, speckled and mottled.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
99
Now, we know that all the “striped speckled and spotted” animals were taken
away by Laban’s sons in a three day journey, thus leaving only the solid colored
animals, which belonged to Laban’s flock.
The dream indicates that the “striped, speckled and mottled” animals were
heterozygous carrying the particular genes for streaks, spots and speckles even
though their coats were all solid color.
In the dream, God related that He could see into the gene structure, though
Jacob could not and knew the true nature of the animals. Therefore, the
homozygous animals, which could produce offspring colored like themselves were
restrained from mating by means of God’s divine omnipotence.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
100
Chapter Seven: Jacob’s Departure from Laban
Genesis 31 records for us the story of Jacob’s departure from Laban in Paddan
Aram. This chapter contains the final act in the drama of the tumultuous
relationship between Jacob and Laban.
In Genesis 31:1-2, we will see Laban and his sons displaying a bad attitude
towards Jacob because the Lord has been prospering Jacob and giving him spotted,
speckled and stripe flocks from Laban’s solid colored flocks. Also, we will see in
Genesis 31:3, the Lord commanding Jacob to leave Laban and return home to the
land of Canaan and his father Isaac.
Genesis 31:1 Now Jacob heard the words of Laban's sons, saying, “Jacob
has taken away all that was our father's, and from what belonged to our
father he has made all this wealth.” 2 Jacob saw the attitude of Laban, and
behold, it was not friendly toward him as formerly. 3 Then the LORD said to
Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your relatives, and I will be
with you.” (NASB95)
This is the second time that we see Laban’s sons mentioned, with the first
mention of them taking place in Genesis 30:35. The Scriptures do not tell us how
many sons Laban had or how old they were. They should have been involved in
the marriage of their sisters, as Laban was when Rebekah was married to Isaac.
Therefore, they must have either been too young to be involved in the marriage of
their sisters or Laban must have been a very dominating character to keep
everything in his own hands.
In Genesis 30:35, we saw that Laban gave his sons care of the spotted,
speckled, and striped flocks, which were separated from the solid colored animals
among his flocks. Then, out of mistrust for Jacob, Laban sent his boys on a three
day journey in order to ensure that Jacob would not use these flocks to impregnate
his solid colored animals, which Jacob would be shepherding. Jacob’s prosperity
stirred up jealousy on the part of Laban’s sons.
We also must note that Laban’s sons fail to acknowledge that Jacob basically
worked as an indenture servant to Laban for fourteen years in order to build up
Laban’s wealth. They fail to see that their father had dealt deceitfully with Jacob as
well.
Also, we see that Laban’s attitude towards Jacob had changed and was getting
dirty looks from Laban as a result of the Lord prospering Jacob from Laban’s
flocks. Laban had been willing to use Jacob as long as it was to his advantage but
he was not happy to see Jacob’s prosperity above his own. Therefore, we see that
Laban is a “user.”
Jacob was a great shepherd who made Laban a lot of money and so Laban acted
kindly toward him. The incentive for kindness on the part of Laban towards Jacob
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
101
was gone now that Jacob was prospering from Laban’s flocks with the Lord’s help
and was no longer working full time for Laban. So the situation becomes
intolerable for both parties and so it is definitely time for Jacob to leave.
Laban’s sons recognized that all Jacob’s wealth came from what had been their
father’s but this was the Lord’s doing. So they suspect foul play on the part of
Jacob, which would be understandable from their point of view since like their
father, they were natural minded men and not believers.
Unknown to Laban’s sons was that the Lord intervened and rendered justice to
Jacob by giving him revelation as to selective breeding techniques (Compare
Genesis 30:37-43 with 31:4-13).
These selective breeding techniques enabled Jacob to produce numerous
offspring that were speckled, spotted and striped from Laban’s flocks, which Jacob
was shepherding even though these flocks were also solid in color.
The selective breeding techniques that Jacob employs that are recorded in
Genesis 30:37-43 were given to him by the Lord in a dream which is implied in
Genesis 31:10-13 since the Lord states to Jacob that He is responsible for these
techniques being successful.
This was not an accident that Jacob overheard the words of Laban’s sons since
this was according to the providence of God, which expresses the fact that the
world and our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God. As the object of
Satanic attack, the Lord directs Jacob to leave Laban since he was to carry on the
line of Christ and was to be the progenitor of the nation of Israel from whom Christ
would come and bring blessing to the entire world and destroy the works of the
devil.
In Genesis 31:3, “Lord” is the proper noun Yahweh, which is the covenant
name of God indicating that Jacob had a covenant relationship with God and that
God is about to fulfill His covenant promises He made with Jacob that are recorded
in Genesis 28:10-15 and specifically the promises of a homecoming and
protection.
The term Yahweh, “Lord” also emphasizes the “immanency” of God meaning
that the Lord was involving Himself in and concerning Himself with and
intervening in the life of Jacob.
The Lord’s intervention in the life of Jacob in ruling in favor of Jacob over
Laban, which is recorded in Genesis 30:25-43 and confirmed in Genesis 31:4-13
has caused a rift in the relationship between Jacob and Laban, which can only be
resolved by Jacob leaving Laban.
So far we have seen that Jacob had heard of the antagonism of Laban’s sons
towards him because of his prosperity. Also, he has also seen this antagonism by
virtue of Laban’s bad attitude towards him. Any lingering doubts as to the proper
course of action that Jacob should take are soon dispelled by the Lord’s command
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
102
for him to leave Laban and return home to Canaan as well as the Lord’s
reassurance to Jacob of protection from Laban.
The Lord’s command to Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers” and the
promise “I will be with you” would evoke memories in Jacob of the revelation he
received from the Lord at Bethel before leaving Canaan to depart for Paddan
Aram, and which revelation is recorded in Genesis 28:10-15. Therefore, we see
that the Lord’s command to Jacob “Return to the land of your fathers” recorded
in Genesis 31:3 indicates to Jacob that the Lord is about to fulfill the promise He
made to Jacob “I will bring you back to this land” recorded in Genesis 28:15.
The Lord’s faithfulness to Jacob in protecting him and prospering reminds us of
God’s faithfulness towards us here in the church age.
Therefore, we see that Lord’s promise to Jacob that “I am with you” recorded
in Genesis 31:3 echoes the promise the Lord made to Jacob “I will be with you”
recorded in Genesis 28:15 and is a guarantee to Jacob of the Lord’s presence in his
life. The Lord’s promise to be present in Jacob’s life reminds us of the Lord’s
promise to us here in the church age that He will never leave us or forsake us.
In Genesis 31:4-16, we have the record of Jacob informing his wives that the
Lord has commanded him to leave Laban and his wives agree to leave with him.
Genesis 31:4 So Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah to his flock in the
field, 5 and said to them, “I see your father's attitude, that it is not friendly
toward me as formerly, but the God of my father has been with me.”
(NASB95)
The fact that Jacob “sent and called Rachel and Leah to his flock in the
field” suggests that Jacob is now in charge of his home since we have seen in
Genesis 29:31-30:24 he was being ordered around by his wives and used as a stud
by his competing wives.
The fact that Jacob “sent and called Rachel and Leah to his flock in the
field” and that they obeyed him indicates that both women are subordinating
themselves to Jacob and respecting him as they should according to the Word of
God.
The fact that Jacob “sent and called Rachel and Leah to his flock in the
field” demonstrates that he is considerate of his wives, which is an expression of
his love for them and responsibility of a Christian husband.
The fact that Jacob spoke to his wives first to inform them why they needed to
leave their father and simply did not order them to come with him, no questions
asked, demonstrated his love for them and consideration of their feelings since
Laban was their father.
Rachel’s name is mentioned first and then Leah indicating that she is given
priority over Leah as the principle object of his love and affection. The lower
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
103
social status of his concubines, Zilpah and Bilhah made it unnecessary for Jacob to
seek their agreement to his plan to leave.
The first reason why Jacob summons Rachel and Leah while shepherding his
flock in the field was so as to not arouse the suspicion of Laban or his sons and the
second reason was for protection from eavesdroppers.
The fact that Jacob desired to leave Laban secretly was “not” a sin since in
Scripture we see that David kept his whereabouts secret from Saul in order to
protect himself (1 Samuel 19:2). The Lord Jesus Christ went in secret to the
Temple in order to avoid a confrontation with the Pharisees, which could lead to
His premature arrest before the time that the Father had ordained for Him (See
John 7:1-10). However, although it was not a sin that Jacob left secretly, it was a
sin that he left secretly out of fear of Laban.
In response to Laban’s question as to why Jacob left secretly, Jacob replies in
Genesis 31:31, “Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your
daughters from me by force.” Therefore, Jacob’s sin in this matter was a lack of
faith in the Lord to protect him from Laban.
Jacob should have left openly, trusting that the Lord would protect him from
Laban as He said He would in Genesis 28:15 in the phrase “I will keep you.”
Jacob’s sin of fear due to a lack of faith repeats the sin of his grandfather Abraham
who out of fear of Pharaoh of Egypt and Abimelech said that Sarah was his sister
and not his wife (See Genesis 12:9-20; 20:1-18). Jacob’s sin of fear due to a lack of
faith repeats the sin of his father of Isaac who out of fear of the Philistines told
them that Rebekah was his sister and not his wife (See Genesis 26:7-11). Unlike,
his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac, Jacob’s fear was not for his own life
but that his loved ones would be taken away from him by force.
Jacob had never previously informed his wives about the terrible situation
between him and their father out of respect for their love for their father but now
he had to present the complete picture to them since the Lord wants him to leave
Laban. Jacob begins by pointing out to both women the change in their father’s
attitude towards him, which was caused by the Lord intervening and instructing
him in the use of selective breeding techniques and prospering him at the expense
of Laban. This conversation with his wives reveals that Jacob has grown up quite a
bit spiritually in the last twenty years since he openly proclaims his faith in the
Lord and His promises and gives all the credit to the Lord for blessing him despite
the antagonism of Laban and his sons towards him.
Jacob’s statement “the God of my father has been with me” is an
acknowledgment that God has been faithful to him as He was to his father Isaac as
demonstrated by God fulfilling His promise that He made to him at Bethel twenty
years prior to be with him, which is recorded in Genesis 28:15.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
104
Jacob employs the noun Elohim, “God” rather than the covenant name of God,
Yahweh, “Lord” since the former emphasizes the omnipotence of God, which was
manifested by prospering Jacob in spite of Laban’s attempt to cheat him.
Genesis 31:6 You know that I have served your father with all my strength.
(NASB95)
Notice that Jacob consistently refers to Laban as “your father,” which he does
in order to contrast the spiritual character of “my father” (Isaac) with the godless
character of “your father” (Laban).
Jacob declares to his wives that he served Laban with all his strength, which is
impressive since we see in Genesis 29:10 that he demonstrated great strength in
moving the large rock from a well in order to impress Rachel.
The fact that Jacob served Laban with all his strength even though Laban was a
terrible employer demonstrates the spiritual principle, which is to work hard for
your employer as to the Lord even if the employer is unreasonable and you will be
rewarded by the Lord (See Ephesians 6:5-8; 1 Peter 2:18-20; Colossians 3:22-24).
Genesis 31:7 Yet your father has cheated me and changed my wages ten
times; however, God did not allow him to hurt me. (NASB95)
Jacob’s statement “God did not allow him (Laban) to hurt me” is an
acknowledgment that God has been faithful in fulfilling His promise that He made
to Jacob at Bethel twenty years prior to protect him, which is denoted in the phrase
“I…will keep you” in Genesis 28:15.
Jacob’s statement that Laban changed his wages “ten” times is a figure
implying “enough is enough” since in the Bible the number ten signifies the
perfection of the divine order, thus implying that from God’s perspective, Laban
had cheated him long enough and now God is intervening and commanding him to
leave Laban.
Genesis 31:8 If he spoke thus, “The speckled shall be your wages,” then all
the flock brought forth speckled; and if he spoke thus, “The striped shall be
your wages,' then all the flock brought forth striped.” (NASB95)
In Genesis 31:7-8 the reader learns what had not yet been revealed in Genesis
30, namely, that Laban had repeatedly changed the terms of the original contract he
made with Jacob recorded in Genesis 30:25-36 in order to cheat Jacob.
Genesis 30:32 reveals that the original agreement stipulated that “every
speckled and spotted sheep and every black one among the lambs and the
spotted and speckled among the goats” would be Jacob’s wages. However,
Genesis 31:8 reveals that Laban changed the terms stipulated in the original
agreement by changing Jacob’s wages to only the “speckled” animals among his
flocks and then he changed it to only the “striped.”
So it appears that Laban allowed only one of these markings at a time to be
Jacob’s wages instead of giving him all the speckled, spotted sheep and goats.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
105
When the speckled animals multiplied, Laban would change the terms to only the
spotted and when they multiplied, he changed it to the striped, thus it was always
Laban’s intention to cheat Jacob by giving him what he thought would be a small
number of the young of his flocks.
Genesis 31:9 “Thus God has taken away your father's livestock and given
them to me.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s statement that God took away from Laban his flocks and gave them to
him is further indication that Jacob did not attempt to cheat Laban and
acknowledges that the justice of God has ruled in his favor and thus God has
sovereignly chosen to give Laban’s livestock to him.
Psalm 103:6 The LORD performs righteous deeds and judgments for all
who are oppressed. (NASB95)
The fact that God ruled in favor of Jacob is a fulfillment of the blessing
pronounced upon Jacob by his father Isaac, recorded in Genesis 27:29, namely,
that those who bless Jacob will be blessed and those who curse him will be cursed.
Therefore, when Isaac pronounces this blessing on Jacob, he is stating in effect that
like his grandfather Abraham, the Lord would identify with the cause of Jacob,
thus, blessing Jacob would be equivalent to doing it to God whereas cursing Jacob
would in effect be cursing God.
Laban “cursed” Jacob in the sense that he dealt unjustly and deceitfully with
Jacob for twenty years and so by taking away Laban’s flocks and giving them to
Jacob, God was pronouncing judgment upon Laban.
Genesis 31:10 And it came about at the time when the flock were mating
that I lifted up my eyes and saw in a dream, and behold, the male goats which
were mating were striped, speckled, and mottled. 11 Then the angel of God
said to me in the dream, “Jacob,” and I said, “Here I am.” 12 He said, “Lift
up now your eyes and see that all the male goats which are mating are striped,
speckled, and mottled; for I have seen all that Laban has been doing to you.”
(NASB95)
The “angel of God” is the preincarnate Christ since in Genesis 31:13, He states
to Jacob that He is the “God of Bethel.”
The dream that is recorded in Genesis 31:10-12 and is to be distinguished from
the dream that is recorded in Genesis 31:3 since in the former, the Lord informs
Jacob that He is ruling in his favor and judging Laban whereas in the latter, the
Lord tells him to leave Laban and head home to Canaan.
Genesis 31:10-12 refers to the events recorded in Genesis 30:37-43 since in the
dream God makes reference to Jacob’s contract with Laban, which stipulated that
Jacob would receive as his wages, the “spotted, speckled and striped” of Laban’s
flock.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
106
The selective breeding techniques that Jacob employs that are recorded in
Genesis 30:37-43 were given to him by the Lord in a dream which is implied in
Genesis 31:10-12 since the Lord states to Jacob that He is responsible for these
techniques being successful.
Genesis 31:10-12 records that during the time that the animals were in heat and
mating by the water troughs Jacob saw in the dream that the males that were
impregnating the females were described as “striped, speckled and mottled.”
Now, we know that all the “striped speckled and spotted” animals were taken
away by Laban’s sons in a three day journey, thus leaving only the solid colored
animals, which belonged to Laban’s flock.
The dream indicates that the “striped, speckled and mottled” animals were
heterozygous carrying the particular genes for streaks, spots and speckles even
though their coats were all solid color. In the dream, God related that He could see
into the gene structure, though Jacob could not and knew the true nature of the
animals. Therefore, by means of God’s divine omnipotence the homozygous
animals, which could produce offspring colored like themselves were restrained
from mating and the heterozygous animals were compelled to mate.
The Lord statement to Jacob, “for I have seen all that Laban has been doing
to you” is a reference to the omniscience of God in the sense that God knows
perfectly, eternally and simultaneously all that is knowable, both the actual and the
possible and thus has all knowledge of every event in human and angelic history.
Proverbs 15:3 The eyes of the LORD are everywhere, keeping watch on the
wicked and the good. (NASB95)
Therefore, the Lord’s statement “for I have seen all that Laban has been
doing to you” would indicate to Jacob that the Lord knew perfectly, eternally and
simultaneously everything that had transpired between him and Laban.
So this statement would of course comfort Jacob in that since God knew
everything that had transpired between him and Laban, God also had already taken
measures from eternity past to protect him.
Genesis 31:13 “I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar, where
you made a vow to Me; now arise, leave this land, and return to the land of
your birth.” (NASB95)
The Lord’s statement “I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar,
where you made a vow to Me” was a reminder to Jacob of his worship at Bethel,
which was in response to the theophany, divine promises and vision of elect
angels, and which worship is recorded in Genesis 28:16-22.
The Lord’s reference to a pillar reminded Jacob when he anointed a pillar by
pouring oil on its top, which is recorded in Genesis 28:18 and expressed his
dedication, devotion, consecration and gratitude to the Lord for the gracious
promises that He made to him in the dream at Bethel twenty years before.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
107
The Lord’s reference to a vow in Genesis 31:13 reminded Jacob of the vow that
he made to the Lord, recorded in Genesis 28:20, which was his verbal and
voluntary act of submitting to the Lord’s authority and expressed that he was
reorienting his life and had committed himself to living according to the standards
of the Lord.
In Genesis 31:14-16, we see that both Rachel and Leah were united and in
agreement in their response to Jacob informing them that the Lord wanted him to
leave Laban and return home to Canaan.
Genesis 31:14 Rachel and Leah said to him, “Do we still have any portion
or inheritance in our father's house? 15 Are we not reckoned by him as
foreigners? For he has sold us, and has also entirely consumed our purchase
price. 16 Surely all the wealth which God has taken away from our father
belongs to us and our children; now then, do whatever God has said to you.”
(NASB95)
Undoubtedly, Jacob was relieved to see and hear that both Rachel and Leah
were unified and in agreement to leave with him. He was relieved that they both
were united in going with him since they had fought and competed for Jacob’s love
and affection since the day he married them. However, both women were united in
their love for him and so both were willing to leave with him.
Genesis 31:14-15 reveals that Rachel and Leah agreed to follow Jacob to his
homeland not only out of retaliation against their father but Genesis 31:16 also
reveals they agreed out of recognition of God’s providential dealings with their
father.
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on Rachel and Leah’s response recorded in
Genesis 31:14-16, writes, “Their grievances pertain to the past, present and future.
In the past, Laban sold them and used up what was paid for them; in the present, he
counts them as foreigners; their future and that of their children depends on the
wealth they now have and that rightly belongs to them but which they fear Laban
will steal” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 426, Zondervan).
The rhetorical question of the two women, “Are we not reckoned by him as
foreigners?” expresses the fact that they were exploited in the same way as Jacob
who was a foreigner from Canaan rather than being treated as his own flesh and
blood.
Their statement “For he has sold us, and has also entirely consumed our
purchase price” refers to the fact that by cheating Jacob out of his wages for
fourteen years, Laban in effect had consumed the bride-price since Jacob’s
fourteen years of service was payment to marry both Rachel and Leah.
The “bride-price” refers to the compensation paid to the family of the bride for
the loss of the bride’s presence and services and her potential offspring and would
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
108
demonstrate proof to Laban’s family that Rachel and Leah would be well cared for
by Jacob.
The fourteen years’ service that Jacob performed for Laban in order to marry
both Rachel and Leah was to be in lieu of the usual “bride-price” and so by
cheating Jacob out of his wages, Laban was cheating his daughters and
grandchildren!
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on this statement, writes, “Legally, the
consummating sum given in marriage was to be transferred at least in part to the
daughters. Some of Jacob’s wages during the fourteen years he worked for them
should also have belonged to them. Further, by cheating Jacob during the last six
years, Laban has continued to cheat them” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 426,
Zondervan).
The fact that Jacob worked hard for seven years in order to marry both Rachel
and Leah made both women love Jacob all the more and resent their father. Rather
than treating the bride-price like a dowry, to provide a financial base for his
daughters and grandchildren’s future well-being and security, as should have been
done, Laban had used it up for himself and gave them nothing.
Both Rachel and Leah felt that since their husband had been responsible for the
great prosperity of their father, and since this was in effect what Jacob had given in
order to marry them, these possessions by all rights should have come to them and
their children.
Instead, Laban made it clear that he would give neither woman anything and as
a result they felt justified in interpreting God’s dealings with Laban, in causing his
flocks to gradually become those of Jacob, as simply taking what had rightly
belonged to them and their children and restoring it to them.
The reason for Rachel and Leah’s decision to leave with Jacob was not based
simply on obedience to God’s will but rather because their best material interests
were not being served by the present arrangement whereas Jacob wanted to leave
out of obedience to the will of God.
Rachel and Leah’s statement “do whatever God has said to you” indicates that
they acknowledge God’s blessing upon Jacob and that it is God’s will for them to
leave their father and go with Jacob and expresses their faith in the Lord and their
willingness to risk a journey to the Promised Land.
In Genesis 31:17-21, we see Jacob departing from Paddan Aram and heading
towards Canaan.
Genesis 31:17 Then Jacob arose and put his children and his wives upon
camels; 18 and he drove away all his livestock and all his property which he
had gathered, his acquired livestock which he had gathered in Paddan-aram,
to go to the land of Canaan to his father Isaac. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
109
Jacob put his wives and children on camels, which we have noted in our
previous studies in the book of Genesis, were a prime measure of wealth back in
the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob since camels were rare back then.
Genesis 29:17-30:24 records that Jacob had four wives, eleven boys and one
girl. Jacob’s wives included not only Rachel and Leah but also his concubines,
Zilpah (Leah’s maid) and Bilhah (Rachel’s maid).
In the days of the patriarchs, a concubine was considered as a “second-class
wife,” acquired without payment of bride-money and possessing fewer legal rights.
In the Old Testament period, a concubine was a legal wife but one of secondary
rank and she could be sent away with a small gift. Therefore, the children of a
concubine did not have the same legal rights as the wife and so the inheritance
would go to the child of the wife rather than the concubine.
The boys that Leah bore Jacob included Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah (See
Genesis 29:31-35) as well as Issachar, and Zebulun (See Genesis 30:14-21). Leah
was only one of Jacob’s wives who bore him a girl (See Genesis 30:21). The boys
that Leah’s maid, Zilpah bore to Jacob included Gad and Asher (See Genesis 30:913). The boys that Rachel’s maid, Bilhah bore to Jacob, included Dan and Naphtali
(See Genesis 30:1-8). The only boy that Rachel bore to Jacob at this point in
Jacob’s life was Joseph (See Genesis 30:22-24) but later on she gives birth to
Benjamin but dies while giving birth (See Genesis 35:16-19).
Jacob would have put all the material goods on donkeys and would have
ordered his servants to drive his flocks ahead of him.
“Drove away” is the verb nahagh, which in this context refers to flocks of
sheep and herds of cattle being “led” or “driven.”
“Livestock” is the noun miqneh, which refers sheep and goats.
A comparison of Genesis 30:25-43 and Genesis 31:10-12 indicates that Jacob’s
livestock would have included “striped, speckled, spotted and mottled
(blotched)” sheep and goats as well as dark colored sheep.
“Property” is the noun rekhush, which refers to “possessions.”
“Gathered” is the verb rakhash, which means, “to acquire” and in context
refers to all the property and livestock that Jacob had “acquired” during his last six
years of service to Laban.
“Acquired livestock” is composed of the noun miqneh, “livestock” in the form
of sheep and goats and the noun qinyan, “acquired,” which denotes that which is
acquired by purchase.
Therefore, the expression refers to livestock in the form of sheep and goats that
Jacob acquired by purchase, which implies that the livestock that he purchased,
which he took with him were solid colored or homozygous white sheep and goats
since he had only striped, spotted, speckled and mottled sheep and goats and dark
colored sheep.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
110
Remember, after fourteen years of service to Laban, Jacob still had no property
or livestock of his own (See Genesis 30:30). Therefore, everything that Jacob is
taking with him he acquired during the last six years of his service to Laban in
Paddan Aram.
So Genesis 31:18 records that Jacob leaves with his family and possessions and
livestock and heads home to his father who resides in the land of Canaan.
“Canaan” is the more ancient name of Palestine, apparently derived from
Hurrian, meaning, “belonging to the land of red purple,” the dye the early
Canaanites or Phoenician traders peddled far and wide.
The natural boundaries of Canaan as expressed in the Bible extend from the
Negev in the South to the northern reaches of the Lebanon Range in Syria and the
land west of the range and of the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea.
The Lord promised Abraham and his descendants the land of Canaan as a
permanent possession (See Genesis 12:7; 13:14-17; 17:8) as well as Isaac (See
Genesis 26:3-5) and Jacob (See Genesis 28:13).
The possession of the land refers to the “Palestinian” Covenant, which was a
confirmation and enlargement of the original “Abrahamic” covenant and amplified
the land features of the “Abrahamic” covenant (Gen. 13:14-15; 15:18). The
“Palestinian” covenant was reiterated to Moses (Ex. 6:2-8) who described the
geographical boundaries of the land in Numbers 34:1-12 and who prophesied the
fulfillment of this covenant during the millennium in Deuteronomy 30:1-9.
The “Palestinian” Covenant stipulated that the descendants of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob who exercise faith alone in Christ alone would not only come into
permanent possession of the land of Canaan but also most of the land in Turkey,
East Africa, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and Red Sea, Syria, Iraq, Jordan.
The boundaries of this land grant are on the Mediterranean, Aegean Sea,
Euphrates River and the Nile River (See Genesis 15:18). The Lord promises that
this land would be given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s descendants and this
promise was fulfilled to a certain extent by Israel under Joshua (Josh. 21:43-45; cf.
13:1-7) and David and Solomon (1 Kgs. 4:20-25; Neh. 9:8).
The “Palestinian” covenant will have its literal and ultimate fulfillment during
the millennial reign of Christ (Isa. 11:11-12; Jer. 31-37; Ezek. 34:11-16; Hos. 1:1011; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Micah 4:6-7; Zeph. 3:14-20; Zech. 8:4-8).
Jacob’s departure from Paddan Aram or Mesopotamia is in marked contrast
with his arrival at this place. If you recall, Jacob left his father Isaac and his mother
Rebekah empty handed when he departed twenty years prior to go to Paddan Aram
and see his uncle Laban. But now, we see Jacob leaving his uncle Laban and
Paddan Aram with quite a caravan and very wealthy according to a comparison
with Genesis 30:43.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
111
Henry M. Morris commenting on Genesis 31:17-18, writes, “The momentous
nature of this event is indicated by the formal statement of verse 18, Jacob was
now leaving Paddan Aram or Mesopotamia, to go back to Canaan and to Isaac his
father. The time had come for him to take over the patriarchal responsibility
associated with God’s promises. He possessed both the birthright and the blessing;
and they entailed great responsibilities, as well as privileges, which it was now
time to fulfill” (The Genesis Record, page 482, Baker Book House).
Genesis 31:19 When Laban had gone to shear his flock, then Rachel stole
the household idols that were her father's. (NASB95)
Genesis 31:19 explains to the reader that Jacob was able to escape without
Laban knowing about it since Laban was out shearing the sheep, which was a very
busy time for sheep farmers such as Laban.
Bruce K. Waltke writes, “Sheep shearing was carried out in the spring. It
entailed large numbers of men working at great distances from their homes for an
extended period of time. Consequently, Laban and his men are far away and very
preoccupied, allowing Rachel to steal the gods and enabling Jacob to be gone for
three days (31:22) before Laban becomes aware of it” (Genesis, A Commentary,
page 427, Zondervan).
Genesis 31:19 records that Rachel stole Laban’s household idols while Laban
was out shearing the sheep, which was a sin according to Exodus 20:15, Leviticus
19:11 and Deuteronomy 5:19.
“Household idols” is the noun teraphim, which were small idols like figurines
and were considered the family gods, which gave the family protection and were
kept on a god-shelf and were outlawed in Israel (See 1 Samuel 15:23; 19:13; 2
Kings 23:24; Zechariah 10:2f.).
These gods were usually small figurines (two to three inches long), sometimes
carried on the body as charms, many of which archaeologists have discovered.
There are many reasons offered by Bible scholars and commentators as to the
reason why Rachel stole her father’s household idols. The obvious reason is that by
taking away her father’s household idols, she was taking away his protection from
his perspective, which the idols were thought to give.
Another explanation supported by the text and archaeology relates her theft to a
practice during the days of the patriarchs that is mentioned Hurrian texts found in a
place called “Nuzi,” which is about 10 miles southwest of modern Kirkuk in
northeastern Iraq. These Hurrian texts included about 5,000 tables from family
archives from approximately 1500 B.C. and they give us insight into life in the
days of the patriarchs.
According to these documents from Nuzi, possession of the household gods
was connected to inheritance and property rights of their owner. Therefore, Rachel
stole the household gods in order to establish a future claim on Laban’s family
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
112
inheritance. She thought by possessing them would somehow help validate the
legitimacy of her husband’s title to the flocks he had acquired while serving Laban
and represent the inheritance she had a right to expect.
The household gods were a token of rightful claim to the possessions and the
headship of the family. Rachel must have felt justified in stealing these gods and in
expecting to share in the family inheritance. After all, this is what she and Leah
had just affirmed to Jacob (cf. Genesis 31:14)
From Rachel’s perspective, getting Laban’s wealth was God’s will and if that
was the case with the matter of the flocks which Jacob had been tending, why
should it not be true of the estate at Laban’s death? Also, Rachel does not tell
Jacob of her theft since he would undoubtedly disapproved of her taking anything
with her that was Laban’s property since he already rejected anything that was her
father’s.
Genesis 31:20 And Jacob deceived Laban the Aramean by not telling him
that he was fleeing. (NASB95)
“Deceived” is the verb ganav, “to steal,” which is used with the noun lev,
“heart,” which refers to the mentality of the soul and so these two literally mean
that Jacob “stole the heart” of Laban.
The meaning of the expression “stole the heart” of Laban is understood by
comparing it with the prepositional phrase “by not telling him (Laban) that he
(Jacob) was fleeing.”
Therefore, Jacob stole the heart of Laban in the sense that he left secretly and
unobserved by Laban so that Laban had no knowledge of and was totally unaware
that Jacob had left. The fact that Jacob left secretly was “not” a sin since in
Scripture we see that David kept his whereabouts secret from Saul in order to
protect himself (1 Samuel 19:2). The Lord Jesus Christ went in secret to the
Temple in order to avoid a confrontation with the Pharisees, which could lead to
His premature arrest before the time that the Father had ordained for Him (See
John 7:1-10). However, although it was not a sin that Jacob left secretly, it was a
sin that he left secretly out of fear of Laban.
In response to Laban’s question as to why Jacob left secretly, Jacob replies in
Genesis 31:31, “Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your
daughters from me by force.” Therefore, Jacob’s sin in this matter was a lack of
faith in the Lord to protect him from Laban. Jacob should have left openly, trusting
that the Lord would protect from Laban as He said He would in Genesis 28:15 in
the phrase “I will keep you.”
Jacob’s sin of fear due to a lack of faith repeats the sin of his grandfather
Abraham who out of fear of Pharaoh of Egypt and Abimelech said that Sarah was
his sister and not his wife (See Genesis 12:9-20; 20:1-18).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
113
Jacob’s sin of fear due to a lack of faith repeats this sin of his father of Isaac
who out of fear of the Philistines told them that Rebekah was his sister and not his
wife (See Genesis 26:7-11).
Unlike, his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac, Jacob’s fear was not for
his own life but that his loved ones would be taken away from him by force.
Genesis 31:20 also describes Laban as the “Aramean,” which is an ethnic
designation denoting a tribal population, which lived from Mesopotamia to Asia
Minor and Syria-Palestine who like the patriarchs were descendants of Shem. The
emphasis upon Laban’s ethnic affiliation alerts the reader that Laban and Jacob are
now totally alienated from each other and represent two distinct groups of people.
Genesis 31:21 So he fled with all that he had; and he arose and crossed the
Euphrates River, and set his face toward the hill country of Gilead. (NASB95)
The “Euphrates” river was located in southern Mesopotamia and rises in the
mountains of Armenia Major and flows through Assyria, Syria, Mesopotamia, and
the city of Babylon, from 1,700 to 1,800 miles into the Persian Gulf.
“The hill country of Gilead” was a fertile, high plateau in Transjordan, which
was located between Yarmuk that runs into the Jordan and south of the Sea of
Galilee and the northern shore of the Dead Sea.
Jacob’s caravan forded the Euphrates River, which is sufficiently shallow at
certain points near its source for this, and headed for Mount Gilead, which was far
to the southwest and is a very mountainous region east of the Jordan River whose
northern edges are nearly three hundred miles from Haran. Therefore, Jacob and
his party had a very long journey to undertake.
Laban Pursues Jacob
In Genesis 31:22-24, we have the record of Laban pursuing Jacob and
overtaking him and confronting him in the hill country of Gilead.
Genesis 31:22 When it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob had
fled, 23 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.
(NASB95)
Henry M. Morris, “If the three days journey, which typically separated him
from Laban’s flocks was oriented in such a way as to place Jacob’s flocks a three
days’ journey southwest of Laban’s home (the sheep-shearing would probably
have taken place not too far from there), then Jacob and his flocks would have
already been approximately eighty or ninety miles on their way when their flight
began in earnest. A day’s journey was usually reckoned at about thirty miles for
men traveling unencumbered. However, once they began moving the flocks along,
they would be able to make only fifteen or twenty miles a day. Thus, once they
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
114
started driving the cattle, it would take them probably ten days or so to reach the
Mount Gilead region” (The Genesis Record, page 483, Baker Book House).
Catching up with Jacob was no easy matter, for he had gained three days’ lead
time. By the time Laban had rushed home, discovered the loss of his gods, and
gathered the relatives who were armed for battle, a fourth day must have been lost.
Remember, Laban and his men were out in the field busy sheep-shearing and
were busy with not only the work itself but also the festivities that were connected
with this annual event.
Laban didn’t get word of Jacob’s departure until Jacob had been on the trail for
three days. No doubt Laban was furious with Jacob but he and his men could not
drop the work of sheep-shearing immediately so by the time they were ready to
pursue Jacob, probably another day had gone by.
Once, on the trail, Laban would have driven his men hard to catch up to Jacob
and it appears that he and his men covered the entire three hundred miles in only
seven days, which is confirmed in that from the Euphrates to Gilead is some three
hundred miles.
Jacob was encumbered with his herds and flocks and loses his three days’
advantage by the time seven days of pursuit are ended. Laban and his sons had no
intention of letting Jacob take all his flocks to Canaan and were intending to take
them by force if necessary and even do harm to Jacob as indicated by the verb
radhaph, “pursued,” which is used of chasing after someone to do them harm.
Further indicating that Laban was intending to harm Jacob is the verb davaq,
“overtook,” which denotes military pursuit and is in the hiphil (intensive and
reflexive) stem expressing Laban’s hostility towards Jacob indicating that Laban
intently caused himself to overtake Jacob.
In Genesis 31:23, the verb davaq, does not mean that Laban “overtook” Jacob
in the sense that he made contact with him and met with Jacob face to face but
rather it means that he “kept close to” Jacob but did not make contact. This
interpretation is confirmed by the context since Genesis 31:24 indicates that Laban
spent the night where Jacob was encamped before making contact with him or
meeting him face to face. Therefore, the verb davaq implies that Laban “kept close
to” Jacob so that he could make a reconnaissance and evaluate the situation but did
not make contact and did not reveal his position to Jacob.
In Genesis 31:25, the verb nasagh means that Laban “overtook” Jacob in the
sense that he made contact with him and identified his position to Jacob and met
with Jacob face to face.
The verb davaq in Genesis 31:23 indicates that Laban did not make contact
with Jacob whereas nasagh in Genesis 31:25 indicates that he came right up to
Jacob so as to confront him face to face.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
115
Genesis 31:24 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.” (NASB95)
A comparison of Genesis 31:23 and 24 indicates that once Laban and his men
had Jacob and his people in their sight, they encamped for the night without
making contact as indicated in that Laban had a dream the night they overtook
Jacob.
A comparison of the verb davaq in Genesis 31:23 indicates that Laban did not
make contact with Jacob whereas nasagh in Genesis 31:25 indicates that he came
right up to Jacob so as to confront him face to face.
As in Genesis 31:20, Genesis 31:24 also describes Laban as the “Aramean,”
which is an ethnic designation denoting a tribal population, which lived from
Mesopotamia to Asia Minor and Syria-Palestine and who like the patriarchs were
descendants of Shem. The emphasis upon Laban’s ethnic affiliation alerts the
reader that Laban and Jacob are now totally alienated from each other and
represent two distinct groups of people.
“God” is the noun Elohim, which emphasizes the omnipotence of God
indicating that Laban is confronting the omnipotent God in a dream who is
protecting Jacob, which will discourage Laban from physically harming Jacob.
The fact that God intervenes on behalf of Jacob by warning Laban not to harm
Jacob is a fulfillment of His promises to Jacob to be with him and protect and bring
him back to the land of Canaan, and which promises are recorded in Genesis
28:15.
“Be careful” is the niphil imperative form of the verb shamar, which means,
“to pay attention, listen and obey” and the preposition le, which functions as an
ethical or reflexive dative of advantage meaning, “yourself, for your benefit.”
Therefore, God is saying to Laban in the dream, “Watch yourself,” or in other
words, “Pay attention and do what I say for it is your benefit that you do so.”
“That you do not” is the conjunction pen, which indicates the prevention of a
possible or potential event, implying that God is taking measures to prevent Laban
from taking military action against Jacob and doing him harm.
“Speak” is the verb davar, which emphasizes the activity of speaking.
“Either good or bad” is composed of the preposition min, “either” and this is
followed by the noun tov, “good” and the preposition `adh, “or” and the noun ra,
“evil.”
The preposition min is combined with the preposition `adh and together they
literally mean, “from…to” expressing an inclusive idea meaning everything or
anything. Therefore, literally speaking this entire expression translated “either
good or bad” in the New American Standard literally means, “from good to bad”
but idiomatically, it means, “anything positive or negative.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
116
The noun tov, “good” refers to speaking anything “positive” to Jacob that could
influence him to return to Paddan Aram such as sweet talking Jacob and proposing
any new deals with him. Whereas, the noun ra, “evil” refers to Laban speaking
anything “negative” to Jacob that would intimidate him and cause him to go
against the will of God and return to Paddan Aram.
This exact expression appears in Genesis 24:50 where Laban and Bethuel
respond to Abraham’s servant Eliezer’s story of God’s providential activities and
proposing that Isaac marry Rebekah by saying “we cannot speak to you bad or
good.”
This expression is an example of “merism” which is an expression of totality
through the combination of opposites. Therefore, Laban and Bethuel’s response
meant that they couldn’t say anything at all and have no choice in the matter since
it is clearly God’s will that Isaac marry Rebekah.
In Genesis 31:24, the expression, “do not speak to Jacob either good or bad”
is also an example of “merism.” Therefore, the expression means that God
prohibited Laban from saying anything to influence Jacob to return since that
would be against His will or to say anything by way of bitter reproach or
intimidation. This expression does “not” mean he was prohibited from speaking
anything at all to Jacob but that he could not say anything to influence Jacob in
returning or saying anything by way of bitter reproach. This expression was a
proverbial phrase for opposition or interference. Therefore, God does not want
Laban sweet talking or proposing any new deals that would entice Jacob to return
with him to Paddan Aram, nor, does God want Laban speaking harsh and bitter
words to Jacob in order to intimidate Jacob and cause him to return to Paddan
Aram.
This proverbial expression therefore indicates that God does not want Laban to
oppose or interfere with Jacob returning to Canaan, which is His will. God does
not want Laban saying positive or negative to Jacob that would prevent him from
returning to Canaan when it is God’s will for him to return.
Therefore, we could translate Genesis 31:24 God came to Laban the
Aramean in a dream of the night and said to him, “Watch yourself, pay
attention and do what I say, do not say anything positive or negative to Jacob
(so as to prevent him from returning to Canaan), for it is for your benefit.”
(Author’s translation)
Genesis 31:25-31 records Jacob leaving Laban secretly out of fear that Laban
would take his wives and children from him and which fear was due to a lack of
faith in the Lord to honor His promise to protect him from Laban.
Genesis 31:25 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. 26 Then Laban said to Jacob, “What have you done by
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
117
deceiving me and carrying away my daughters like captives of the sword? 27
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; 28
and did not allow me to kiss my sons and my daughters? Now you have done
foolishly. 29 It is in my power to do you (plural form of pronominal suffix
meaning, “every one of 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.’ 30 Now
you have indeed gone away because you longed greatly for your father's
house; but why did you steal my gods?” 31 Then Jacob replied to Laban,
“Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your daughters from
me by force.” (NASB95)
This statement reveals that Jacob’s sin was not that he left Laban secretly but
that he left secretly out fear of Laban, and which fear was a sin because it was due
to a lack of faith in God’s promise to him that he would protect him (See Genesis
28:15) and would be with him (See Genesis 28:15 31:3).
If Laban attempted to take back his daughters and his grandchildren, Jacob
would have fought. Undoubtedly, the Lord also would have fought for him as well
and given him the victory over Laban and his men since Jacob’s boys were the
progenitors of the twelve tribes of Israel. Therefore, we see that Jacob answers
Laban’s first two accusations by revealing that he left secretly out of fear of Laban,
and which fear was due to a lack of faith in the Lord’s promise to protect him.
In Genesis 31:26, the word “deceiving” is the same expression used in Genesis
31:20, which literally means “to steal the heart” since it is composed of the verb
ganav, “to steal,” and the noun lev, “heart,” which refers to the mentality of the
soul.
Jacob stole the heart of Laban in the sense that he left secretly and unobserved
by Laban so that Laban had no knowledge of and was totally unaware that Jacob
had left. He had not done Laban any wrong by leaving Laban secretly but he had
done God wrong by leaving secretly out of fear for Laban since this fear was due
to a lack of faith in God’s ability to protect him from Laban.
Fear is a result of unbelief and unbelief is failure to trust that God will protect
and provide for us. The fact that Jacob left secretly out of fear of Laban taking his
loved ones from him by force is quite interesting because the Lord had just
finished commanding Jacob to return to Canaan and reassured him that He would
be with him (See Genesis 31:3). So we see quite clearly that Jacob is not resting in
the promises of the Lord and is therefore, not operating in faith but rather unbelief.
Biblical faith is trusting in the promises of God regardless of the circumstances
or consequences and resting in them. True Biblical faith is confident obedience to
God’s Word in spite of circumstances and consequences.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
118
The principle of faith operates quite simply: (1) God speaks and we hear His
Word. (2) We trust His Word and act on it no matter what the circumstances are or
what the consequences may be.
The circumstances may be impossible, and the consequences frightening and
unknown but we obey God’s Word just the same and believe Him to do what is
right and what is best.
Jacob is looking at Laban and thus entering into fear rather than concentrating
on the Lord’s promise to protect him.
Principle: Unbelief is the failure to take into account and acknowledge the
character and nature of God, His presence and His Word.
Unbelief operates in the sphere of the old Adamic sin nature and contradicts
faith and leaves God out.
Unbelief blinded Jacob as to the presence of the Lord in his life, which he saw
firsthand, causing him to see only the difficulties in leaving Laban.
Jacob’s unbelief had produced cowardice to the extent that he left secretly like a
fugitive.
The apostle Paul taught the Philippian believers to pray to the Father rather than
entering into fear.
Philippians 4:6 Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and
supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
(NASB95)
Prayers for protection from God fill the Bible.
Psalm 140:1 Rescue me, O LORD, from evil men; 2 Preserve me from
violent men who devise evil things in their hearts; They continually stir up
wars. 3 They sharpen their tongues as a serpent; Poison of a viper is under
their lips. Selah. (NASB95)
Genesis 31:25 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. (NASB95)
“Caught up” is the verb nasagh, which means that Laban “overtook” Jacob in
the sense that he “came up to” him, or made contact with him and confronted him
face to face.
“Pitched” is the verb taqa, and is not the usual verb for pitching a tent, which is
natah (See Genesis 12:8; 26:25).
The verb taqa denotes the pounding or thrusting or driving tent pegs into the
ground. The verb taqa implies a hostile atmosphere that pervades this scene
between Jacob and Laban whereas natah denotes the pitching of the tent in the
sense of spreading out the tent but in a peaceful setting.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
119
The fact that Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit employs this verb
taqa rather than natah indicates that he is trying to paint a picture of a tense and
suspenseful scene where violence is about to break out.
Genesis 31:26 Then Laban said to Jacob, “What have you done by
deceiving me and carrying away my daughters like captives of the sword?”
(NASB95)
Laban opens his questioning of Jacob by saying “what have you done?” which
introduces an accusation of wrongdoing. These are the same accusatory words
Jacob spoke to Laban when Laban deceived him on his wedding night and sent
Leah into his tent and not Rachel. Laban has reaped what he has sowed.
Laban repeatedly defrauded Jacob from the very beginning of their relationship
but now has the audacity to complain that he has been misled by Jacob.
“Deceiving” is the same expression used in Genesis 31:20, which literally
means “to steal the heart” since it is composed of the verb ganav, “to steal,” and
the noun lev, “heart,” which refers to the mentality of the soul.
Jacob stole the heart of Laban in the sense that he left secretly and unobserved
by Laban so that Laban had no knowledge of and was totally unaware that Jacob
had left.
Laban accuses Jacob of carrying away his daughters like prisoners of war,
which is slander and a lie. Lies are an abomination to God, which God hates.
Psalm 34:13 Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking
deceit. (NASB95)
Colossians 3:9 Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self
with its evil practices. (NASB95)
Ephesians 4:25 Therefore, laying aside falsehood, SPEAK TRUTH EACH
ONE OF YOU WITH HIS NEIGHBOR, for we are members of one another.
(NASB95)
However, Laban is so self-deceived and deluded that he does not recognize that
Rachel and Leah are Jacob’s wives even though Jacob has fully satisfied the terms
of their agreement of the marriage contract. Furthermore, both Rachel and Leah
left of their own accord with Jacob and even complained bitterly of their father’s
treatment of them as well as Jacob and their children.
In Genesis 31:14-16, we see that both Rachel and Leah were united and in
agreement in their response to Jacob informing them that the Lord wanted him to
leave Laban and return home to Canaan. Thus the agreement of Jacob’s wives to
leave with him refutes Laban’s accusation that Jacob carried Rachel and Leah off
like prisoners of war.
The fourteen years’ service that Jacob performed for Laban in order to marry
both Rachel and Leah was to be in lieu of the usual “bride-price” and so by
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
120
cheating Jacob out of his wages, Laban was cheating his daughters and
grandchildren!
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on this statement, writes, “Legally, the
consummating sum given in marriage was to be transferred at least in part to the
daughters. Some of Jacob’s wages during the fourteen years he worked for them
should also have belonged to them. Further, by cheating Jacob during the last six
years, Laban has continued to cheat them” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 426,
Zondervan).
Rather than treating the bride-price like a dowry, to provide a financial base for
his daughters and grandchildren’s future well-being and security, as should have
been done, Laban had used it up for himself and gave them nothing. Therefore, in
Genesis 31:26, Laban’s first accusation is a sin against Jacob since it is a wild
exaggeration, totally without basis and without fact and is in fact slander and
defamation of Jacob’s character.
Laban’s first accusation against Jacob is hypocrisy as well since Laban feigns
concerns for his daughters when in reality he could have cared less about them as
demonstrated in his treatment of them over the past twenty years!
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines hypocrisy, “a pretense
of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one
does not possess; a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved
attitude.”
Laban’s first accusation was hypocrisy because it was a pretense of having
concern for his daughters’ safety, which he did not possess as demonstrated by his
treatment of his daughters and that his real motive for tracking down Jacob was to
harm him and reclaim his household idols according to Genesis 31:30. He is
playing the part of an outraged parent and grandparent when in fact he is an
indifferent and cruel parent and grandparent who cares for no one but himself and
making money!
Genesis 31:27 “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.”
Laban’s second question “why did you flee secretly and steal away from me”
is a complaint against Jacob’s secret departure, which was against the custom of
the day when someone was moving away.
Laban is telling Jacob that he didn’t give him an opportunity to say goodbye to
Jacob, his daughters and grandchildren by having a party for them but this would
sound hollow to Jacob’s family since they were so mistreated and disrespected by
Laban.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
121
Jacob, Rachel and Leah have already experienced Laban’s version of a party
according to Genesis 29:22-27 where Laban got Jacob drunk and then sent Leah
into his tent on his wedding night when he expected Rachel for whom he had just
worked seven years for in lieu of the bride-price.
At this point, all of Jacob’s family are rolling their eyes since Laban’s appeal to
customs such as a farewell party and kisses make a mockery of him.
Laban accuses Jacob of acting foolishly by failing to let him have a party for
him, his daughters and grandchildren and this too is hypocrisy. The fact that he
calls Jacob foolish reveals that he did not want to have a farewell party for Jacob
and reveals his bitterness.
Laban accusatory words and hypocrisy and quick temper reveal to everybody
that he is in fact the fool and not Jacob. Laban’s hypocrisy and false accusations
reveal that he is a fool.
Genesis 31:29 “It is in my power to do you (plural form of pronominal suffix
meaning, “every one of 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.’”
(NASB95)
Laban then boasts that not only that he was able to do harm to Jacob but also his
entire household as indicated by the plural form of the pronominal suffix meaning
“every one of you.” Therefore, we see that Laban had every intention of not only
harming Jacob but also his own daughters and grandchildren until the Lord warned
him not to. However, in view of his dream where the Lord warned him to not harm
Jacob, he knew this was an empty threat.
Laban’s claim that it was in his power to do harm to Jacob and his entire
household reveals the fact that he had every intention of harming Jacob and this is
confirmed by the intense way in which he pursued him for three hundred miles.
The fact that Laban admits that God had warned him not to harm Jacob also
reveals that Laban’s intention was to harm Jacob since God would not have given
such a warning unless Laban had every intention of harming Jacob.
Laban apparently considers Jacob to be a servant under his authority by stating
it was in his power to do harm to Jacob. However, the Lord has revealed to Laban
in the dream that Jacob was under his authority and would not be touched!
In fact, Laban has to acknowledge that he is under God’s authority since he
obeys the Lord’s command to not harm Jacob. Laban recognizes that there is no
point in carrying this particular line of questioning and conversation any further so
he abruptly changes the subject in order to render another accusation and slander of
Jacob’s character.
Genesis 31:30 “Now you have indeed gone away because you longed greatly
for your father's house; but why did you steal my gods?” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
122
Laban’s acknowledgement that God had intervened and warned him to not
harm Jacob would have made Jacob relax for a moment thinking that Laban is
through with his harangue. However, Laban is always full of surprises and saves
the worst of all accusations for last, namely, that Jacob has stolen his household
idols.
Laban tries to justify his actions to some point and acknowledges to Jacob that
he realizes that he wanted to return to Isaac and that this was a good enough reason
to leave Paddan Aram.
His third accusation, “why did you steal my gods?” is also without any
evidence and slanders Jacob’s character and accuses him of idolatry.
Genesis 31:19 reveals that it was Rachel and not Jacob who was guilty of
stealing Laban’s idols. Laban’s accusation is also ridiculous since Laban knew full
well that Jacob would have nothing to do with his household idols since he
worshiped Yahweh who prohibited household idols in his home.
Jacob would have nothing to do with Laban’s household idols since he did not
place any value on them since he had a relationship and fellowship with the Living
God who made promises to him and had fulfilled those promises.
Jacob Responds to Laban’s Accusations
Genesis 31:31-35 records Jacob’s response to Laban’s accusations as well as
Rachel’s deceiving her father Laban.
Genesis 31:31 Then Jacob replied to Laban, “Because I was afraid, for I
thought that you would take your daughters from me by force.” (NASB95)
Jacob responds to Laban’s first two accusations.
Genesis 31:26 “Why did you flee secretly and steal away from me? 27
What have you done by deceiving me and carrying away my daughters like
captives of the sword?” (NASB95)
He does not respond immediately to Laban’s third accusation that appears in
Genesis 31:30, “Why did you steal my gods?” Jacob does not immediately
answer Laban’s charge of stealing his household idols in order that he might set the
record straight before both Laban’s men and his own household exactly why he
had left suddenly and secretly. He states to everyone that if he had attempted to
leave openly that he was afraid and for good reason that Laban would have tried to
take his daughters and their children back from him by force.
This statement reveals that Jacob’s sin was not that he left Laban secretly but
that he left secretly out fear of Laban, and which fear was a sin because it was due
to a lack of faith in God’s promise to him that he would protect him (See Genesis
28:15) and would be with him (See Genesis 28:15 31:3).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
123
Genesis 31:32 “The one with whom you find your gods shall not live; in the
presence of our kinsmen point out what is yours among my belongings and
take it for yourself. For Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them.”
(NASB95)
Jacob makes the statement “the one with whom you find your gods shall not
live” because he could not believe that anyone in his family would do such a thing,
much less his wife Rachel.
The fact that his wife Rachel was guilty would have greatly embarrassed Jacob
and would have made Laban look justified before everyone in chasing down Jacob.
In the days of Laban and Jacob, the theft of household idols was a capital crime
and guilty of death, which is indicated by Jacob’s statement that the one found with
the stolen household gods would be put to death. So unknowingly, Jacob
pronounces a death sentence upon Rachel his wife. So the suspense heightens for
the reader since unlike Jacob, the reader knows that Rachel is the thief in the
family.
The prepositional phrase “in the presence of our kinsmen” indicates that
Jacob is calling the family of Laban and Jacob to be witnesses in this dispute
between Jacob and Laban and to prevent Laban from making any accusations of a
cover-up.
Jacob proposes that if anything of Laban’s has been found stolen, then it shall
be returned to its owner.
Genesis 31:33 So Laban went into Jacob's tent and into Leah's tent and
into the tent of the two maids, but he did not find them. Then he went out of
Leah's tent and entered Rachel's tent. (NASB95)
The search for the teraphim was focused upon the tents of Leah and Rachel and
their maids, Zilpah and Bilhah since they were the ones who would have had
access to the room in their father’s tent where the teraphim were kept.
Laban goes to Rachel’s tent last because he suspected her least of all and yet
she was the guilty party. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the narrator
Moses keeps the reader in suspense revealing that Laban searched all the tents in
which the reader already knows the teraphim will not be found so that
subsequently, the discovering in Rachel’s tent seems inevitable.
Genesis 31:34 Now Rachel had taken the household idols and put them in
the camel's saddle, and she sat on them. And Laban felt through all the tent
but did not find them. (NASB95)
“Household idols” is the noun teraphim, which were small idols like figurines
and were considered the family gods, which gave the family protection and were
kept on a god-shelf and were outlawed in Israel (See 1 Samuel 15:23; 19:13; 2
Kings 23:24; Zechariah 10:2f.).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
124
To add further suspense to the story, Moses under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit avoids telling the reader until the last possible moment that Rachel had
hidden the teraphim in her camel’s saddle to prevent their discovery by Laban.
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on the camel’s saddle, writes, “A relief from Tell
Halif in northern Syria (900 B.C.) shows a camel driver with a stick in his right
hand, fully and securely seated on a boxlike saddle. The box, about 18 inches long
and 14 inches high, is bound by straps to the camel and serves as both a riding
saddle and a pack saddle” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 430, Zondervan).
The fact that Rachel sat on the household idols demonstrates her contempt for
her father’s household idols and that she did not steal them for herself.
Why did Rachel steal the household idols? As we note earlier in this study of
Genesis 31, the obvious reason is that by taking away her father’s household idols,
she was taking away his protection from his perspective, which the idols were
thought to give. Also, we have noted that another explanation supported by the text
and archaeology relates her theft to a practice during the days of the patriarchs that
is mentioned Hurrian texts found in a place called “Nuzi,” which is about 10 miles
southwest of modern Kirkuk in northeastern Iraq.
These Hurrian texts included about 5,000 tables from family archives from
approximately 1500 B.C. and they give us insight into life in the days of the
patriarchs. According to these documents from Nuzi, possession of the household
gods was connected to inheritance and property rights of their owner. Therefore,
Rachel stole the household gods in order to establish a future claim on Laban’s
family inheritance. She thought by possessing them would somehow help validate
the legitimacy of her husband’s title to the flocks he had acquired while serving
Laban and represent the inheritance she had a right to expect. The household gods
were a token of rightful claim to the possessions and the headship of the family.
Rachel must have felt justified in stealing these gods and in expecting to share
in the family inheritance. After all, this is what she and Leah had just affirmed to
Jacob (cf. Genesis 31:14)
From Rachel’s perspective, getting Laban’s wealth was God’s will and if that
was the case with the matter of the flocks which Jacob had been tending, why
should it not be true of the estate at Laban’s death?
Genesis 31:35 She said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I
cannot rise before you, for the manner of women is upon me.’ So he searched
but did not find the household idols.” (NASB95)
Rachel’s statement “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you
for the manner of women is upon me” means that she was having her monthly
period.
Whether she was or not, the Scriptures do not reveal. Under the Mosaic Law,
women who were having their period were ceremonially unclean (See Leviticus
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
125
15:19-30). This statement was Rachel’s final act of retribution for the fraud Laban
perpetrated on her and Jacob on what was to have been their wedding day and it
was also retribution for Laban taking her bride price. So Rachel deceives her
father, thus Laban reaped what he sowed.
Laban sowed the seeds of deception by sending Leah into Jacob’s tent rather
than Rachel and thus he reaped deception when Rachel deceived him into thinking
that she did not have the teraphim. Rachel’s deception of her father reveals that the
fruit does not fall too far from the tree.
Laban does not ask her to get off the camel for a couple of reasons.
Nahum Sarna, writes, “He cannot approach Rachel and he cannot possibly
imagine that she would sit on his “gods” in a state of menstrual impurity. The
ancients widely regarded menstrual flow as a potently contaminating substance and
the menstruant was thought to be possessed by evil spirits, thus requiring her
separation from other persons” (Nahum Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary, page
219, The Jewish Publication Society).
According to ancient law, the futility of Laban’s search for his property
constitutes presumptive proof of Jacob’s innocence (Nahum Sarna, JPS Torah
Commentary, page 219, The Jewish Publication Society).
Jacob’s Speech
Genesis 31:36-42 contains Jacob’s speech before Laban and all their relatives,
which is delivered with ferocious intensity and summarizes his twenty years with
Laban. In Genesis 31:36-38, Jacob demonstrates his innocence from being wrongly
accused of stealing the teraphim in the present and his innocence in the past in not
stealing from Laban’s flocks. In Genesis 31:39-40, he presents to his audience the
difficult conditions he had to work under. In Genesis 31:41-42, Jacob appeals to
God’s vindication of him in the past and in the present in Laban’s dream.
Genesis 31:36 Then Jacob became angry and contended with Laban; and
Jacob said to Laban, “What is my transgression? What is my sin that you
have hotly pursued me? 37 Though you have felt through all my goods, what
have you found of all your household goods? Set it here before my kinsmen
and your kinsmen, that they may decide between us two. 38 These twenty
years I have been with you; your ewes and your female goats have not
miscarried, nor have I eaten the rams of your flocks.” (NASB95)
When Laban’s search does not turn up anything, Jacob flies off the handle.
Jacob’s emotions had been building up over the years and all of a sudden they
come to a boiling point. Even Laban, who probably was a bully and a rough
character, is taken back momentarily. Both men know that Jacob is under divine
protection. So Jacob can afford to blow up.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
126
Genesis 31:36-42 are Jacob’s testimony of twenty years of pent-up emotions.
He has been cheated and used and treated as dirt. Laban had been a hard
taskmaster and Jacob a very conscientious servant. So we see Jacob reveling in his
innocence in addition to the assurance he gained from Laban’s report that God had
spoken to him in the night, preventing harm to Jacob.
In the light of these events Jacob now seemed to have the upper hand or in other
words, he held the winning cards, and he planned to use them to greatest
advantage. The years of friction between these two men now boiled over as Jacob
scalded Laban with righteous indignation. Jacob was angry and called for a
judgment scene. He knew he was totally innocent and he felt the suspicions of his
father-in-law were unfair and unjustified. He felt that Laban had made up the story
of the stolen teraphim as an excuse to search his possessions.
In Genesis 31:36-38 Jacob presents his case to his household and Laban’s clan,
thus before all their relatives. Jacob presents several rhetorical questions to his
audience in order to present his innocence and to assure that his reputation in
Paddan Aram remains intact.
In Genesis 31:36, Jacob’s questions, “What is my transgression? What is my
sin that you have hotly pursued me?” demonstrate his innocence before God and
that his conduct towards Laban in the eyes of God has been impeccable.
Genesis 31:37 “Though you have felt through all my goods, what have you
found of all your household goods? Set it here before my kinsmen and your
kinsmen, that they may decide between us two.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s question, “Though you have felt through all my goods, what have
you found of all your household goods?” appeals to his audience that Laban’s
accusation that he stole his household gods has been proven wrong, and that he is
innocent.
Jacob proposes that if Laban found anything that belonged to him, he should set
it before all their relatives and let them judge what to do. The tables have been
turned where Jacob has gone from being the accused to being the aggrieved party.
Genesis 31:38 “These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and
your female goats have not miscarried, nor have I eaten the rams of your
flocks.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s statement recorded in Genesis 31:38 indicates that just as Laban cannot
justly accuse Jacob of stealing his teraphim so he cannot fault Jacob in the care of
Laban’s flocks.
Jacob reveals that none of Laban’s ewes or female goats miscarried, which was
due to his conscientiousness and tender care of Laban’s flocks as well as the
Lord’s blessing.
Jacob reveals that he never ate from Laban’s flocks and thus has not stolen any
of Laban’s property.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
127
Genesis 31:39 “That which was torn of beasts I did not bring to you; I bore
the loss of it myself. You required it of my hand whether stolen by day or
stolen by night.” (NASB95)
Jacob reveals further of his great integrity in dealing with Laban and that he
states that he even bore losses that were really not his fault, and for which he was
not legally responsible according to the law of Hammurabi coming from this
period demonstrates and from the Mosaic Law as well (See Exodus 22:10-11).
Genesis 31:39 reveals that Jacob is not taking credit for doing more than the
law demanded but rather he is accusing Laban of violation of Near Eastern law and
custom, which absolved a shepherd of personal responsibility in a case of a beast
killing a sheep, provided he could supply the carcass of the dead sheep. Though he
was liable for lost or stolen sheep, he was not liable for sheep torn by predators.
Henry M. Morris, writes, “It was customary that when a shepherd brought a
torn animal to his master that this was regarded as evidence that he had defended
the sheep and had driven the beast away and that he had done all he could to save
the sheep; under these circumstances, the master bore the loss, rather than the
shepherd. Jacob however had borne all the losses himself, evidently by replacing
lost animals from Laban’s flocks with animals from his own flocks” (The Genesis
Record, page 488, Baker Book House).
Genesis 31:40 “Thus I was: by day the heat consumed me and the frost by
night, and my sleep fled from my eyes.” (NASB95)
In Genesis 31:40, Jacob reveals the terrible conditions he had to work under at
times and that he was very conscientious in tending to Laban’s flocks. The fact that
Jacob had been exposed to extreme weather conditions reveals that Jacob who
once was a homebody and a momma’s boy has been toughened up under Laban’s
school of hard knocks and has been trained for leadership away from home.
Genesis 31:41 “These twenty years I have been in your house; I served you
fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your flock, and you
changed my wages ten times.” (NASB95)
Jacob demonstrates great tactfulness and consideration for his wives in that he
does not mention Laban sending Leah and not Rachel into his tent on his wedding
night after he had just worked seven years for Laban to marry Rachel.
Jacob’s statement that Laban changed his wages “ten” times is a figure
implying “enough is enough” since in the Bible the number ten signifies the
perfection of the divine order, thus implying that from God’s perspective, Laban
had cheated him long enough and now God is intervening and commanding him to
leave Laban.
Throughout Jacob’s twenty years of service for Laban, he never once was
rewarded for his conscientious and faithful and diligent service but rather was
cheated time again by Laban.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
128
Genesis 31:42 “If the God of my father, the God of Abraham, and the fear
of Isaac, had not been for me, surely now you would have sent me away
empty-handed. God has seen my affliction and the toil of my hands, so He
rendered judgment last night.” (NASB95)
In Genesis 31:36-42, Jacob has presented evidence that the real thief in his
relationship with Laban is not himself but rather Laban. Jacob states that even
though Laban has been unjust in his treatment of him, God has not and has blessed
him despite Laban’s unscrupulous behavior.
Even though Laban had not rewarded him for his hard work, God had done so.
God overruled Laban’s intention to send Jacob away empty handed.
The expression “the fear of Isaac” refers to the fact that Isaac reverentially
worshipped God and had a relationship and close intimate fellowship with God
who has ruled in Jacob’s favor.
Jacob’s statement that if God had not intervened on his behalf that Laban would
have sent him away empty handed reveals that Laban is guilty of not paying his
workers.
Jacob’s statement “God has seen my affliction” is Jacob’s acknowledgement
that God has demonstrated that His love is “compassionate” meaning that God
intensely desired and did act to alleviate Jacob’s pain and suffering and was
removing its cause, which was Laban (See Genesis 16:13; 1 John 3:16-17). This
statement echoes Hagar’s statement recorded in Genesis 16:13 where the Lord
delivered her in Ishmael in the desert after the two were dismissed from the home
of Abraham and Sarah. It also echoes the statement made by Leah recorded in
Genesis 29:32 when she named her firstborn son Reuben.
Jacob’s statement “so He (God) rendered judgment last night” refers to
Laban’s dream the night before, which is recorded in Genesis 31:24, and which
dream Laban acknowledged to Jacob as recorded in Genesis 31:29.
His statement “so He (God) rendered judgment last night” means that God
has ruled in his favor by intervening on his behalf by means of a dream, and
prohibited Laban from speaking anything positive or negative to Jacob that would
prevent his leaving Paddan Aram and heading back home to Canaan.
This statement indicates that Laban’s dream confirms to Laban that it was
God’s will that Jacob depart from Paddan Aram and leave for Canaan. Jacob’s
statement recorded in Genesis 31:42, reveals that Jacob acknowledges that the God
of his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac has ruled in his favor and provided
for him and protected him.
Jacob’s experience in Paddan Aram with Laban foreshadows his descendants,
the nation of Israel experience in Egypt under Pharaoh. Jacob’s experience of
servitude for the hard taskmaster Laban and the blessing he received while in
service to Laban as well as his deliverance from this servitude by God anticipates
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
129
and foreshadows the experience his descendants, the nation of Israel, will
experience while in Egypt under Pharaoh.
Just as Jacob served a cruel and hard master, Laban, so Jacob’s descendants, the
nation of Israel will serve Pharaoh of Egypt. Just as Jacob was blessed by God
during this time of servitude to Laban so Israel will be blessed during their time of
servitude in Egypt. Just as Jacob was commanded by God to leave Laban and was
thus delivered from his servitude so Israel was commanded by God to leave Egypt
and was thus delivered from the hardship of Egypt and the hard taskmaster,
Pharaoh.
Laban Responds to Jacob’s Speech
Genesis 31:43-55 presents to us the record of Laban’s response to Jacob’s
scathing rebuke, which is to propose a non-aggression pact with Jacob at Mizpah.
Up to this point in our study of the book of Genesis, this non-aggression pact
between Jacob and Laban will be the third non-aggression pact that the patriarchs
have agreed to (See Genesis 21:22-24; 26:26-33).
Genesis 31:43 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?” (NASB95)
Now that Laban has been publicly exposed by Jacob’s testimony recorded in
Genesis 31:35-42, Laban pitifully attempts to cover his loss of face with empty
rhetoric, hypocrisy, and self-righteous arrogance and emotion.
Laban attempted once again to turn the tables on Jacob and make him out to be
the bad guy by diverting attention from Jacob’s embarrassing facts by changing the
subject.
His first claim, “the daughters are my daughters” is a true statement but they
are now married to Jacob and are no longer under his authority but Jacob’s since he
is husband of both Rachel and Leah now.
Laban’s second claim, “the children are my children” is true only in the sense
that Jacob’s children are Laban’s grandchildren but that does not give Laban the
right to take these children back with him.
His third claim, “the flocks are my flocks” is also false since it totally ignores
the contract that he made with Jacob in which he agreed to Jacob’s proposal that
Jacob would receive all the “striped, spotted, speckled” sheep and goats and dark
colored sheep that were born of Laban’s solid colored animals (See Genesis 30:2543).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
130
Laban’s claim “the flocks are my flocks” demonstrates Laban’s failure to
acknowledge that God had blessed Jacob and was responsible for Jacob’s
prosperity from this contract (See Genesis 31:11-12).
His fourth claim, “all that you see is mine” is also totally false and therefore
another lie from his lips since all the prosperity that Jacob had, came from God and
not Laban.
As we saw in Genesis 30:25-36, Laban had provided Jacob with nothing and
had given him no property and had cheated Jacob on his wages. The property that
Jacob left Paddan Aram with was accumulated during his last six years of service
to Laban and was part of the contract that Laban agreed to with Jacob, which is
recorded in Genesis 30:25-36. Therefore, the truth of the matter is that Laban gave
Jacob nothing and that God had prospered Jacob and had given Jacob everything.
Laban has been attempting to make himself appear as the reason for Jacob’s
success and so in effect he is saying to Jacob, “you were nothing until you met me
and worked for me!”
His rhetorical question, which demands a negative response, “But what can I
do this day to these my daughters or to their children whom they have
borne?” expresses Laban’s frustration at not being able to take revenge on Jacob
since God had warned Laban in a dream to not harm Jacob, which is recorded in
Genesis 31:24 and acknowledged by Laban as recorded in Genesis 31:29.
Genesis 31:44 “So now come, let us make a covenant, you and I, and let it
be a witness between you and me.” (NASB95)
By proposing a covenant, Laban is in effect capitulating to Jacob and
acknowledging his defeat in his case against Jacob. A foundational concept of a
covenant is the notion of a legal contract, which was developed to establish and
regulate a relationship where none previously existed. Therefore, we see Laban
seeking to establish and regulate a peaceful coexistence between himself and Jacob
where one previously did not exist.
Genesis 31:4, Then Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. (NASB95)
“Pillar” is the noun matstsevah, which denotes a single upright stone pillar set
up as a monument and a memorial to mark the boundaries between Laban on the
north and Jacob on the south.
Jacob erected three pillars in his life to mark the three great turning points in his
life: (1) His first encounter with the Lord at Bethel (Genesis 28:18) (2) Departure
from Laban and return to Canaan (Genesis 31:45) (3) His second encounter with
the Lord at Bethel (Genesis 35:14).
In Genesis 31:45, Jacob erected a memorial to stand as a witness to the oral
contract between him and his uncle Laban and called it “Galeed,” which is the
Hebrew term for “witness heap.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
131
The employment of piled stones serves as an eternal witness against one who
would dare to break the treaty made between the parties, a common Near Eastern
practice.
This treaty was a formal one, employing several elements: (1) The grounds
delineated by the treaty (2) Invoking divine witnesses (3) A curse for breaking the
agreement, which was insured in the case of Jacob and Laban by the presence of
God (4) A meal before the witnessing heap, confirming the acceptance of the terms
by both parties.
The stones used in this passage also represent another common ancient Near
Eastern legal practice, namely that of establishing boundary stones to demarcate
territory. These stones marked the extension of territory under the jurisdiction of a
ruler, the extent of a private plot, and in some cases, served as a public
proclamation that land had been transferred. Presumably, the boundary marked by
the stones was the limit of Jacob’s property as Gilead would later become part of
the nation of Israel.
Genesis 31:46 Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones.” So they took
stones and made a heap, and they ate there by the heap. 47 Now Laban called
it Jegar-sahadutha, but Jacob called it Galeed. (NASB95)
In his native language, which is Aramaic, Laban gave the heap of stones the
name “Jegar-sahadutha,” which means, “witness heap.”
In his native language, which is Hebrew, Jacob gave the heap of stones the
name “Galeed,” which also means, “witness heap.”
The fact that Jacob gave the heap of stones a Hebrew name indicates that he is
identifying himself with the Promised Land, the land of Canaan. The fact that
Laban gave the heap of stones an Aramaic name and Jacob a Hebrew one reveals
that Laban and Jacob are now two distinct people, each speaking their own
language.
Genesis 31:48 Laban said, “This heap is a witness between you and me this
day.” Therefore it was named Galeed, 49 and Mizpah, for he said, “May the
LORD watch between you and me when we are absent one from the other. 50
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.” 51
Laban said to Jacob, “Behold this heap and behold the pillar which I have set
between you and me. 52 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.” (NASB95)
By invoking the name of Jacob’s God, Laban was implying that Jacob was the
one who needed to be watched and this was the responsibility of the God of Jacob.
Laban’s gods would not need to do anything since he was a man of his word,
which of course was a joke.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
132
The witness heap was also given the name “Mizpah,” meaning “watchtower”
since Laban did not trust Jacob, which is a case of Laban projecting onto Jacob his
own failure and the fact he himself can’t be trusted. Therefore, Laban is saying, “I
do not trust you Jacob and since I won’t be hear to watch you, then may the Lord
keep watch.”
This treaty was not a promise between friends but a warning between
antagonists who did not trust each other. They called on God to keep each other
true to the terms of the covenant they had just made and so therefore, this covenant
is a “non-aggression” pact.
Laban’s statement “If you mistreat my daughters” is hypocrisy on his part
again in the sense that he made a pretense of having concern for his daughters’
safety, which he did not possess as demonstrated by his treatment of his daughters
as expressed by his daughters in Genesis 31:14-16.
Notice in Genesis 31:51 how Laban states that he claims to have built this pillar
and heap of stones when in reality it was Jacob and his family according to Genesis
31:46 and so we see that once again Laban always claims what he has not done or
does not belong to him and is therefore delusional.
Genesis 31:51-52 manifests another element of a treaty common in ancient
Near Eastern legal practice, namely, that of establishing boundary stones to
demarcate territory. The boundary marked by the stones was the limit of Jacob’s
property as Gilead would later become part of the nation of Israel.
Genesis 31:53 “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.”
(NASB95)
Genesis 31:53 manifests two more elements of a treaty in ancient Near Eastern
practice, namely the invoking divine witnesses, a curse for breaking the agreement,
which was insured in the case of Jacob and Laban by the presence of God. Laban
added an oath to the covenant by calling on the God of Abraham and the gods of
Nahor, the gods of their father to judge between Jacob and Laban, which indicates
how great a split this is between the two families of Laban and Jacob.
The phrase “the God of Nahor” should be translated “the gods of Nahor” for
two reasons: (1) Laban was still a polytheist as evidenced by his household gods
that Rachel stole. (2) The plural form of the verb shaphat, means “they will
judge.”
Jacob ignored the gods of Nahor and took his oath only in the name of the true
and living God who was worshipped by Isaac, his father and grandfather Abraham
as indicated by the statement that “Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac.”
This statement expresses Jacob’s faith in the God of his father Isaac indicating that
he is identifying with the God his father Isaac who reverentially worshipped God
and possessed an eternal relationship and close intimate fellowship with Him.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
133
Genesis 31:54 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. (NASB95)
Genesis 31:54 manifests the final element of a treaty in ancient Near Eastern
practice, namely that partaking of a meal between the parties before the witnessing
heap, confirming the acceptance of the terms by both parties.
Genesis 31:55 Early in the morning Laban arose, and kissed his sons and
his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned to his
place. (NASB95)
So we see the covenant ceremony has been concluded resulting in peace
between Laban and Jacob. Laban’s chase of Jacob has ended in a covenant
guaranteeing respect for each other’s family and territory in the future and so
therefore, Laban heads home to Paddan Aram and Jacob to Canaan.
Laban did not altogether lack affection for his own family as demonstrated that
he kissed his grandsons and daughters goodbye and gave them a blessing. He must
have known that his daughters had come to resent him and he was probably feeling
guilty about that.
Notice, he was so arrogant and proud that he could not bring himself to
apologize to his daughters and Jacob.
So Laban walks off the pages of Scriptures here since never again do we hear of
him. He was governed and controlled by the old Adamic sin nature and the cosmic
system, which he loved.
Laban encountered the true and living God in a dream and had witnessed the
reality of God in the life of Jacob and was even blessed by God due to his
association with Jacob.
Unfortunately, this did not lead to the bowing of his will and trusting in Christ
as His Savior since he continued in idolatry and covetousness and involved in the
god of materialism.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
134
Chapter Eight: Jacob Reunites With Esau
Jacob’s Encounter with Angels
Genesis 32:1-2 presents to us the record of Jacob encountering the angels of
God as he was returning to the land of Canaan and naming the place, “Mahanaim,”
which means, “This is God’s camp.”
In this chapter, we see Jacob leaving behind forever his problems with Laban
but now he has to confront his past and Esau who he cheated out of the blessing of
the birthright.
We saw in Genesis 31 Jacob escaping one conflict with Laban but now in
Genesis 32, we see him returning to another conflict, namely his unresolved feud
with his twin brother Esau.
So we see that Jacob had two great enemies, one that resided outside the
Promised Land in Laban and the other in the Promised Land, that being Esau. Esau
typifies the believer’s enemy within, that being the old Adamic sin nature and
Laban typifies the believer’s enemy from without, that being the cosmic system of
Satan.
As soon as Jacob made his way through the mountains of Gilead, after
triumphing over Laban and separating from him by the Mizpah monument, his
thoughts would soon turn to his old adversary, Esau.
If you recall, his mother Rebekah said that she would send for Jacob after Esau
had cooled down (Genesis 27:45). However, Jacob never heard from her during the
twenty years in Paddan Aram. Either she was ill or died and was therefore not able
to call him back or Esau was still threatening to kill Jacob.
Also, at this time, Jacob probably thought that his father Isaac had died since
prior to leaving his family, the entire family was anticipating that his death would
be soon. So Jacob was facing an uncertain future just as he was when he left
Canaan.
The reader in Genesis 32 finds a potentially dangerous conflict taking place
between the two brothers but the anticipation of this encounter creates an
opportunity to drive Jacob to prayer to solve the potential problem. But before
Jacob meets Esau, he has two unexpected meetings, one with the elect angels of
God who have been protecting him while in exile, which is recorded in Genesis
31:1-2 and the other with the preincarnate Christ, which is recorded in Genesis
32:22-32.
These two meetings, one with the angels and the other with the preincarnate
Christ were designed to reassure Jacob of God’s protection and presence when he
encounters Esau. These two encounters with the angels and the Lord mark the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
135
second and third turning points in the life of Jacob, with the first being of course,
his encounter with the Lord at Bethel.
Each time that Jacob encounters the angels of God and the preincarnate Christ,
he memorializes it by constructing a pillar, the first at Bethel (28:19), the second at
Mahanaim (32:2) and the third at Peniel (32:30).
The first encounter with the angels of God and the preincarnate Christ as
recorded in Genesis 28:10-15 prepared him to meet Laban and the second
encounter prepares him to meet Esau.
The outline of Genesis 32 is as follows: (1) Angels of God meet Jacob at
Mahanaim (32:1-2) (2) Jacob sends messengers to Esau (32:3-6) (3) Jacob divides
his family out of fear of Esau (32:7-8) (4) Jacob prays for protection from Esau and
claims covenant promises of God (32:9-12) (5) Jacob sends gifts to Esau (32:1321) (6) Jacob sends family across Jabbok (32:22-23) (7) Jacob prays as he wrestles
the God-Man, Jesus Christ at Peniel (32:24-32).
In Genesis 33:1-17 we see Jacob finally encountering Esau and the two men
reconciling with each other. Therefore, Genesis 32 can be described as “God
Prepares Jacob to Meet Esau.”
Now, in Genesis 32:1-2, Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit opens
the story of Jacob meeting Esau by presenting the vertical dimension (God, the
angels and Jacob) of the story before the horizontal (Jacob and Esau).
In these two verses, we see the same elect angels of God that met Jacob as he
left the land of Canaan (Genesis 28:10-15), now meet him upon his return. Genesis
32:1-2 and Genesis 28:10-15 are correlated since what took place at Bethel on
Jacob’s way out of the land of Canaan now took place on his way back to that land.
Jacob’s vision of these angels in Genesis 32:1-2 would reassure him once again
of the divine presence and protection. What the Holy Spirit through Moses wants
us to see and understand is this entire situation between Jacob and Esau is to be
viewed from two perspectives, the divine and human and that before Jacob can
reconcile with Esau, he must persevere in prayer with God so that God can resolve
Jacob’s problem with Esau.
Genesis 32:1 Now as Jacob went on his way, the angels of God met him.
(NASB95)
“Angels” is the noun mal’akh, which means, “messenger” is used in the Old
Testament with reference to “elect” angels (Gen. 19:1; Ps. 91:11) and men (Deut.
2:26; Josh. 6:17) and of the “preincarnate” Christ (Gen. 22:11; Zech. 3:1).
The phrase “angels of God” refers to the elect angels of God since: (1) If the
preincarnate Christ were in view, the singular form of the noun mal’akh would be
used and not the plural form as it is here. (2) Jacob names the place “the camp
(army) of God” ruling out a reference to human beings. (3) The noun Elohim,
“God” stands in apposition to the noun mal’akh, “angels.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
136
We have seen in our past studies in the book of Genesis that the elect angels are
employed by God to guard (Genesis 3:24), to communicate with God’s people
(Genesis 18:1) and to protect God’s people (Genesis 19:1-22; 28:10-15).
Angels are created spirit beings (Ps. 148:2, 5) in eternity past, (Job 38:4, 7)
since the Lord Jesus Christ created the angels in eternity past (Col. 1:16). They are
in eternity (present) a higher category of beings than humans are (Heb. 2:6-7),
however, in eternity (future), redeemed humans will be a higher category of beings
than the angels (Ps. 8:4-5).
The doctrine of positional sanctification states that the church age believer is
positionally higher than the angels by virtue of their union with Christ through the
Baptism of the Spirit, which takes place at the moment of salvation (Ephesians
2:6).
There are innumerable angels (He. 12:22) and they do not die and neither does
their number increase or decrease (Lu. 20:36).
There are now 2 categories of angels in the cosmos: (1) Elect (2) Non-elect or
fallen.
The elect angels of God are arranged in ranks as well as the fallen or non-elect
angels (Ephesians 6:12).
The elect angels: (1) Protect (2) Provide (3) Proclaim the Word of God (4)
Execute God’s Judgments.
In Relation to the Church: Hebrews 1:14 describes ministry of the elect-angels
“servant-spirits who are divinely commissioned and repeatedly dispatched for
service on behalf of those who are destined to inherit salvation.” (Author’s
translation)
In this, however, Scripture points to a number of specific ministries: (1) The
elect-angels bring answers to prayer (Acts 12:5-10). (2) They help in bringing
people to the Savior (Acts 8:26; 10:3). (3) They may encourage in times of danger
(Acts 27:23-24). (4) They care for God’s people at the time of death (Luke 16:22).
Therefore, the presence of these elect angels would be a sign to Jacob of God’s
presence and protection from Esau and would therefore be a great encouragement
to Jacob as he made his way back home. This vision of angels would reassure
Jacob that God cares for him and was also still accessible to him as he encountered
his brother Esau.
“Met” is the verb pagha, which conveys that Jacob’s encounter with these elect
angels of God would result in a reconciliation with Esau.
Just as the angels appeared to Jacob in order to reassure him as he was leaving
Canaan facing an unknown future (from the human perspective) and preparing to
meet his deceitful uncle Laban who cheated him so the angels appear to Jacob
again in order to reassure him as he faces the unknown (from the human
perspective) and prepares to meet his old adversary, his twin brother Esau.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
137
Notice that the angels initiated the encounter in that they met Jacob and not vice
versa and that is because God whose authority the angels are under, is a God of
love, who always initiates so as to motivate a worshipful response (See 1 John
4:19).
Genesis 32:2 Jacob said when he saw them, “This is God's camp.” So he
named that place Mahanaim. (NASB95)
“Camp” is the noun machaneh, which refers to a “military encampment” for
the elect angels of God as indicated by the statement that the angels of God met
Jacob in his journey home to Canaan.
“Mahanaim” is the proper noun machanayim, which means, “two camps,”
referring to Jacob’s human encampment and the angels encampment and was
located on the Jabbok River, along which the major east-west trade route
connecting the Trans-jordan King’s Highway and the coastal Via Maris run.
Man cannot see angels for they are invisible but can be seen by man when God
takes one of two actions: (1) He lifts the veil of the spiritual dimension (2 Kin.
6:17). (2) He allows them to change their form to human (Heb. 13:2).
In Genesis 28:10-15 and 32:1-2, we see God lifting the veil of the invisible
spiritual dimension, which He has done several times throughout history.
Jacob Sends a Delegation to Esau
Genesis 32:3-6 records Jacob sending a delegation to his brother Esau in order
to communicate to him his desire to reconcile with him.
Genesis 32:3 Then Jacob sent messengers before him to his brother Esau in
the land of Seir, the country of Edom. (NASB95)
Jacob sends this delegation to Esau in order to communicate that he wished to
reconcile with him and that he had peaceful intentions towards Esau. The sending
of this delegation reveals the sensitivity of Jacob since it was an attempt on Jacob’s
part to see things from Esau’s perspective and was not motivated out of fear of
Esau.
From Esau’s perspective, when he heard that Jacob was migrating back to
Canaan and with a large caravan and many possessions, he would be wondering of
Jacob’s intentions since in the past Jacob had hurt him.
Jacob realized that Esau would probably be very fearful and suspicious of him
based upon his actions towards Esau in the past where he deceived his blind father
into giving the blessing of the birthright to him rather than Esau.
Also, Jacob figured that Esau might think he had come to claim the prophecy of
Genesis 25:23 that the “older shall serve the younger” and so therefore, he
thought that it would be expedient to communicate to Esau that he did not desire to
subjugate him and his family to himself.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
138
Therefore, we see that Jacob had gained an appreciation of Esau’s feelings by
being the victim himself of Laban’s treachery and deceitfulness. The divine
discipline in the form of twenty years hard labor for Laban has affected a change of
character in Jacob by driving out of the soul of Jacob the sinful patterns of
deceitfulness and treachery and replaced them with kindness, gentleness,
thoughtfulness and love and consideration for others.
At this point neither man knows the intentions of the other but courageously
Jacob initiates contact with Esau in order to calm whatever fears Esau might still
have towards him based upon their difficult relationship in the past.
Jacob takes the initiative because he is operating in faith that God is with him
and will protect him and if he didn’t have faith he wouldn’t have attempted to
initiate contact with Esau but would have sought to enter the land of Canaan
secretly.
The name “Seir,” demarcates the Edomite territory, which was situated at the
southeast border of Palestine (Judges 11:17; Numbers 34:3) and was properly
called “the land of Seir” (Genesis 36:8; Gen 32:3; Joshua 24:4; Ezekiel 35:3, 7,
15) and “the country of Edom.”
Merrill F. Unger, writes, “The physical geography of Edom is somewhat
peculiar. Along the western base of the mountain range are low calcareous hills.
These are succeeded by lofty masses of igneous rock, chiefly porphyry, over which
lies red and variegated sandstone in irregular ridges and abrupt cliffs with deep
ravines between. The latter strata give the mountains their most striking features
and remarkable colors. The average elevation of the summit is about two thousand
feet above the sea. Along the eastern side runs an almost unbroken limestone ridge,
a thousand feet or more higher than the other. This ridge sinks down with an easy
slope into the plateau of the Arabian Desert. Although Edom is thus wild, rugged,
and almost inaccessible, the deep glens and flat terraces along the mountainsides
are covered with rich soil, from which trees, shrubs, and flowers now spring up
luxuriantly” (From The New Unger's Bible Dictionary. Originally published by
Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright (c) 1988.).
Genesis 32:4 He also commanded them saying, “Thus you shall say to my
lord Esau: ‘Thus says your servant Jacob, ‘I have sojourned with Laban, and
stayed until now; 5 I have oxen and donkeys and flocks and male and female
servants; and I have sent to tell my lord, that I may find favor in your sight.’”
(NASB95)
At this point, Jacob does not know if Esau’s anger towards him has subsided or
if he is still thinking revenge. As he was approaching Canaan, undoubtedly, Jacob
would be thinking at least two things. One that his father was dead since when he
left for Paddan Aram, his father’s death was considered imminent.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
139
Secondly, he would have been thinking of what his mother Rebekah said to him
when she informed him that Esau was planning to kill him after his father’s death.
However, the assumption that Isaac’s death was imminent was proven wrong since
Isaac lived another eighty years after Jacob left for Paddan Aram. Therefore, he
informs the delegation to speak to Esau in deferential terms so as to convey to Esau
that his intentions are peaceful and conciliatory.
Notice the deferential language that Jacob instructs the delegation to use when
addressing Esau, “my lord” and “your servant.” He uses these deferential terms
to convey to Esau that his intentions are peaceful and conciliatory and that he does
not wish to claim the promise that “the older shall serve the younger.”
The deferential terms used by Jacob do not express his fear of Esau but rather
his conciliatory attitude towards Esau since Jacob is the one who initiates the
contact with his brother something he would not desire to do if he was afraid of
Esau.
If he was afraid of Esau, he would have crept into Canaan secretly just as he left
Laban secretly out of fear. However, instead we see him announcing his return in
obedience to the Lord’s command by sending this delegation with a peaceful and
conciliatory message for Esau.
Robert Deffinbaugh, “The substance of his message to Esau was that he had
returned a wealthy man. In this case he was not coming back in order to place a
claim on his father’s wealth. Jacob sought to assure Esau that his return was a
friendly and non-threatening one. All that he sought was Esau’s favor.” (The Book
of Genesis; Biblical Studies Press, 1997).
Bruce K. Waltke, “Although this introductory greeting conforms to the
customary epistolary style of the ancient Near East, nevertheless, through this
courtesy Jacob begins to right the arrogance toward his brother that brought him in
diametrical opposition to his promised destiny (27:29). Like Abraham with Lot,
Jacob takes the first step toward giving up the rights of his election to the blessing
(13:1-12), trusting God to fulfill the promise. His rivalry with Esau is about over”
(Genesis, A Commentary, page 442, Zondervan).
We must remember that Esau did not know Jacob’s intentions either and did not
know that Jacob had since changed from the last time that he spoke with him. Esau
would have been thinking about the prophecy of Genesis 25:23 that the “older
shall serve the younger” and so therefore, would have been wondering if Jacob
had come to claim that promise and subjugate him and his family and take his
possessions, thus, Jacob makes clear through this delegation that this is not his
intention.
Jacob’s statement “I have sojourned with Laban, and stayed until now”
reveals to Esau the reason why he has not heard from him and also reveals his tact
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
140
in that he omits the real reason why he left home to go to Paddan Aram, which was
to avoid Esau’s plot to kill him.
Jacob’s statement “that I may find favor in your sight” expresses his desire to
reconcile with his brother Esau.
Genesis 32:6 The messengers returned to Jacob, saying, “We came to your
brother Esau, and furthermore he is coming to meet you, and four hundred
men are with him.” (NASB95)
Evidently, it appears from the text of Genesis 32:6 that the delegation never
made contact with Eau and never communicated Jacob’s desire to reconcile with
Esau since they are never said to speak with Esau. Therefore, it appears that the
messengers only went far enough to discover that Esau was advancing toward
them accompanied by four hundred men, which would understandably cause them
to think that Esau had hostile intentions.
So the delegation never makes contact with Esau out of fear of him because
they saw the four hundred men and immediately assumed that Esau’s intentions
were hostile and they conveyed that fear to Jacob by emphasizing the four hundred
men.
The four hundred men was the standard size of a militia in the days of the
patriarchs (1 Samuel 22:2; 25:13; 30:10; cf. Genesis 14:14). The fact that the
messengers state to Jacob that Esau is coming to meet him with four hundred men
is rather ambiguous for two reasons.
Was Esau using the four hundred men to attack Jacob or to receive his brother
royally and escort him into the land of Canaan? Jacob would not be asking himself
why the messengers were allowed to return unharmed and allow him to prepare
himself since the messengers never made contact with Esau and never
communicated with him.
Jacob’s response to the news about Esau and his four hundred men, which is
recorded in Genesis 32:7 indicates quite clearly that he was convinced that Esau
had come to attack him.
News is known to travel with incredible speed in the Middle East as travelers
have reported many times in the past. Esau would have been informed about the
arrival of Jacob’s caravan through reconnaissance by his men.
Now, from Esau’s perspective, based upon his past dealings with Jacob and his
knowledge of the prophecy that the “older shall serve the younger” it is
understandable that Esau protects himself and his family by going out to meet
Jacob with four hundred men just in case Jacob’s intentions are hostile. So Esau
would have two questions in his mind, has Jacob come to attack me or is he
coming with peaceful intentions? Therefore, Esau would have been arriving with
the four hundred men for either one of two reasons, one to protect himself in case
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
141
Jacob attacks him or to welcome home his brother royally and escort him on home
to their father.
Both Esau and Jacob at this point are filled with uncertainty and anxiety as to
what the intentions of the other might be. However, God has softened the heart of
both men throughout the past twenty years because both have been prospered by
God, thus setting the stage for reconciliation between the two rather than war.
Jacob Responds to Report From His Messengers to Esau
Genesis 32:7-8 records Jacob responding to the report from his messengers that
Esau was advancing towards him with four hundred men by dividing his family
into two companies in order to save lives.
Also, Genesis 32:9-12 records Jacob praying for protection from Esau and
claiming the covenant promises of God (32:9-12) in prayer in order to meet his
fear of Esau.
Genesis 32:7 Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed; and he divided
the people who were with him, and the flocks and the herds and the camels,
into two companies; 8 for he said, “If Esau comes to the one company and
attacks it, then the company which is left will escape.” (NASB95)
The knowledge of Esau’s desire to kill him, his inability to retreat because of
the treaty with Laban, the fact that he was encumbered by small children and
livestock cause Jacob to come to the conclusion that Esau’s intention is to attack
him.
In the event of an attack, all he can do is minimize his losses since he can’t
retreat and he is slowed by the children and livestock. Jacob’s fear of Esau does
not paralyze him but in fact he keeps his head as evidenced by his acting
decisively, which demonstrated great leadership. He expects the worst and so he
makes every effort to avoid a total catastrophe.
To deal with this impending confrontation with Esau, Jacob takes three actions.
Jacob’s first act was to take defensive measures by splitting his party into two
camps allowing at least the rear to escape, and which measures are recorded in
Genesis 32:7-8. Jacob’s second act was offensive, which was to pray to the Father
for deliverance as recorded in Genesis 32:9-11. The third act that Jacob took to
deal with the advance of Esau was also offensive in nature, which was to present
Esau with gifts, which is recorded in Genesis 32:13-22.
Jacob follows the custom often employed by endangered caravans and divided
his company into two divisions, with a view to giving one a chance to escape while
Esau’s army subdued the other. He realized that they would require God’s
protection and he was fully intending to go to God in prayer to ask for this
protection, which he does as recorded in Genesis 32:9-12.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
142
However, he also realizes it was wise as well as in keeping with God’s will for
him to take whatever precautions that were open to him as soon as possible, after
which he could pray in faith, knowing that he had done all he could and the Lord
would have to take charge the rest of the way.
Jacob does not scheme and plan and cry out to God until afterwards. He does
not come to God as a last resort but in fact goes to God and communicates his fear
to Him, which is not sin but what God wants him to do.
Genesis 32:9-12 is Jacob’s first recorded prayer and the only extended prayer in
the book of Genesis.
Genesis 32:9 Jacob said, “O God of my father Abraham and God of my
father Isaac, O LORD, who said to me, ‘Return to your country and to your
relatives, and I will prosper you, 10 I am unworthy of all the lovingkindness
and of all the faithfulness which You have shown to Your servant; for with my
staff only I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two companies.’”
(NASB95)
Jacob addresses God, “O God of my father Abraham and God of my father
Isaac” which echoes the Lord’s identification of Himself to Jacob at Bethel, which
is recorded in Genesis 28:13.
In Genesis 28:13, the Lord identifies Himself to Jacob as “the Lord, the God
of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac” in order to reassure Jacob that he
will be protected by Him.
In Genesis 32:9, Jacob aims to hold the Lord to His promise of protection by
addressing God, “the God of my father Abraham and the God of my father
Isaac.”
Jacob’s statement “God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac”
is an acknowledgment that God has been faithful to him as He was to his
grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac.
“God” is the noun Elohim, which emphasizes the sovereignty of God, thus
indicating Jacob’s desire that God sovereignly intervene in his life and protect him
from Esau. The noun Elohim, also expresses that God is omnipotent or allpowerful and was able to bring to pass that which He has determined to take place,
thus Jacob is expressing his desire that God use His omnipotence to protect him
from harm.
“Lord” is the proper noun Yahweh, which is the covenant name of God thus
Jacob is reminding God that he has a covenant relationship with Him. The term
“Lord” also emphasizes the “immanency” of God indicating Jacob’s desire that
the Lord involve Himself in and concern Himself with and intervene in his life and
bless him in fulfillment of His promises to him.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
143
Therefore, we see Jacob approaching God in prayer based upon his covenant
relationship with God that was possessed by both his grandfather Abraham and his
father Isaac.
The command “Return to your country and to your relatives, and I will
prosper you” is a reference to the Lord’s command to Jacob to “return to the
land of your fathers and I will be with you,” which is recorded in Genesis 31:3.
By using this command when addressing God in prayer, Jacob is reminding
God that he was obedient to His command and thus in this predicament with Esau
because of it and so Jacob is holding God to His promise to bless him, which is an
expression of faith on the part of Jacob.
Jacob states in the prayer, “I am unworthy,” which is an acknowledgement on
his part that he merits nothing with God and that all He has been promised and has
received from God is a gift of His sovereign grace and is casting himself upon
God’s mercy and compassion.
His use of this expression expresses Jacob’s humility and that he has finally
come to realize that all the prophecies about him and all the blessings were based
not upon His merits but upon God’s grace.
“Lovingkindness” is the noun chesedh, which means, “loyal or faithful love” to
Jacob and which loyal or faithful love Jacob attributes to God who remained
faithful to His covenant promises to Jacob by remaining with him and protecting
and prospering him while he was in exile with Laban. Therefore, we see that Jacob
has an awareness and knowledge of God’s character.
This word chesedh involves the inferior partner depending on the kindness of
the superior to meet a desperate need. Therefore, we see that Jacob attributes his
prospering to God’s loyalty and prays that he can count on the Lord again to follow
through for him on this dangerous journey and meet his need as a covenant partner
and give him protection from Esau.
“Faithfulness” is the noun `emeth, which is used by Jacob to praise the Lord’s
faithfulness, and reliability and trustworthiness in keeping His promises to prosper
and protect him while with Laban.
When taken together, these two noun chesedh, “lovingkindness” and `emeth,
“faithfulness” express the continued stability and reliability of God’s
unconditional love towards Jacob. Jacob also acknowledges the Lord’s
providential care of him while in exile with Laban.
Jacob calls himself the Lord’s “servant” which is the noun `evedh which refers
to one who is under authority to another for protection.
The term is a reminder to God that since Jacob is under His authority that Jacob
is therefore, under God’s protection as well.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
144
Jacob’s statement, “for with my staff only I crossed this Jordan, and now I
have become two companies” is an acknowledgement that God has fulfilled His
promises to prosper him while in exile.
By making this statement, Jacob is implying that since God has given Jacob so
much material prosperity in life to enjoy, is this prosperity to be brought to nothing
by the loss of his life and the lives of his family?
Genesis 32:11 “Deliver me, I pray, from the hand of my brother, from the
hand of Esau; for I fear him, that he will come and attack me and the mothers
with the children.” (NASB95)
Jacob acknowledges his fear of Esau in this prayer to God, and which fear is not
sin but rather faith in God since Jacob demonstrates His confidence in God by
going to Him in prayer to meet this fear of Esau and asking God to deliver him
from Esau and his men.
The acknowledgement of fear in one’s life is not sin but becomes sin when we
don’t go to God to meet the fear and trust Him to handle the situation. Jacob’s fear
would have become sin if he attempted to deal with this problem with Esau solely
by means of his own devices and leave God out of the situation.
The fact that Jacob prayed and did not attempt to deal with this problem with
Esau by means of his own power and schemes demonstrates that he is no longer
self-confident but rather confident in God. The twenty years with Laban has
broken Jacob of relying upon himself to deal with his problems and has taught him
to turn to God to solve his problems.
Jacob is not looking at Esau but looking to God and is thus operating in faith
and concentrating on the Lord’s promise to protect him.
Principle: Unbelief is the failure to take into account and acknowledge the
character and nature of God, His presence and His Word.
Unbelief operates in the sphere of the old Adamic sin nature and contradicts
faith and leaves God out.
The fact that Jacob goes to God in prayer to deal with this situation and doesn’t
leave God out is an expression of his confidence in God.
Remember, Jacob does not know Esau’s intentions and so his fear is justified.
The fact that Jacob entered into fear of Esau is not a sin but would have been if he
left God out of the situation and did not ask Him to deliver him from Esau.
The fact that Jacob was “not” paralyzed by fear but in fact took these measures
and even prays indicates that he is not sinning but rather meeting his fear with
practical common sense and appropriating the divine provision of prayer to
overcome his fear of Esau.
Fear is not sin but becomes sin when we do not turn to God in prayer to
overcome that fear and do not claim the promise of divine protection. Jacob met
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
145
his fear and anxiety with prayer and claiming the promises that God had made to
him in the past of the divine presence, protection and prosperity.
So to meet his fear of Esau, Jacob asks God to deliver or rescue him from Esau
and his men.
Genesis 32:12 “For You said, ‘I will surely prosper you and make your
descendants as the sand of the sea, which is too great to be numbered.’”
(NASB95)
The phrase “for You (Lord) said” is a reference to the personal, national and
universal promises that the Lord made to Jacob at Bethel, which are recorded in
Genesis 28:13-15 and expresses Jacob’s confidence in God and his motivation for
his petition and that he bases his entire future on God’s promises.
The statement “I will make your descendants as the sand of the sea” is a
reference to the promise God made to Jacob to make his descendants like the dust
of the earth, which is recorded in Genesis 28:14.
“Your descendants” refers to Isaac’s “biological” descendants, which would
be the nation of Israel and it refers to his “spiritual” descendants, which would be
anyone, Jew or Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ as their Savior.
In a “near” sense “Your descendants” refers the nation of Israel (saved and
unsaved) and in a “far” sense it refers to saved Israel during the millennial reign of
Christ.
The comparative clauses “like the dust of the earth” in Genesis 28:14 and “as
the sand of the sea” in Genesis 32:12 were fulfilled in a “near” sense in the days
of Solomon (see 1 Kings 4:20) and will be fulfilled in a “far” sense during the
millennial reign of Christ (see Hosea 1:10).
The fact that Jacob reminds God of this promise indicates his concern for his
family and posterity and not just himself. The fact that Jacob reminds God of His
promise that his descendants would be as the sand of the sea, demonstrates that he
is operating in faith in this situation with Esau since he is claiming the promises of
God or in other words, he is resting on God’s Word.
The fact that Jacob is claiming the promise that his descendants would be as the
sand of the sea indicates Jacob’s desire to see that God’s Word is fulfilled, which
would ultimately result in the glorification of God since it would demonstrate
God’s faithfulness and veracity. Therefore, Jacob’s prayer is not selfish since he
desires to see God’s Word fulfilled in his life, which leads to the glorification of
God.
He does not let go and let God but rather does all that is humanly possible to
protect himself and then also goes to God to communicate his fear of Esau and
claims the promise of divine protection to meet that fear and then trusts God to
work out the details of his deliverance. Therefore, we see that Jacob is
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
146
demonstrating tremendous spiritual leadership in this situation and faith in God by
taking these measures.
Truly, Jacob is a changed man since prior to his exile, he would have never
prayed to God to solve a problem but now he prays to solve his problem of anxiety,
fear and worry.
If you recall, Jacob left Laban secretly because of fear of Laban, which was an
expression of unbelief since he did not pray for deliverance from Laban and did
not claim the promise of divine protection. However, here we see Jacob in fear of
Esau but handling it differently in that he figures God into the equation by
communicating his fear to God and reminding God that He promised to protect and
prosper him, which was an expression of his faith.
Jacob Sends Gifts to Esau
Genesis 32:13-21 presents to us the record of Jacob sending gifts to Esau to
restore stealing the blessing of the birthright and thus pacifying him in case Esau
has hostile intentions towards him.
Genesis 32:13 So he spent the night there. Then he selected from what he
had with him a present for his brother Esau: 14 two hundred female goats
and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams, 15 thirty milking
camels and their colts, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and
ten male donkeys. (NASB95)
When Genesis 32:13 records that Jacob “spent the night there” it is referring
to “Mahanaim,” which according to Genesis 32:2 was the place that he
encountered the elect angels.
“Mahanaim” is the proper noun machanayim, which means, “two camps,”
referring to Jacob’s human encampment and the angels encampment and was
located on the Jabbok River, along which the major east-west trade route
connecting the Trans-jordan King’s Highway and the coastal Via Maris run.
The statement “Then he selected from what he had with him” indicates that
Jacob had little time to assemble these animals and simply took whatever was
brought to him and did not have the opportunity to inspect them since this was
done at night.
A comparison of Genesis 32:13 and 21-22 indicates that after his prayer to the
Lord for deliverance and during that same night, Jacob decided it proper to send a
very gracious gift to Esau.
Genesis 32:14 records that Jacob sent Esau two hundred female goats and
twenty male goats. Goats were domesticated as early as 3000 B.C. and their milk,
butter, cheese and meat provided sustenance. Goat hair and hides were useful in
making clothing and containers for liquids.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
147
Genesis 32:14 also records that Jacob sent Esau two hundred ewes or female
sheep and twenty rams or mature male sheep.
Genesis 32:15 records that Jacob sent Esau thirty milking or nursing camels and
their colts. The camel was a prime beast of burden and a prime measure of wealth
in the ancient Near East, owing both to its ability to store water and to survive on
desert and steppe scrub. With the camel’s domestication, overland trade routes to
the remote spice regions of the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula were opened
to the rest of the ancient Near Eastern economic sphere.
Camels were used for milk and hides and their skins were used for sandals. The
Israelites were prohibited from eating the meat of camels (Lev. 11:4; Deut. 14:7).
However, camel meat is a common part of the diet of Arabic peoples today and
was also part of the diet of many biblical peoples.
The possession of many camels implied that the owner was engaged in
caravanning. The camel was used for riding and as a beast of burden and for
recreational purposes such as racing.
Genesis 32:15 records that Jacob also sent Esau forty cows and ten bulls as well
as twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. These animals were valuable for
transportation, milk and leather. The females are especially prized for breeding and
thus herd expansion and milking, thus Jacob sends more females than he does
males.
Donkeys were domesticated early and were comparatively plentiful. Therefore,
if we do the math, Jacob sent a total of 550 animals, which is not counting the
young camels.
This gift was very generous and gracious and was Jacob’s attempt to reconcile
with Esau and offer restitution for his deceiving his blind father Isaac into
bestowing the blessings of the birthright upon him rather than Esau.
Jacob sends the gifts in increments in order to offer restitution to Esau in case
he is still offended by Jacob’s past conduct in relation to the blessing of the
birthright. The animals were sent as free gifts to compensate the wrong Jacob had
done to Esau when he deceived his father Isaac into bestowing upon him the
blessing of the birthright rather than to Esau.
Bruce K. Waltke, “He is ready to restore the blessing and to recognize Esau as
lord (See Proverbs 25:21-22), trusting God to keep His covenant promises (See
Genesis 13; 32:9-12)” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 444, Zondervan).
This gift was “not” a bribe on Jacob’s part but rather it was to express that his
intentions towards Esau were peaceful and conciliatory and deferential.
Also, this gift was “not” an attempt on Jacob’s part to help God out here and
therefore an act of unbelief. If you recall, Jacob prayed to God for deliverance
from Esau in Genesis 32:9-12. This gift should be “not” construed that Jacob was
now forgetting about his prayer to God for deliverance and thinking that he could
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
148
deliver himself with this gift or help God out with this gift. Rather, Jacob was
doing what was required of him under these circumstances since he had cheated
and had been deceitful with Esau in the past and was offering restitution for his
past conduct with Esau.
With this gift, Jacob was attempting to offer “restitution” to Esau and make
amends for actions against Esau when he had deceived his blind father Isaac into
bestowing the blessings of the birthright to him rather than Esau. The Lord Jesus
Christ taught His disciples the doctrine of restitution in Matthew 5:21-25.
Some propose that the believer when he sins against his fellow believer need
only to confess his offense to God who then freely forgives, without any need to
seek forgiveness or to resolve the offended horizontal relationship. Some make the
claim that the death of Christ brings experiential forgiveness before God and
before men without any further resolution or restitution between men.
These proponents argue that for every sin and crime, one need only to confess
to God for total forgiveness experientially. The victim is then required to forgive
based solely upon the positional forgiveness that “he” has personally received in
Christ. This view is proposed from faulty interpretations of the following two
passages:
Ephesians 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each
other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you. (NASB95)
Colossians 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other,
whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also
should you. (NASB95)
If we carry this view to its logical end, the victim must forgive and seek
restoration with the perpetrator solely because of the forgiveness of Christ. Thus,
the thief steals, confesses to God, who supposedly totally forgives him, but tough
luck for the victim who has lost real property!
The slanderer libels, devastates his target, and confesses to God, who
supposedly totally forgives him but tough luck again for the victim with a ruined
reputation!
In the case of sin against one’s fellow human being, those who hold that
confession to God alone is all that is necessary for forgiveness in the experiential
sense remove the basis for criminal law. They also remove the basis of restitution
to victims and some holding this view include in their logic a faulty interpretation
of David’s prayer of confession in Psalm 51.
Psalm 51:4a “Against You, You only, I have sinned and done what is evil in
Your sight.” (NASB95)
Thus, with their logic, the thief steals, confesses to God, who supposedly totally
forgives him, but tough luck for the victim who has lost real property or the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
149
slanderer libels, devastates his target, and confesses to God, who supposedly
totally forgives him but tough luck again for the victim with a ruined reputation!
In this way they avoid the command of James 5:16 to confess your sins to one
another but to the contrary, we should interpret this passage where the confession
of the offender’s sin to the offended party takes place.
Our Lord taught His disciples that if their horizontal relationships with people
are not right because of sin, then they are not right in their vertical relationship
with God. For instance, if we don’t forgive our fellow believers, then God won’t
forgive us in the experiential sense and thus we won’t be restored to fellowship
(Mt. 6:14-15; Mt. 18:21-35).
So, if we have sinned and injured someone whether his or her property or
reputation, we must confess it to the injured party and offer restitution, which in
some cases, restitution could simply involve an apology.
Sins against society and against one another require civil restitution for
experiential forgiveness before God and men, thus, the thief steals, realizes his sin,
and confesses to God and his victim, then makes restitution, and God forgives him.
The divine requirement commands men to forgive the repentant offender. The
death of Christ compensated God and the perpetrator compensates the victim by
restitution. The slanderer libels and devastates his target, realizes his sin, confesses
to God and the victim, makes restitution, and God forgives him. The Lord requires
men to forgive the repentant man and the death of Christ compensates God
whereas restitution compensates the victim.
Leviticus 6:1-7 presents clear guidelines about the principles involved when
one sins against God and another person. In the Gospel of Luke, Zaccheus
informed the Lord that he gave to those whom he had defrauded four times as
much (Luke 19:8-10). Therefore, we see that in Genesis 32:13-21, Jacob is offering
restitution to Esau in order to make amends for defrauding Esau when he stole the
blessing of the birthright.
Genesis 32:16 He delivered them into the hand of his servants, every drove
by itself, and said to his servants, “Pass on before me, and put a space between
droves.” (NASB95)
Genesis 32:16 records that Jacob divided the animals into five different droves:
first the goats (200 female and 20 male), then the sheep (20 male and 200 female),
then camels (30) and their young, then the cattle (40 cows and 10 bulls) and then
the donkeys (20 female and 10 male).
Jacob told his servants to keep a good distance between each drove of animals
so that as a result Esau would receive five separate gifts at different times. Jacob
instructed his servants in command of each drove to inform Esau that each drove
of animals was a gift from Jacob who would be following behind them.
Notice also that Jacob gives instructions that each shepherd was to “follow” his
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
150
herd, rather than lead it in order to impress Esau with the herd and then the
message that the herd was a gift for him.
Genesis 32:17 He commanded the one in front, saying, “When my brother
Esau meets you and asks you, saying, ‘To whom do you belong, and where are
you going, and to whom do these animals in front of you belong?’ 18 then you
shall say, ‘These belong to your servant Jacob; it is a present sent to my lord
Esau. And behold, he also is behind us.’” 19 “Then he commanded also the
second and the third, and all those who followed the droves, saying, “After
this manner you shall speak to Esau when you find him 20 and you shall say,
‘Behold, your servant Jacob also is behind us.’ For he said, ‘I will appease him
with the present that goes before me. Then afterward I will see his face;
perhaps he will accept me.’” (NASB95)
“Appease” is the piel form of the verb kaphar, which in the context of Esau and
Jacob’s relationship at this point refers to “reconciling” or “repairing” their
relationship. The implication of this word is that with this gift Esau would be
visually blocked from seeing Jacob’s transgression of twenty years earlier or in
other words, the gift was designed to “cover” the sin that Jacob had committed
against Esau some twenty years earlier.
Genesis 32:21 So the present passed on before him, while he himself spent
that night in the camp. (NASB95)
Jacob Sends Family Across the Jabbok River
In Genesis 32:22-23, we see that by faith Jacob sends his family across the
Jabbok River and into the land of Canaan.
Genesis 32:22 Now he arose that same night and took his two wives and his
two maids and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 He
took them and sent them across the stream. And he sent across whatever he
had.” (NASB95)
In the Hebrew style, the narrator first gives a summary statement that presents
the final result, which is recorded in Genesis 32:22 stating that Jacob crossed the
Jabbok, which is then followed by the details, which continue up to Genesis 32:32
where the final crossing takes place.
Now, Genesis 32:22 records that Jacob sent his household across the Jabbok at
night, which is significant. The darkness symbolizes the turmoil that Jacob was
experiencing in his soul as he was trying to reconcile Esau’s advance with four
hundred men and God’s promises to be with him and protect him and to return him
to the land of Canaan.
Jacob’s “two wives” were Rachel and Leah and the “two maids” were his
secondary wives or concubines, Zilpah (Leah’s maid) and Bilhah (Rachel’s maid).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
151
“His eleven children” were Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah (See Genesis 29:3135), Issachar, Zebulun (See Genesis 30:14-21), Gad, Asher (See Genesis 30:9-13),
Dan, Naphtali (See Genesis 30:1-8), and Joseph (See Genesis 30:22-24).
“Dinah” is not mentioned “not” because she is the only girl in the family but
rather because she plays no role in the founding of the nation of Israel, which is the
concern of the narrator Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
This is a critical time in the founding of the nation of Israel because the nation
will never become a reality if they do not survive this encounter with Esau.
Furthermore, if the nation does not become a reality, then the Savior will not be
able to come into the world since the Savior was to descend in His human nature
from Jacob and his family.
“Ford” is the noun ma`avar, which refers to a shallow smooth flowing section
of the Jabbok river, which would allow Jacob’s household to walk across to the
other side.
Before the construction of bridges, flat stepping stones or timber would be laid
across the shallowest and narrowest part of the river to enable one to cross it.
“Jabbok” is the proper noun yabboq, which is a sixty-mile-long tributary east
of the Jordan River and is one of the major streams of the Trans-jordan, originating
in the mountains near Ammon, flowing north and then northwest and emptying
into the Jordan River about 20 miles north of the Dead Sea.
Bruce K. Waltke, “The river flows through deeply cut canyons for about 50
miles westward from its source, moving from 1900 feet above sea level to 115 feet
below sea level” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 445, Zondervan).
Today, the “Jabbok” is called the “Wadi Zerqa,” which means, “the blue
river.” The “Jabbok” formed a natural boundary and constituted the limit of the
territory the nation of Israel dispossessed under Moses (Numbers 21:24;
Deuteronomy 2:37; 3:16; Joshua 12:2; Judges 11:13, 22).
So after sending the animals and the servants across the river, which constituted
the gift for Esau as restitution for his deceitful conduct in the past towards Esau,
Jacob then sends his family across last. The fact that Jacob initiates contact with
Esau and even risks sending his beloved wives and children ahead of him to meet
Esau indicates quite clearly that Jacob is operating in faith and trusting the Lord to
protect him and his family.
If Jacob was afraid of Esau he would never have risked initiating contact with
Esau or risk sending his beloved family ahead of him in the path of Esau. To cross
at night with a vast entourage as Jacob did, was a difficult and dangerous
operation, which could only be undertaken by moonlight and only under urgent
circumstances, which this was.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
152
By moving from the northern to the southern side of the Jabbok River, Jacob is
placing himself and his family all the more quickly in the path of Esau, who was
advancing from Seir in the south.
If he lived in fear of Esau, he would never undertaken such an operation and
risk his family’s safety or his own. If you recall, Jacob told Laban that he left
Paddan Aram in secret out of fear of Laban. If Jacob was afraid of Esau, he would
have slipped into the country secretly just as he left Laban in secret out of fear of
Laban. Therefore, it is clear that Jacob is operating in faith, resting in the promise
of God to protect him and his family and if he wasn’t operating in faith, he would
never have risked initiating contact publicly with Esau or risk sending his beloved
wives and children ahead of him.
Faith produces courage whereas unbelief produces cowardice and so we see that
Jacob’s faith has produced courage in his soul. Faith honors the Lord whereas
unbelief dishonors the Lord because it calls into question His integrity and ability
to deliver on His promises.
Faith is obedience to God’s commands and is the positive response to God’s
commands and acting upon those directions. Jacob is demonstrating his faith by
his obedience to the Lord’s command to return to the land of Canaan.
Unbelief on the other hand is disobedient and is the negative response to God’s
commands and as a result the failure to act upon God’s commands. Unbelief not
only occupies itself with difficulties but also magnifies and exaggerates them so
that spiritual defeat (Rm. 7) rules out experiencing victory (Rm. 8).
Fear is a result of unbelief and unbelief is failure to trust that God will protect
and provide for us.
So we see quite clearly that Jacob is resting in the promise that the Lord would
protect him and is therefore, operating in faith rather than unbelief and is not
occupied with the difficulties of confronting Esau or magnifying them or
exaggerating them.
Jacob obeyed the Lord’s command to return to Canaan even though there was
uncertainty as to Esau’s attitude towards him. Hearing the Word of Christ produces
faith in God (Rm. 10:17) and so we see that God’s Word motivated Jacob to walk
by faith.
The Christian soldier’s faith or total and absolute confidence in God’s
faithfulness to His promises acts as a shield protecting his soul from the attacks of
Satan and his kingdom of darkness, which come in the form of thought projections
that are designed to produce doubt in God’s Word (Ephesians 6:16). Jacob’s soul
was protected from the attacks by the kingdom of darkness because of his faith in
God and His promises.
The believer employs the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, by
exercising faith in the Word of God, which is expressed by obedience and results
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
153
in victory in spiritual combat (Ephesians 6:17; 1 John 5:4). Jacob will experience
victory not only in spiritual combat with Satan and the kingdom of darkness but
also victory with Esau in that they will be reconciled.
Faith in the Word of God appropriates the omnipotence of God (cf. Matthew
17:20). Jacob is not looking at Esau but looking to God and is thus operating in
faith and concentrating on the Lord’s promise to protect him and is therefore
appropriating the omnipotence of God to deal with this mountain in his life in the
form of Esau.
God will reward our faith since it pleases Him and so God will reward Jacob for
his faith in Him (cf. Hebrews 11:6).
Principle: Unbelief is the failure to take into account and acknowledge the
character and nature of God, His presence and His Word.
Unbelief operates in the sphere of the old Adamic sin nature and contradicts
faith and leaves God out.
By initiating contact with Esau and sending his family across the Jabbok, Jacob
is taking into account God and acknowledging His character and nature, His
presence and His Word in the form of His promise of protection.
Fear is not sin but becomes sin when we do not turn to God in prayer to
overcome that fear and do not claim the promise of divine protection. Jacob met
his fear and anxiety with prayer and claiming the promises that God had made to
him in the past of the divine presence, protection and prosperity.
Jacob Wrestles with the Lord
In Genesis 32:24a, we see Jacob alone in prayer prior to his encounter with
Esau and entrance into the land of Canaan, which was in obedience to the Lord’s
command.
Genesis 32:24 Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him
until daybreak. (NASB95)
So after Jacob had done everything he could in the way of offering restitution to
Esau for his deceitfulness towards Esau twenty years before, and after sending his
wives and children across, we see Jacob alone.
Several questions come to mind when we view this passage. First of all, why
did Jacob rise in the night and send his family across at night, why not wait till
daylight? Secondly, why after taking his family across the Jabbok, did he return to
the other side of the river to be alone?
The answer to both of these questions is that Jacob wanted to be alone with God
in prayer before his meeting with Esau the next morning. He knew that Esau would
not arrive until the next morning and so his family would be safe for the night with
the other servants.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
154
Though the text does not say specifically, the implication is that Jacob sent
everyone across the Jabbok and stayed behind in order to be completely alone with
God in prayer. So we see that Jacob prayed not only before sending the gift to Esau
but also he will pray once again after sending the gift and his family across the
Jabbok before meeting Esau.
Jacob’s desire to be alone with God in prayer presents to us a great example to
follow in approaching our relationship with God and when facing great adversity.
Then, we see in Genesis 32:24b Jacob wrestling with the preincarnate Christ.
So after Jacob had done everything he could in the way of offering restitution to
Esau for his deceitfulness towards Esau twenty years before, and after sending his
wives and children across, we see Jacob alone. Jacob wanted to be alone with God
in prayer before his meeting with Esau the next morning.
The reason why Jacob wanted to be alone with God in prayer was that
undoubtedly he was “wrestling” with his fears concerning encountering Esau the
next day. Jacob was wrestling with his fears in prayer even though by faith he
prayed for deliverance from Esau and even initiated contact with Esau and sent his
beloved family across the Jabbok directly in the path of Esau. While in prayer,
Jacob was fighting the good fight of faith.
1 Timothy 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith. (NASB95)
Jacob must have crossed the Jabbok again because Genesis 32:24 tells us that
he was alone. He was alone as far as other human beings are concerned but he is in
reality alone with God.
Genesis 32:24 Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him
until daybreak. (NASB95)
“And” is the conjunction we, which is employed with the imperfect tense of the
verb `avaq, “wrestled” in order to signify the next “sequential” event that took
place after Jacob was left alone in prayer with God and should therefore be
translated “then.”
“Man” is the noun `ish, which refers to the Son of God prior to becoming a
human being permanently in Bethlehem two thousand years ago and is therefore a
“theophany” or “Christophany.”
The words “theophany” or “Christophany” are technical theological terms used
to refer to a visible or auditory manifestation of the Son of God before His
incarnation in Bethlehem (Gen. 32:29-30; Ex. 3:2; 19:18-20; Josh. 5:13-15; Dan.
3:26). Therefore, in the Old Testament a “theophany” or “Christophany” were
appearances of the “preincarnate” Christ.
The word “incarnate” is from the Latin, in and caro, whose stem carn means,
“flesh.” Therefore, the term “preincarnate” means before the Son of God became a
human being permanently in Bethlehem.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
155
There are three stages in the career of the Lord Jesus Christ: (1) “Preincarnate”:
Eternity past as the second Person of the Trinity, the Son of God. (2) “Incarnate”:
Virgin birth through the first advent to the resurrection. (3) “Glorified Incarnate”:
Resurrection and on into eternity future.
The context indicates quite clearly Jacob wrestled with the Lord since Genesis
32:28 says that the man wrestling with Jacob says to Jacob that he has “striven
with God.”
Furthermore, in Genesis 32:29, Jacob named the place where the wrestling
match took place “Peniel,” which means, “I have seen God face to face, yet my
life has been preserved.”
These “preincarnate” appearances of the Son of God are often designated in the
Old Testament by the expression, “the angel of the Lord” or simply “angel.”
“Angel” is the noun mal’akh, which means, “messenger” is used in the Old
Testament with reference to “elect” angels (Gen. 19:1; Ps. 91:11) and men (Deut.
2:26; Josh. 6:17) and of the “preincarnate” Christ (Gen. 22:11; Zech. 3:1).
One must refer to the context in order to determine if the word “angel” or
“angel of the Lord” is a reference to a human or angelic messenger or a divine
messenger, i.e. the Son of God.
Hosea 12:3-5 refers to Jacob’s wrestling match with the Lord and uses the term
“angel” and identifies that angel as God. Hosea 12:4 says that Jacob “wrestled
with the angel” whereas Hosea 12:3 says that Jacob “contended with God,” and
Hosea 12:5 calls the angel “the Lord is His name,” thus identifying the angel as
God. Therefore, the context of Hosea 12:3-5 and Genesis 32:24-32 indicates quite
clearly that the “man” that Jacob wrestled with was a preincarnate appearance of
the Son of God.
Now, Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit does not immediately
identify to the reader that it was the Lord that Jacob was wrestling with in order to
heighten the story’s tension and to draw the reader in. Jacob is alone, unprotected,
and in the dark and now he is attacked by some man, which would cause the reader
to take notice. Therefore, we see Jacob left alone in prayer with God and then an
unidentified man initiates a wrestling match with him at night.
“Wrestled” is the niphal form of the verb `avaq and is a play on the name
“Jabbok,” which means, “Wrestler” and Jacob’s name, which means, “heel
catcher.” So to paraphrase this word play, we could say that the Lord “Yabboked”
Jacob or “He Jacobed” him.
This wrestling match with the Lord was an “historical event” and was “not” a
dream or an allegory since you don’t wake up from a dream with a dislocated hip
as Jacob did.
Also, this wrestling match was “spiritual” as well since Hosea 12:4 states that
Jacob “wept and sought His (the Lord’s) favor” in prayer.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
156
Jacob’s wrestling match with the preincarnate Christ is symbolic of his
struggles with both God and men.
Genesis 32:25 When he (the Lord) saw that he (the Lord) had not prevailed
against him (Jacob), he (the Lord) touched the socket of his (Jacob’s) thigh; so
the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him. 26 Then
he (the Lord) said, “Let me go, for the dawn is breaking.” But he (Jacob) said,
“I will not let you go unless you bless me.” (NASB95)
Notice, that the Lord initiates the wrestling match and not Jacob since it states
that the Lord “wrestled with Jacob” and not “Jacob wrestled with the Man.”
Jacob did “not” want to wrestle anybody.
Remember, he had just left his uncle Laban who abused him for twenty years
and now he is about to face his old rival, Esau who had sought to kill him in the
past. Therefore, the last thing that Jacob wanted to do was pick a fight with
someone.
This wrestling match between God and Jacob is a “microcosm” or “symbolic”
of Jacob’s struggles in life with men, which in reality were with God. The
wrestling match with Jacob did “not” teach any spiritual lessons to Jacob but rather
the divine discipline that he underwent in the form of the fourteen years of hard
labor for his deceitful uncle Laban taught Jacob many spiritual lessons, which are
symbolized in the wrestling match with the Lord.
Jacob’s problems with his father Isaac (favored Esau over Jacob), his brother
Esau, and his uncle Laban, and his wives were in reality problems with God since
God permitted these people to come into his life to draw him closer to God. Since
the wrestling match depicts Jacob’s struggles with God and men, the Lord
initiating the wrestling match with Jacob symbolizes that the Lord is the one who
gave him his father Isaac and his brother Esau and brought his uncle Laban into his
life who were the source of great adversity in Jacob’s life.
God not only prospered Jacob but also permitted adversity to take place in his
life in the form of people such as his father Isaac, his twin brother Esau and his
uncle Laban.
The Son of God appeared as a man at night to illustrate this to Jacob and to the
reader that Jacob’s problems with people were in fact problems with God. In the
same way that Jacob thought he was wrestling just a mere man when in reality he
was wrestling with God so Jacob erroneously thought that his struggles in life were
with his father Isaac, his twin brother Esau and his uncle Laban when in reality
they were with God.
Jacob’s entire life could be characterized as a wrestling match with both God
and men. The first manifestation of this wrestling match was in the womb of his
mother Rebekah where both he and his twin brother were crushing each other (See
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
157
Genesis 25:22). The actions of Jacob at birth grabbing the heel of his brother Esau
was the second manifestation of this wrestling match (See Genesis 25:26).
Another manifestation of Jacob’s struggles with men was when he exploited
Esau’s hunger by getting him to exchange his birthright for a bowl of red lintel
soup (See Genesis 25:28-34). Then, there was Jacob at the instigation of his mother
Rebekah deceiving his father Isaac who was blind at the time in bestowing the
blessings of the birthright to himself rather than his brother Esau (See Genesis 27).
This was followed by Jacob’s problems with Laban who was brought into
Jacob’s life to discipline him so as to break his sinful patterns of deceitfulness and
treachery (See Genesis 29:21-28). This discipline came in the form of Laban
deceiving Jacob by sending Leah and not Rachel into his tent on his wedding night
when he had just worked seven years for Rachel. This discipline succeeded as
manifested in Jacob’s thoughtfulness and consideration of Esau’s feelings and his
desire to offer Esau restitution for cheating him out of the blessing of the birthright
(See Genesis 32:13-20).
Jacob’s wrestling match with God and man also manifested itself in the love life
of Jacob where he chose Rachel to be his wife because of her physical beauty
rather than based upon her character (See Genesis 29:10-20). This physical
attraction blinded Jacob as to the true identity of his right woman, which was Leah
who was not as beautiful as Rachel. As a result of this poor decision Jacob had to
deal with Leah and Rachel competing with each other in order to gain his affection
and love (See Genesis 29:31-30:24).
So we can see that the wrestling match is indicative of Jacob’s life up to the
birth of Joseph. I say that this wrestling match with God and people was indicative
of Jacob’s life up to the birth of Joseph because when Joseph was born, at the end
of the fourteen years of service for Laban, we see Jacob demonstrates a
tremendous act of faith in dealing with a problem with Laban.
If you recall in Genesis 30, Laban had cheated Jacob out of his wages for
fourteen years and after the fourteen years was completed Jacob wanted to leave
Laban. Laban didn’t want Jacob to leave because he was prospered by God for
being associated with Jacob. Therefore, Laban asked Jacob to name his wages.
Jacob asks for nothing from Laban but instead proposed to Laban that all the
spotted, speckled and striped of Laban’s flock be removed so that only solid
colored animals remain, which he would care for. Jacob proposes that his pay
would consist of only those animals yet unborn that would be less desirable to
Laban because of their markings. Therefore, it would be entirely up to the Lord as
to how many animals would become Jacob’s.
Jacob’s proposal put himself entirely at the mercy of the Lord and was a great
act of faith in the Lord on his part. This great act of faith was the first ray of
sunlight in his life and was the beginning of the end of his divine discipline.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
158
Also, Jacob’s wrestling match with the Lord at night symbolizes the divine
discipline that Jacob underwent in the form of fourteen years of hard labor for his
deceitful uncle Laban.
The fact that the wrestling match took place at night is a picture or symbolic of
the divine discipline he underwent in the form of his fourteen years of hard labor
for his deceitful uncle Laban. This discipline was a demonstration of the Lord’s
love for Jacob.
The Lord Jesus Christ disciplines the believer in the sense that He rebukes,
punishes and trains the believer because He personally and affectionately loves the
believer (cf. Revelation 3:3:14-19). Revelation 3:20-22 teaches that the Lord
disciplines us not only because He loves us and but also because He wants to
reward us.
God disciplines His disobedient children by permitting adversity, trials, and
irritations to come into their lives that are beyond their capacity to handle in order
to get their attention and to focus upon their number one priority in life as children
of God, which is conformity to the Father’s will.
The divine discipline was successful in getting Jacob to recognize that his
number one priority in life was conformity to the will of God.
God disciplines His disobedient children by permitting them to reap the fruits of
their bad decisions so that they might learn that conformity to His will is the only
way to true joy and happiness and blessing in life (Ezek. 16:43; Gal. 6:7-8).
God permitted Jacob to reap the fruits of his bad decisions with Esau and his
father Isaac so that he might learn that conformity to His will is the only way to
true joy and happiness and blessing in life.
The Holy Spirit disciplines the disobedient child of God by rebuking them with
the Word of God as it is communicated by the pastor-teacher in the local assembly
and the purpose of such rebuke is to conform the believer to the will of his
heavenly Father, which results in blessing and true happiness.
Just as any good father disciplines his children because he loves them, so God
the Father disciplines His children because He loves them. If God did not train us
when we are obedient and punishes us when we are disobedient, then we would be
illegitimate children, thus divine discipline in the sense of punishment and training
is the mark of a child of God (cf. Hebrews 12:1-11).
Hebrews 12:10 teaches us that ultimately, God disciplines us because He wants
us to share in His character and integrity, which is meant by the phrase “share His
holiness” and to produce “the fruit of righteousness” according to Hebrews
12:11.
Righteousness deals with proper conduct towards both God and man whereas
holiness deals with the character that is result of proper conduct towards God and
man.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
159
We are not to get angry or bitter when God disciplines us through the Word, or
adversity and underserved suffering but rather we are to listen to what God is
trying to say to us and to learn the lesson that He is teaching us so that we might
acquire the character of our heavenly Father. Jacob received discipline without
getting bitter and complaining and instead recognized and submitted to God’s
authority (cf. Proverbs 3:11-12; 15:32-33; Job 5:17-18).
The divine discipline in the form of fourteen years of hard labor for Laban had
humbled him and forced him to avail himself of the divine provision of prayer and
claiming the promises that the Lord had made to him at Bethel.
The fact that Jacob’s wrestling match with the preincarnate Christ ended at
“daybreak” symbolizes or is a picture of Jacob no longer under divine discipline
but rather “walking in the light,” which describes experiencing fellowship with
God by being obedient to the Word of God, which demonstrates our faith in God
(cf. 1 John 1:5-7).
The divine discipline in the form of twenty years of hard labor for Laban had
humbled him and forced him to avail himself of the divine provision of prayer and
claiming the promises that the Lord had made to him at Bethel. When Jacob
wrestles the Lord, at that point in his life, he was walking in the light, in fellowship
with God.
The question arises, at what point in the life of Jacob did he come out from
under divine discipline and begin to walk in fellowship with God by operating in
faith? The turning point in Jacob’s life came when he stopped fighting God and
men and began to walk by faith was after the fourteen years of service to Laban.
Jacob’s wrestling match with the Lord and men continued up to the birth of
Joseph at the completion of Jacob’s fourteen years of service to Laban, which is
indicated by Jacob’s proposal to Laban recorded in Genesis 30 since this proposal
demonstrated tremendous faith in the Lord and His promises.
If you recall, the first seven years that Jacob worked for Laban was to marry
Leah and the next seven years was payment to marry Rachel. During these last
seven years, God had prospered Jacob by giving him eleven boys and one girl (See
Genesis 29:31-30:24) and through the birth of these children, Jacob could see God
working in his life and fulfilling His promises to him of numerous progeny, which
caused a change in Jacob in that he grew to trust and love God.
Also during these fourteen years, Jacob saw God prospering Laban through him
and this too caused a change in Jacob in that he grew to love and trust God even
more as a result of seeing the Lord fulfill His promises to be with him and protect
him and bless him (See Genesis 30:27).
Furthermore, right after the Lord gave Jacob’s favorite wife Rachel a child
named Joseph, we see Jacob’s faith in the Lord manifested in a fantastic way in his
proposal to Laban regarding flocks, which is recorded in Genesis 30:22-43.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
160
Jacob asks for nothing from Laban but instead proposed to Laban that all the
spotted, speckled and striped of Laban’s flock be removed so that only solid
colored animals remain, which he would care for. He proposes that his pay would
consist of only those animals yet unborn and so therefore, it would be entirely up
to the Lord as to how many animals would become Jacob’s.
Jacob’s proposal put himself entirely at the mercy of the Lord and was a great
act of faith in the Lord on his part and was the first ray of sunlight in his life and
was the beginning of the end of his divine discipline. It is at this point in his life
that Jacob begins to walk by faith and not by sight and his faith is manifested in
several incidents after this proposal with Laban, which are recorded in Genesis 3132.
In Genesis 31:3, Jacob obeyed the Lord to leave Laban and return to Canaan
even though he knew Laban would react in a hostile fashion towards him and that
Esau had in the past wanted to kill him. In Genesis 32:3-6, Jacob initiates contact
with Esau by sending messengers to Esau to convey to him his desire to reconcile
with him. In Genesis 32:9-12, Jacob deals with his fear of Esau and his four
hundred men by praying to God for deliverance and claiming the promises of
protection from God. In Genesis 32:13-21, Jacob sends 550 animals to Esau as
restitution for stealing the blessing of the birthright from him twenty years before.
In Genesis 32:22-23, Jacob sent his family across the Jabbok directly in the path of
Esau, manifesting his faith that God would protect them. In Genesis 32:24a, Jacob
desired to be alone with God in prayer before he encountered Esau.
Therefore, we can see that Jacob left Canaan a man who could be characterized
as a cheat and a scoundrel and a slave to his old Adamic sin nature that did not
trust God to deal with his problems with people. However, upon reentering
Canaan, he had developed into a great man of God who walked by faith and not by
sight, who prayed to God for help in adversity rather than resorting to his own
schemes to solve his problems. So the character of Jacob has changed dramatically
since he left Canaan and this is why the Lord changed his name to Israel and which
change of name represented a change of character.
Jacob Prevails
Genesis 32:25 When he (the Lord) saw that he (the Lord) had not prevailed
against him (Jacob), he (the Lord) touched the socket of his (Jacob’s) thigh; so
the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him.
(NASB95)
Genesis 32:25a records the Lord as not prevailing over Jacob in their wrestling
match. The Lord did not prevail over Jacob in the sense that the Lord could not
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
161
refuse Jacob’s prayer requests because they were according to His will and because
Jacob persevered in prayer.
The fact that the Scriptures state that the Lord did not prevail against Jacob does
“not” impugn God’s omnipotence but rather as we will note does effectively
portray the power of persevering in prayer with God.
God does allow the prayer of men to be mighty in His sight when they
persevere in prayer and offer that prayer in faith. The fact that Jacob is physically
broken and yet will not give up is symbolic of Jacob being broken through the
divine discipline in the form of fourteen years of hard labor for Laban and yet not
quitting on God but in fact he persevered in his relationship with God in prayer by
claming the promises God made to him!
Therefore, the statement “he (the Lord) had not prevailed against him
(Jacob)” means that Jacob would not give up in the wrestling match with Lord,
which was symbolic of Jacob’s prayer life in that he did not give up but rather
persevered in prayer.
Jacob had learned the power and importance of persevering in prayer, which is
called by theologians, “prevailing prayer.” Perseverance is the capacity to continue
to bear up under difficult circumstances (cf. Luke 18:1-8).
Matthew 7:7 “Ask repeatedly, and it will be given to you; seek repeatedly,
and you will find; knock repeatedly, and it will be opened to you.” (Author’s
translation)
The prayer of Jacob that appears in Genesis 32:24-32 was unlike the prayers
that we in the church age are to make. Jacob spoke directly face to face with the
visible manifestation of the Son of God whereas in the church age we are
commanded by the Son of God to pray directly to the Father who is invisible (Jn.
16:26-27; Eph. 3:14).
The statement “he (the Lord) had not prevailed against him (Jacob)” implies
that God opposed Jacob but not just in the wrestling match but in a spiritual sense,
namely, in prayer. God opposed Jacob in the sense that when Jacob first got saved
and was first learning to pray as a spiritual child of God, he like most spiritual
children, asked for things from God that were against His will or he asked for
things for selfish reasons (cf. James 4:3). So early on in his relationship with God,
God opposed Jacob because his prayers were not according to the will of God (cf.
1 John 5:14-15).
Now that Jacob has matured spiritually, God did not oppose his prayers because
they were according to the will of God. Therefore, the statement “he (the Lord)
had not prevailed against him (Jacob)” means that God could no longer oppose
Jacob’s prayers because they he had matured to the point spiritually that his
prayers were according to the will of God.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
162
In fact Genesis 32:9-12 records Jacob’s prayer for deliverance from Esau and in
this prayer he claimed the promises that God made to him, which are recorded in
Genesis 28:10-15 and 31:3, thus Jacob was praying according to the will of God
since the promises originated from God.
Now, we must remember that when the Lord initiated the wrestling match,
Jacob was alone in prayer presenting to the Lord his fears concerning confronting
Esau the very next day.
So Jacob was actually already “wrestling” in prayer with the Lord in the sense
that Jacob was trying to reconcile the advance of Esau with four hundred men and
God’s promises to be with him and protect him and to return him to the land of
Canaan.
While in prayer, he was fighting the good fight of faith in the sense that in his
soul, he was fighting the temptation to give in to his fears and not trust God to
protect him from Esau.
The fact that the Lord said to Jacob in Genesis 32:28 that he had prevailed
indicated that Jacob had won this battle over his fears of Esau in prayer by clinging
to the promises that God made to him to protect and prosper him, and which
promises are recorded in Genesis 28:10-15 and 31:3.
By means of meditating in prayer upon the promises that God made to him,
which are recorded in Genesis 28:10-15 and 31:3, Jacob was assured that God had
a plan for his life. Therefore, because he prevailed in prayer by being fully assured
that God had a plan for his life and would keep His promises to protect and prosper
him, Jacob in a sense had prevailed over men and in particular Esau.
While in prayer, Jacob came to a point where he was fully convinced that God
would protect him and therefore trusted God and by doing so, Jacob appropriated
the omnipotence of God so that he would prevail over Esau in the sense that Esau
would not attack him but rather would be conciliatory.
Genesis 32:25b records the Lord dislocating Jacob’s hip. The dislocation of
Jacob’s hip symbolized that by means of the fourteen years of hard labor for
Laban, which constituted divine discipline, the Lord had succeeded in getting
Jacob to stop trusting in his own power to solve his problems and to depend upon
the power of God.
Genesis 32:25 When he (the Lord) saw that he (the Lord) had not prevailed
against him (Jacob), he (the Lord) touched the socket of his (Jacob’s) thigh; so
the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him.
(NASB95)
Notice that Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit informs the reader
that the Son of God did not overcome Jacob in the wrestling match rather than He
“could” not since at any time, the Lord could have crushed Jacob during the match
but did not since He is gentle.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
163
“The socket of his thigh” refers to the ball and socket joint of Jacob’s thigh
since “socket” is the noun kaph, which denotes the “acetabulum,” the cup shaped
socket in the hipbone that receives the head of the thighbone.
Jacob was physically very strong as witnessed by his moving the large stone
from the well of water when Rachel appeared to him for the first time (See Genesis
29:10). However, the fourteen years of divine discipline under Laban had taught
Jacob that he was impotent to solve his own problems with Laban by means of his
own physical strength and had to rely upon the omnipotence of God to solve his
problems with Laban. Therefore, the dislocation of Jacob’s hip during this
wrestling match symbolizes what the Lord had accomplished in Jacob through the
divine discipline in the form of fourteen years of hard labor for Laban, which was
to demonstrate to Jacob his own impotence and God’s omnipotence.
During the fourteen years of hard labor for Laban, the Lord had broken Jacob’s
confidence in his own strength and got him to acknowledge that God was all
powerful and all sufficient and that he was helpless and hopeless and totally and
completely dependent upon God. The divine discipline in the form of fourteen
years of hard labor for his uncle Laban humbled Jacob so that he acknowledged his
own human weakness or impotence so as to experience the power of God in life
and his right to appropriate that power by prayer and claiming the divine promises
given to him. The Lord taught the apostle Paul these spiritual principles (see 2
Corinthians 12:1-10).
Therefore, the dislocation of Jacob’s hip was symbolic of the Lord breaking
Jacob’s confidence in his own strength and ability to deal with problems with
people. The dislocation of Jacob’s hip would be a perpetual reminder or memorial
to Jacob to not depend upon his own power and ability but rather to depend and
rely upon the power of God to deal with problems with people and adversities in
life. It is also a reminder to us here in the church age to never depend upon our
own human power to solve our problems in adversity with people and
circumstances but rather to depend upon the power of God, which is resident in the
Word of God and our union and identification with Christ.
The Lord Cripples Jacob
In Genesis 32:26, we see the crippled Jacob clinging to the Lord and not letting
Him go until the Lord blesses him.
Genesis 32:26 Then he (the Lord) said, “Let me go, for the dawn is
breaking.’ But he (Jacob) said, ‘I will not let you go unless you bless me.”
(NASB95)
“Bless” is the verb barakh, which means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity” and so therefore, the verb indicates Jacob’s desire
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
164
that the Lord would endue him with power for success, prosperity, fecundity
(offspring in great numbers) and longevity.”
Like his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac, the Lord would bless Jacob
in the sense that the Lord would multiply his descendants so that his posterity was
great in number both, racially and spiritually and multiply his possessions and
livestock and prosper him financially. The Lord would give Jacob the capacity to
be prolific in that he would be the progenitor of a multitude of children in both a
biological and spiritual sense. He learned through the discipline that God is
sovereign and that no one can stop God from blessing him, not even Esau. Jacob
also learned that he could not merit the blessing of God, nor could he do anything
that could merit the blessing of God.
Therefore, Jacob has learned what God’s grace is all about, namely, that we can
not merit the blessing of God because of who we are or what we do, that it is a gift
and cannot be earned or deserved. Jacob exploited his brother Esau’s hunger and
got him to exchange his birthright for a bowl of red lintel soup because he thought
he had to do something to get God to bless him. He disguised himself as Esau in
order to deceive his father Isaac who was blind into giving him the blessing of the
birthright rather than to Esau because he thought he had to do something to get
blessed by God.
Jacob’s finally learned that neither Esau or anyone or himself could prevent
God from blessing him. He clung to the Lord demanding to be blessed because he
now understands that the blessings of God come directly from God and not by
cheating and deceiving people. Jacob had learned through the twenty years with
Laban that Esau could neither provide nor prevent the blessing of God and so it
was not Esau that stood in the way of Jacob’s blessing in the land of Canaan.
On the one hand, it was God Who opposed Jacob and on the other it was Jacob
himself, who by means of his deceitfulness and treachery, attempted to produce
spiritual blessings through carnal means. Jacob had learned that the blessing of
God must be obtained from God himself, and this must be done by clinging to Him
in helpless dependence, not by trying to manipulate Him or fighting Esau.
Jacob had learned through the years of divine discipline while living with
Laban that he did “not” have to deceive his father Isaac into giving him the
blessing of the birthright instead of Esau but that the blessing of the birthright was
based upon God’s grace meaning it was a gift that he did “not” earn or deserve.
The Lord Changes Jacob’s Name to Israel
In Genesis 32:27-28, we have the account of the Lord changing Jacob’s name to
Israel.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
165
Genesis 32:27 So he (the Lord) said to him (Jacob), “What is your name?”
And he said, “Jacob.” (NASB95)
The Lord did “not” ask Jacob his name to solicit information since He is
omniscient, rather the Lord did so because He wanted to arouse in Jacob an
awareness of his former character reflected in his name and to prepare him for a
change of name, which would accurately reflect his new character.
Jacob must have disliked his name since its meaning was not very
complimentary but it was an accurate description of his character up to the end of
his fourteen years of divine discipline under Laban. However, it was an accurate
description of his character that was the result of being a slave to his old Adamic
sin nature.
Genesis 32:28 “He said, “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel;
for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed.” (NASB95)
“Israel” is the proper noun yisra’el, which means, “one who fights and
overcomes with the power of God” since the Lord states the reason for the name is
that Jacob has fought with both God and men and has prevailed.
The bestowal of this name constituted the essence of the blessing that he
requested from the Lord recorded in Genesis 32:26. It also memorializes the
historical event of Jacob wrestling the preincarnate Christ, and which wrestling
match symbolized Jacob’s struggles in life with men, which in reality were with
God.
The statement “you have striven with God and with men” refers to Jacob’s
problems with Isaac, Esau, Laban, and his wives, which were in reality problems
with God since God permitted these people to come into his life to draw him closer
to God.
The Lord’s statement “you…have prevailed” refers to the fact that Jacob
persevered in prayer by claiming the promises of God’s protection and presence
and thus praying according to will of God since the promises originated from God
(See Genesis 32:9-12).
The Lord’s statement “you…have prevailed” also means that Jacob had won
his battle over his fears of Esau in prayer by clinging to the promises that God
made to him to protect and prosper him (See Genesis 28:10-15 and 31:3).
While in prayer, Jacob came to a point where he was fully convinced that God
would protect him and by doing so, he appropriated the power of God so that he
would prevail over Esau in the sense that he would reconcile with him. Therefore,
the name “Israel” would be a memorial to Jacob that during the fourteen years of
divine discipline under Laban he had stopped trusting in his own power to solve
his problems and depended upon the power of God.
The dislocation of Jacob’s hip and the name “Israel” would be a perpetual
reminder or memorial to Jacob to not depend upon his own power and ability but
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
166
rather to depend and rely upon the power of God to deal with problems with people
and adversities in life.
The change of name from “Jacob” to “Israel” marks a change in Jacob’s
character and reorientation in his life in the sense that no longer does he solve his
problems with people by means of deception as denoted by the name “Jacob” but
now solves them with the power of God by claiming the promises of God in
prayer.
The change of name indicates that Jacob has grown to spiritual maturity and has
oriented himself to the grace of God. Jacob oriented himself to the grace of God in
the sense that he has learned that he did “not” have to deceive his father Isaac into
giving him the blessing of the birthright instead of Esau but that the blessing of the
birthright was based upon God’s grace meaning it was gift that he did “not” earn or
deserve.
Just as the name “Jacob” reflects character produced by the function of the
power of the old sin nature so the name “Israel” reflects character produced by
appropriating the power of the Word of God by claiming the promises of God in
prayer.
Peniel
Genesis 32:29-32 presents to us the record of Jacob naming the place of his
wrestling match with the Lord “Peniel” and then crossing it.
Genesis 32:29 Then Jacob asked him and said, “Please tell me your name.”
But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?” And he blessed him there.
(NASB95)
Jacob asked the Lord what His name was because he could not fathom that he
indeed wrestled with God and lived to tell about it.
In Genesis 32:30, Jacob names the place where he had the wrestling match with
the Lord “Peniel,” because as he said, “I have seen God face to face and yet my
life has been preserved.”
Therefore, Jacob inquired from the Lord about His identity because Jacob could
not believe that he could have wrestled with God and lived to tell about it, it was
beyond comprehension that he could have a wrestling match with the Creator. The
Lord’s response to Jacob’s question clearly indicates that Jacob ought to have
known who it was who had wrestled with him and spoke to him since in Genesis
32:28, we see that the Lord clearly identifies Himself as Elohim, “God.”
The statement “He (the Lord) blessed him (Jacob)” is “not” a reference to a
blessing since the changing of Jacob’s name to Israel and the wrestling match itself
constituted a blessing. Rather the statement “He (the Lord) blessed him (Jacob)”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
167
denotes the Lord saying farewell to Jacob and no longer making Himself visible to
Jacob in human form.
Genesis 32:30 So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, “I have seen
God face to face, yet my life has been preserved.” (NASB95)
“Peniel” is the proper noun peni’el, which means, “face of God” and is an
abbreviated form of “I have seen God face to face.”
Bruce K. Waltke, writes, “The location of the site is uncertain, but a good case
has been made for modern Tulul edh-Dhahab, which stands on the bank of Jabbok,
four miles east of Succoth” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 447, Zondervan).
Although, Jacob did not get a definitive answer from the Lord as to His name,
nonetheless, Jacob definitively identifies the unidentified man as Elohim, “God”
and to memorialize this he names the place where the wrestling match took place
as “Peniel.”
The expression “face to face” (panim `el-panim) is used only of direct
encounters by human beings with deity. The believer will have a face to face
encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ as well at physical death when he will absent
from the body but face to face with the Lord.
Bruce K. Waltke, “God says explicitly to Moses: ‘No one may see me and live’
(Ex. 33:20). Moses’ face-to-face meeting is equated with ‘he sees the form of the
Lord’ (Num. 12:8). In the man Jacob sees a form of the Lord. The intensity of
meeting his messenger is equivalent to meeting God face to face. The encounter is
both terrifying and intimate” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 447, Zondervan).
The reason why Jacob could wrestle the Lord and live to tell about it is that the
Son of God “condescended” to Jacob. The fact that the Son of God
“condescended” means that He descended to a less formal or dignified level,
namely He appeared as a human being and waived the privileges of His rank as
God and assumed equality with Jacob by manifesting Himself as a human being in
order to communicate with Jacob.
The fact that the Son of God did not destroy Jacob while wrestling with him
was a manifestation of His gentleness and gentleness by way of definition is power
held in reserve. At any time, the Son of God could have body slammed Jacob
through the earth, but did not because He is gentle, His power was held in reserve.
The fact that Jacob survives this encounter with God would reassure him since
if he could survive this encounter with the Lord, the Creator and Sovereign ruler of
creation, then it follows that he will be rescued in his encounter with his twin
brother Esau and should therefore not fear Esau.
The Lord had chosen Jacob to be the progenitor, the father of the nation of
Israel, through whom He, the Lord would come into the world not only in the form
of man but as the very Son of Man.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
168
Jacob’s encounter with Esau presented the greatest opposition to the
accomplishment of the mission God had given him. If Esau were victorious over
Jacob, then all of God’s plans and promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the
promise of salvation to the entire world would be defeated and the world would
never have a Savior.
The Lord wanted Jacob to have assurance concerning the importance of the
mission that the Lord had given him to carry on the line of Christ and to be the
father of the nation of Israel and that the Lord would not allow anyone, not even
Esau to stop this mission from being accomplished.
Genesis 32:31 Now the sun rose upon him just as he crossed over Penuel,
and he was limping on his thigh. (NASB95)
The sun rising was symbolic of Jacob’s spiritual condition at this time and
symbolized that Jacob no longer was under divine discipline but rather
experiencing fellowship with God. The rising sun suggests that Jacob is living now
according to the standards of God’s holiness, which is love and he is living in
obedience to the Word of God and as a result is experiencing fellowship with God.
The name “Penuel” is a variant of “Peniel.”
Genesis 32:32 Therefore, to this day the sons of Israel do not eat the sinew
of the hip which is on the socket of the thigh, because he touched the socket of
Jacob's thigh in the sinew of the hip. (NASB95)
The expression “sons of Israel” is used here for the first time in the Bible and is
a designation for the nation of Israel in Moses’ day and is not simply a designation
for Jacob’s sons. Moses informs the reader that the Israelites in his day made it a
rule not to eat the sciatic muscle of slaughtered animals as a reminder to them of
this encounter that Jacob had with the Lord.
“Sinew” is the noun gidh, which refers to the sciatic nerve, i.e. the central nerve
of the hip region. They were Israelites and not Jacobites, because God touched
Jacob and changed His name, and which name was reflective of his spiritual
character and walk with God.
This dietary restriction was never imposed upon them by God but was instituted
by Israel since they recognized the importance of what Jacob experienced at
Peniel. It would be a reminder to the nation of Israel that when Jacob became weak
and was disabled, Israel emerged as victorious.
This dietary restriction would be a reminder to Israel to not have confidence in
their own strength and ability to deal with problems with other nations. It would be
a perpetual reminder or memorial to not depend upon their own power and ability
but rather to depend and rely upon the power of God to deal with problems with
other nations.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
169
This dietary restriction would be a reminder to the nation of Israel to never
depend upon their own human power to solve their problems with other nations but
rather to depend upon the power of God.
Jacob Reconciles with Esau
In Genesis 33, we see Jacob reconciling with his twin brother Esau. In Genesis
33:1, we see Jacob, now Israel meeting up with his family and caravan and
preparing to meet Esau.
Genesis 33:1 Then Jacob lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, Esau was
coming, and four hundred men with him. So he divided the children among
Leah and Rachel and the two maids. (NASB95)
The statement “Jacob lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold” brings the
reader alongside of Jacob, capturing the scene for us, heightening the tension of the
narrative, indicating the seriousness and magnitude of the moment.
The four hundred men was the standard size of a militia in the days of the
patriarchs (1 Samuel 22:2; 25:13; 30:10; cf. Genesis 14:14).
Prior to Jacob’s encounter with the Lord at Peniel, Jacob questioned the purpose
of Esau’s militia. Was Esau using the four hundred men to attack Jacob or to
receive his brother royally and escort him into the land of Canaan? Jacob’s
response to the news about Esau and his four hundred men, which is recorded in
Genesis 32:7 indicates quite clearly that he was convinced that Esau had come to
attack him.
News is known to travel with incredible speed in the Middle East as travelers
have reported many times in the past. Esau would have been informed about the
arrival of Jacob’s caravan through reconnaissance by his men.
Now, from Esau’s perspective, based upon his past dealings with Jacob and his
knowledge of the prophecy that the “older shall serve the younger” it is
understandable that Esau protects himself and his family by going out to meet
Jacob with four hundred men just in case Jacob’s intentions are hostile.
So Esau would have two questions in his mind, has Jacob come to attack me or
is he coming with peaceful intentions? Therefore, Esau would have been arriving
with the four hundred men for either one of two reasons, one to protect himself in
case Jacob attacks him or to welcome home his brother royally and escort him on
home to their father.
Prior to Jacob sending the gifts to Esau as restitution for stealing the blessing of
the birthright, Esau would have questioned Jacob’s intentions and he too would
have been filled with uncertainty and anxiety as to the intentions of Jacob. On the
other hand, prior to Jacob’s wrestling match with the Lord, Jacob would have been
filled with uncertainty and anxiety as to what the intentions of Esau might be.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
170
However, Jacob’s fears have been calmed by his conversation with the Lord
and Esau’s fears would have been calmed by the arrival of the gifts from Jacob.
Therefore, we see that God has softened the heart of both men throughout the past
twenty years because both have been prospered by God, thus setting the stage for
reconciliation between the two rather than war.
So the battle for Jacob has already been won, God has given him the victory
without a sword being raised in anger (cf. 1 Samuel 17:47). Therefore, as Jacob
approaches his encounter with Esau, he has no fear of being attacked because of
the assurance that the Lord gave him at Peniel and is thus is walking by faith and
trusting in the Lord.
There are several elements to this story of Jacob meeting Esau that indicate
quite clearly that Jacob at this point in the narrative is operating in faith and “not”
unbelief. The fact that Jacob initiates contact with Esau and even risks sending his
beloved wives and children ahead of him to meet Esau indicates quite clearly that
Jacob is operating in faith and trusting the Lord to protect him and his family.
If Jacob was afraid of Esau he would never have risked initiating contact with
Esau or risk sending his beloved family ahead of him in the path of Esau.
To cross at night with a vast entourage as Jacob did, was a difficult and
dangerous operation, which could only be undertaken by moonlight and only under
urgent circumstances, which this was. By moving from the northern to the southern
side of the Jabbok River, Jacob is placing himself and his family all the more
quickly in the path of Esau, who was advancing from Seir in the south.
If he lived in fear of Esau, he would never undertake such an operation and risk
his family’s safety or his own.
If you recall, Jacob told Laban that he left Paddan Aram in secret out of fear of
Laban. If Jacob was afraid of Esau, he would have slipped into the country secretly
just as he left Laban in secret out of fear of Laban. Therefore, it is clear that Jacob
is operating in faith, resting in the promise of God to protect him and his family
and if he wasn’t operating in faith, he would never have risked initiating contact
publicly with Esau or risk sending his beloved wives and children ahead of him.
Jacob obeyed the Lord’s command to return to Canaan even though there was
uncertainty as to Esau’s attitude towards him. He is not looking at Esau but looking
to God and is thus operating in faith and concentrating on the Lord’s promise to
protect him and is therefore appropriating the omnipotence of God to deal with this
mountain in his life in the form of Esau.
By initiating contact with Esau and sending his family across the Jabbok, Jacob
is taking into account God and acknowledging His character and nature, His
presence and His Word in the form of His promise of protection.
Jacob’s reconciliation with Esau is a perfect example as to how God turns the
hearts of men wherever He wishes.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
171
The Lord does “not” turn the hearts of men against their will but rather brings in
people and circumstances, prosperity and adversity to do this.
According to Genesis 32:7-8, just the day before, Jacob had divided his people
and possessions into two companies. The first group was the animals and the
second were his people. Esau has already encountered the first group of the
animals and now he is about to encounter the people of Jacob’s household.
According to Genesis 33:1, Jacob divides his household into two groups. The
first were Jacob’s concubines and their children and they were followed by his
primary wives, Leah and Rachel with their children.
Genesis 33:2 He put the maids and their children in front, and Leah and
her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last. (NASB95)
The maids were Zilpah (Leah’s maid) and Bilhah (Rachel’s maid). The children
of Zilpah would include Gad and Asher (See Genesis 30:9-13) and the children of
Bilhah would include Dan and Naphtali (See Genesis 30:1-8). Leah’s children
were Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah (See Genesis 29:31-35), Issachar, and Zebulun
(See Genesis 30:14-21) and Dinah (See Genesis 30:21). Rachel and Joseph would
bring up the rear.
So we see that Jacob arranged his family in ascending order of their social
status. In the case of Rachel and Leah, they are arranged based upon Jacob’s
affections. Jacob doesn’t put Rachel and Joseph at the rear so as to give them
maximum protection from Esau since he doesn’t fear Esau attacking him because
the Lord reassured him at Peniel that he would be victorious. Rather, Jacob puts
Rachel and Joseph at the rear because they were the most precious to him and he
wants Esau to meet them last because of this. Unfortunately, the family of Jacob is
still plagued by favoritism.
Genesis 33:3 But he himself passed on ahead of them and bowed down to
the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. (NASB95)
Then, we see Jacob passing ahead of his wives and children and putting himself
ahead of the entire group to meet Esau, which is a demonstration of his faith, his
confident assurance that God has given him the victory and reconciliation with
Esau. Therefore, we see that Jacob has overcome his fear of Esau and which fear
has dominated his life prior to his encounter with the Lord at Peniel.
Also, Jacob stands ahead of this great caravan of people and possessions in
order to meet Esau first, which is also a great demonstration of leadership. Where
Jacob was a coward, Israel is a courageous leader.
Jacob demonstrates the humility he learned while enduring fourteen years of
divine discipline under Laban in Paddan Aram by bowing seven times to the
ground before Esau. Where Jacob was arrogant, Israel is humble.
This term denotes touching the nose and forehead to the ground in a prostate
position as a symbol of submission before a superior. In the days of the patriarchs
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
172
bowing to the ground “seven times” is a well attested practice of a vassal to his
lord in ancient court protocol. Therefore, Jacob greets Esau as a vassal greets a
patron with the ceremony of a royal court.
However, we must not think this act of humility on the part of Jacob was
intended as an acknowledgement of servility on his part, but simply as a token of
respect and recognition of Esau as ruler of the region. This act of humility is a
demonstration of a spiritual principle.
Genesis 33:4 Then Esau ran to meet him and embraced him, and fell on his
neck and kissed him, and they wept. (NASB95)
Unlike, Laban who needed to be warned by the Lord to not harm Jacob, Esau
does not need to be restrained by God. Esau initiates the physical contact with
Jacob since he is by nature impulsive as demonstrated by his exchanging his
birthright for a bowl of red lintel soup simply because he was hungry.
His emotional response is typical of him since we saw him cry uncontrollably
when he discovered that Jacob had stolen the blessing of the birthright. Esau’s
emotional response here undoubtedly expressed his relief that Jacob was not going
to attempt to subjugate him and his family and fulfill the prophecy that the “older
shall serve the younger.”
His emotional response towards Jacob is also expressive of his appreciation to
Jacob for his thoughtfulness in sending the gifts as restitution, which expressed
Jacob’s desire to reconcile.
Notice that the statement “they wept” indicating that both Jacob and Esau were
weeping in each others arms. Jacob emotional response also expressed his relief
that Esau did not still harbor bitterness towards him for stealing the blessing of the
birthright but rather was desirous to reconcile as he was.
During the twenty years apart from each other, Esau realized that Jacob was
properly entitled to the birthright and the blessing and that God had chosen Jacob
to be in the line of Christ and inherit the blessings, promises, privileges and
responsibilities of the Abrahamic Covenant.
Esau was able to accept that Jacob was entitled to the birthright and the blessing
because in Genesis 33:9 when Jacob urged Esau to take the gifts, Esau replies, “I
have plenty, my brother; let what you have be your own.”
Furthermore, Genesis 36 reveals that God had prospered Esau with possessions
and posterity and had made him a great nation, the nation of Edom, which would
have given him fulfillment and prevented him from becoming jealous of Jacob’s
great prosperity.
For twenty long years the two brothers had neither seen each other or spoke
with each other but now all their emotions are released and on full display. Jacob
has offered restitution and demonstrated humility towards Esau and Esau in return
has forgiven Jacob and the two are reconciled (cf. Psalm 133:1-3).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
173
Genesis 33:5 “He lifted his eyes and saw the women and the children, and
said, “Who are these with you?” So he said, “The children whom God has
graciously given your servant.” (NASB95)
When Esau sees Jacob’s children, he asks Jacob “who are these with you” and
he does so because when Jacob left home twenty years prior, he was unmarried and
therefore, childless.
“Graciously given” is the verb chanan, which refers to the act of God
bestowing Jacob with the gift of four wives and twelve children and indicates
Jacob’s recognition that his wives and children were an unmerited gift from God
meaning he neither earned or deserved these blessings.
Grace is all that God is free to do in imparting unmerited blessings to us based
upon the merits of Christ and His death on the Cross-and our eternal union with
Him. Grace is God treating us in a manner that we don’t deserve and excludes any
human works in order to acquire eternal salvation. Grace means that God saved us
despite ourselves and not according to anything that we do but rather saved us
because of the merits of Christ and His work on the Cross. Grace excludes any
human merit in salvation (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) and gives the Creator all the credit
and the creature none.
Here we see Jacob giving God the credit. He learned through the discipline that
he could not merit the blessing of God, nor could he do anything that could merit
the blessing of God. Therefore, Jacob has learned what God’s grace is all about,
namely, that we can not merit the blessing of God because of who we are or what
we do, that it is a gift and cannot be earned or deserved.
Jacob tactfully avoids the term barakh, “bless” in order to avoid provoking
Esau to jealousy and reminding him of the stolen blessings of the birthright. “Tact”
is a keen sense of what to say or do to avoid giving offense and is the skill in
dealing with difficult or delicate situations.
Also, Jacob demonstrates great tact by employing the term Elohim, “God”
rather than the covenant name of God, Yahweh, “Lord” since Esau was not chosen
by God to inherit the blessings, promises, privileges and responsibilities of the
Abrahamic Covenant.
The fourteen years of divine discipline under Laban have developed in Jacob
the ability to use tact in dealing with delicate and difficult situations with people.
Genesis 33:6 Then the maids came near with their children, and they
bowed down. 7 Leah likewise came near with her children, and they bowed
down; and afterward Joseph came near with Rachel, and they bowed down. 8
And he (Esau) said, “What do you mean by all this company which I have
met?’ And he (Jacob) said, ‘To find favor in the sight of my lord.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
174
When Esau asked about the gifts of animals, Jacob replied that they were meant
to seek Esau’s favor or in other words to seek his forgiveness for stealing the
blessing of the birthright twenty years before.
As we noted in our study of Genesis 32:20, when Jacob sent the gifts he states
that they were to “appease” Esau meaning the gifts were designed to reconcile or
repair their relationship and by implication “cover” the sin that Jacob had
committed against Esau some twenty years earlier.
Genesis 32:16 records that Jacob divided the animals into five different droves:
first the goats (200 female and 20 male), then the sheep (20 male and 200 female),
then camels (30) and their young, then the cattle (40 cows and 10 bulls) and then
the donkeys (20 female and 10 male).
With this gift, Jacob was attempting to offer “restitution” to Esau and make
amends for actions against Esau when he had deceived his blind father Isaac into
bestowing the blessings of the birthright to him rather than Esau.
Genesis 33:9 But Esau said, “I have plenty, my brother; let what you have
be your own.” (NASB95)
Notice that Esau never mentions God once in their conversation and Jacob
eventually mentions God twice. The fact that Esau does not mention God once
does “not” mean that he was an atheist but it does indicate that he is an unbeliever
and has failed to acknowledge the hand of God in his life.
The etiquette of the Middle East in that day required Esau to make a show of
refusing the gift and Jacob to press it on him.
According to Isaac’s prophecy concerning Esau recorded in Genesis 27:39-40,
Esau acquired his possessions through war and not by farming or shepherding as
Jacob did. Of course, God gave Esau the victories on the battlefield and was thus
the source of Esau’s prosperity.
Genesis 33:10 Jacob said, “No, please, if now I have found favor in your
sight, then take my present from my hand, for I see your face as one sees the
face of God, and you have received me favorably.” (NASB95)
“Present” is the noun minchah, which refers to the gift of the five droves of
animals that served as restitution for Jacob stealing the blessing of the birthright
twenty years before.
Jacob’s statement to Esau, “I see your face as one sees the face of God” is not
flattery meant as if Jacob had been overjoyed to see Esau as one would see the face
of God since that would be obnoxious and insincere. Rather, the statement means
that Jacob saw in Esau’s acceptance of him a reflection of God’s grace because he
knew that it was God Himself who had changed Esau’s heart so that he could be
reconciled to his brother Esau.
As we noted in Jacob’s wrestling match with the Lord recorded in Genesis
32:24-32, during the fourteen years of divine discipline Jacob had learned of the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
175
power and importance of persevering in prayer, which is called by theologians,
“prevailing prayer.”
The wrestling match between God and Jacob was “symbolic” of Jacob’s
struggles in life with men, which in reality were with God. Therefore, by means of
persevering in prayer with God, Jacob had solved his problems with Esau.
Now that Esau had welcomed him with open arms, Jacob saw that looking on
the face of his brother was like looking on the face of God. The one was the result
of the other. God, not Esau, had been the obstacle to Jacob’s entry into Canaan.
Now that he had prevailed with God by means of petition and clinging to Him
by faith, Esau was no longer a foe, but a friend. Therefore, Jacob’s statement to
Esau, “I see your face as one sees the face of God” implies that Jacob
acknowledges God’s sovereignty in his life in that God and not Esau had prevented
him from reentering the land of Canaan.
The fact that the Lord attacked at Jabbok before reentering Canaan also
indicates this to be the case.
Genesis 33:11 “Please take my gift which has been brought to you, because
God has dealt graciously with me and because I have plenty. Thus he urged
him and he took it.” (NASB95)
The fact that Esau accepted Jacob’s gift of five droves of animals and did not
reciprocate indicates that Esau has accepted Jacob’s gift as settlement for Jacob
stealing the blessing of the birthright twenty years before.
Notice that Esau only took the gift after Jacob had insisted indicating that Esau
had forgiven Jacob long ago and did not need the gift to pacify him. From God’s
perspective offering the gifts to Esau was the right thing for Jacob to do since our
Lord taught His disciples that if horizontal relationships with people are not right
because of sin, then they are not right in their vertical relationship with God.
For instance, if we don’t forgive our fellow believers, then God won’t forgive
us in the experiential sense and thus we won’t be restored to fellowship (Mt. 6:1415; Mt. 18:21-35). So, if we have sinned and injured someone whether his or her
property or reputation, we must confess it to the injured party and offer restitution,
which in some cases, restitution could simply involve an apology.
Sins against society and against one another require civil restitution for
experiential forgiveness before God and men, thus, the thief steals, realizes his sin,
and confesses to God and his victim, then makes restitution, and God forgives him.
Unlike the conflict with Laban that was settled with a non-aggression pact, the
conflict with Esau is resolved through the accurate application of the Word of God,
genuine expressions of humility and tact and consideration of others.
The reconciliation between Esau and Jacob is sealed with the acceptance of this
reparation gift. Esau’s acceptance is witnessed by Esau’s four hundred men and by
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
176
Jacob’s entire household just as Abraham’s claim to Ephron’s cave and field was
sealed when Ephron accepted the payment before witnesses.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
177
Chapter Nine: Disaster In Succoth
Jacob Departs from Esau
In Genesis 33:12-16, we see Esau departing from Jacob.
Genesis 33:12 Then Esau said, “Let us take our journey and go, and I will
go before you.” (NASB95)
“Let us take our journey” is the verb nasa`, which means, “to pull up” stakes
that stabilize a tent and is a technical term for “breaking camp.”
Now, remember Esau has four hundred men who serve as Esau’s military and
were therefore, accustomed to traveling at a swift pace. On the other hand, Jacob
could not travel fast but could only go at the pace of the cattle and his children.
Therefore, Jacob is hindered by the animals in his flocks and herds that are nursing
and the children in his household. In fact, they had just completed a very difficult
and arduous journey from Paddan Aram to the Mount Gilead region, which was
over three hundred miles. So Jacob is smart and knows full well he can’t continue
to drive his flocks and family at such a pace because they will die of exhaustion.
Genesis 33:13 But he (Jacob) said to him (Esau), “My lord knows that the
children are frail and that the flocks and herds which are nursing are a care
to me. And if they are driven hard one day, all the flocks will die.” (NASB95)
“Frail” is the adjective rakh, which means, “tender” in the sense that the
children in Jacob’s household could not physically or emotionally withstand the
hardships and sustained efforts of a trip to Seir, which the adults in his household
were capable of withstanding.
“Which are nursing” is the verb `ul, which designates the feeding activity of
the young domestic animals.
“Knows” is the verb yadha`, which means, “to discern” meaning that Esau
could “perceive by sight, see, recognize, or apprehend clearly” that the children in
Jacob’s household and the animals among his flocks that were nursing were
incapable of withstanding another long trip to Seir.
This verb indicates that Jacob is “not” lying or deceiving Esau or making an
excuse for not going to Seir with Esau. But rather he is saying to Esau that he
could see for himself that the children in his household and the animals in his
flocks that were nursing were incapable of withstanding another long trip to Seir
like the one they just completed from Paddan Aram.
As we can see Jacob is declining taking a journey with Esau’s militia because
he has too many young children and too many of his flocks and herds are nursing
their young and if driven hard one day, would die on the journey.
Genesis 33:14 “Please let my lord pass on before his servant, and I will
proceed at my leisure, according to the pace of the cattle that are before me
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
178
and according to the pace of the children, until I come to my lord at Seir.”
(NASB95)
Jacob employs deferential language when addressing his brother Esau, using the
terms “my lord” and “his servant,” which demonstrates the humility he learned
while enduring fourteen years of divine discipline under Laban in Paddan Aram by
bowing seven times to the ground before Esau.
We must not think this deferential language on the part of Jacob was intended
as an acknowledgement of servility on his part, but simply as a token of respect
and recognition of Esau as ruler of the region.
Believers are commanded in the Word of God to defer to one another and
consider each other as more important than themselves.
Romans 12:10 Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference
to one another in honor. (NASB95)
Esau offers to accompany Jacob in a southerly direction however Jacob declines
the offer, not because he is afraid of Esau or that he did not trust him, which is
indicated in that when Jacob approached his encounter with Esau, he had no fear of
being attacked because of the assurance that the Lord gave him at Peniel.
The fact that Jacob passed ahead of his wives and children and put himself
ahead of them to meet Esau demonstrated that he had no fear of his twin brother
but was a demonstration of his faith, his confident assurance that God has given
him the victory and reconciliation with Esau.
Therefore, it is clear that Jacob did not fear or mistrust Esau prior to meeting
him or even after making contact with him since Jacob was operating in faith,
resting in the promise of God to protect him and his family. If he was living in
unbelief, he would have never have initiated contact with Esau.
Also, another factor indicating that Jacob would have no mistrust or fear Esau
at this point in the narrative is that the two had reconciled as demonstrated by Esau
accepting Jacob’s gift before witnesses as restitution for stealing the blessing of the
birthright from Esau.
Jacob declined Esau’s offer because Jacob’s caravan had to travel slowly due to
the presence of young children and large flocks, which were nursing their young
whereas Esau’s soldiers would have been impatient with Jacob’s slow pace.
The second reason why Jacob declined Esau’s offer to travel with him to Seir
but did not mention it to Esau was that the Lord commanded him to return to the
land of Canaan (See Genesis 31:3) and even promised him possession of it (See
Genesis 28:13).
The fact that Jacob doesn’t mention to Esau that the Lord had promised him the
land of Canaan and commanded him to return to it does “not” mean that Jacob has
lost sight of what the Lord said to him but rather he is being tactful. “Tact” is a
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
179
keen sense of what to say or do to avoid giving offense and is the skill in dealing
with difficult or delicate situations.
The fourteen years of divine discipline under Laban have developed in Jacob
the ability to use tact in dealing with this delicate situation with Esau. Jacob
demonstrates great tact in that he avoids mentioning that the Lord commanded him
to return to Canaan in order to avoid provoking Esau to jealousy and reminding
him that God did not choose him to inherit the blessings of the Abrahamic
Covenant, which would include possession of the land of Canaan.
By demonstrating tact with Esau, Jacob, now Israel was loving his neighbor as
himself and treating others the way that he would want to be treated (cf. Mark
12:28-31; Matthew 7:12).
Obviously, Esau knew that Jacob had returned for just this reason yet Jacob
wanted to avoid mention of it because he was sensitive to Esau’s feelings. During
the twenty years apart from each other, Esau realized that Jacob was properly
entitled to the birthright and the blessing and that God had chosen Jacob to be in
the line of Christ and inherit the blessings, promises, privileges and responsibilities
of the Abrahamic Covenant.
Esau was able to accept that Jacob was entitled to the birthright and the blessing
because in Genesis 33:9 when Jacob urged Esau to take the gifts, Esau replies, “I
have plenty, my brother; let what you have be your own.”
Furthermore, Genesis 36 reveals that God had prospered Esau with possessions
and posterity and had made him a great nation, the nation of Edom, which would
have given him fulfillment and prevented him from becoming jealous of Jacob’s
great prosperity.
Jacob’s reference to visiting Esau in Seir does not mean that Jacob planned to
go directly to Seir, but rather it meant that he would visit him by himself in the
future without the flocks and family as indicated by his use of the personal
pronoun “I” instead of “we,” which would of course denote his entire family.
Scripture does not record whether Jacob ever made such a trip but this doesn’t
mean he didn’t take it either.
Genesis 33:15 Esau said, “Please let me leave with you some of the people
who are with me.” But he said, “What need is there? Let me find favor in the
sight of my lord.” (NASB95)
Esau then offered Jacob a portion of his men to accompany him for protection
but Jacob declines this offer as well. Jacob declined this offer from Esau because
Jacob was confident in the Lord’s promise to protect him and be with him as
witnessed by the Lord’s protection of him while dealing with both Laban and Esau.
Therefore, he saw no need for this military presence to protect him since he had
faith and was totally and completely confident that the Lord was with him and
would protect him from any and every possible adversary.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
180
Genesis 33:16 So Esau returned that day on his way to Seir. (NASB95)
Jacob politely refuses Esau’s offer of men and Esau agrees to Jacob’s request
and headed back to Seir. “Seir” is the proper noun se`ir, which is a mountainous
region located primarily east of the Gulf of Aqaba, but west as well and was
originally settled by the Horites, also known as the Hurrians, a non-Semitic people
dispersed throughout the ancient Near East.
Eventually, the descendants of Esau, the Edomites took over the land and so
therefore, Seir was also synonymously called Edom (Genesis 32:3; 33:14, 16;
Joshua 24:4; cf. Genesis 36:1, 39).
Jacob Settles in Succoth
Genesis 33:17 records Jacob settling temporarily in Succoth to rest his flocks
and family before reentering the land of Canaan. Genesis 33:18-20 presents to us
the record of Jacob moving from Succoth, crossing the Jordan River and returning
to the land of Canaan and settling in Shechem.
Genesis 33:17 Jacob journeyed to Succoth, and built for himself a house
and made booths for his livestock; therefore the place is named Succoth.
(NASB95)
“Journeyed” is the verb nasa`, which means, “to pull up” stakes that stabilize a
tent and is a technical term for “breaking camp.”
“Succoth” is the proper noun Sukkoth, which means, “shelters” and implies a
temporary stay at this location and was located east of the Jordan River, near the
Jabbok River.
“House” is the noun bayith, which denotes a permanent structure built of solid
supports and materials including doorposts, walls, a roof, and stone, plaster and
wood materials.
“Booths” is the noun sukkah, which denotes a temporary shelter or stalls for
livestock.
The fact that Jacob builds a house and stalls for his livestock at Succoth
signifies that Jacob intended to have a prolonged stay at this place before crossing
the Jordan into Canaan. This does “not” imply that Jacob was disobeying the
Lord’s command to return to Canaan since Genesis 33:18 records that Jacob
eventually journeyed to Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. Rather, Jacob
wanted to stay for a period of time at Succoth in order to recoup what he gave
away to Esau and to give his young children and the nursing animals a chance to
recover from the long and difficult three hundred mile journey from Paddan Aram.
Jacob was not disobeying the Lord by delaying his entrance into the land of
Canaan by staying at Succoth but rather he was concerned about the health of his
family and flocks and wanted to give them time to recover. Remember, the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
181
members of Jacob’s caravan had been under great strain because of the problems
with leaving Laban and not knowing how Esau would respond to Jacob when
reentering the land of Canaan.
Jacob’s entourage had traveled well over three hundred miles since their
departure from Paddan Aram and would have been exhausted. Therefore, he
temporarily settled in Succoth for the sake of his family and flocks in order to give
them all a rest and it helped that the pasture in Succoth was great.
Furthermore, we must remember that Jacob was crippled by the Lord at Peniel
when the Lord dislocated his hip in the wrestling match and so I’m sure he was
exhausted as well from all the travel and wanted to settle down to rest.
Some commentators believe that Jacob was delaying so as to avoid his father
Isaac who was blind and was deceived by Jacob some twenty years before into
bestowing upon him the blessing of the birthright rather than Esau, Isaac’s favorite
son. However, they fail to consider that if Esau who threatened to kill Jacob twenty
years before had forgiven Jacob, how much more would his father Isaac who was
old at this time, forgive him.
Some commentators contend that Succoth was north of the Jabbok because they
identify it with “Sakut,” which is on the other side of the Jordan, about ten miles
north of the mouth of the Jabbok. Consequently, they argue that Jacob was going
backwards and not forwards towards the land of Canaan, thus indicating his
disobedience to the Lord’s command to return to Canaan. However, they fail to
consider Judges 8:4-9, which implies that Succoth was “south” of the Jabbok since
this passage records that Succoth was east of the Jordan River but much closer to
the Jordan than Penuel, which was north of the Jabbok River.
The fact that the Scriptures are silent about Jacob crossing back over the Jabbok
is further indication that Succoth was “not” north of the Jabbok but rather south.
Furthermore, since Jacob was so concerned with the condition of his flocks,
which were nursing and the young children in his caravan, he would by no means
even consider performing once again the difficult operation of fording the Jabbok
River!
Jacob had no reason to avoid reentering Canaan since the greatest threat to his
life, Esau, had forgiven him and they were now reconciled. Therefore, Jacob
stopped at Succoth simply for the sake of his flocks and young family just as he
stated to Esau.
In fact, we have the following statement in Genesis 33:18 Now Jacob came
safely to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. (NASB95)
This implies that Jacob stays in Succoth was for the safety and well-being of his
family and flocks and was a temporary stay and stepping stone before entering
Canaan.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
182
Also, Jacob had every reason for quickly returning to Canaan since the Lord
had promised him possession of the land. Therefore, Jacob’s stay at Succoth,
which was just outside of the land of Canaan, was temporary even though he built
a house and shelters for his flocks and herds since all hindrances for returning were
now removed (Esau) and the Lord promised him and his descendants the land of
Canaan as a permanent possession.
Genesis 33:18 begins the final section of the account of Isaac’s line and extends
to Genesis 35:29. Genesis 25:19-35:29 constitutes the eighth book in Genesis
presenting to us the family history of Isaac and in particular Jacob whose name
was changed by the Lord to “Israel.” Genesis 33:18-20 forms the prelude for the
events recorded in Genesis 34 where Jacob’s sons exact revenge upon Shechem for
the rape of their sister Dinah.
The Scriptures are silent as to how long Jacob stayed at Succoth before he
entered the land of Canaan and settled at Shechem.
“Safely” is the adjective shalem, which means, “being complete, whole, total”
or “full,” thus in context the word means that Jacob and his caravan arrived back
“safe and sound” in the land of Canaan.
The fact that Jacob had arrived safely in the land of Canaan fulfilled Jacob’s
request of the Lord at Bethel to bring him back safely to the land of Canaan (See
Genesis 28:21).
“Shechem” is the proper noun shekhem, which means, “safe and sound” and is
approximately thirty-five miles north of Jerusalem, directly west of the Jabbok
River and approximately twenty miles from the Jordan in the land of Canaan. It
was located in the heart of the Promised Land at the commercial crossroads of
Canaan in the pass between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. The city was the
place where Abraham first camped when he arrived in Canaan from Haran and is
the place where he built an altar to worship the Lord in response to the Lord
appearing to him and promising him and his descendants the land of Canaan (See
Genesis 12:6-7).
The two prepositional phrases “in the land of Canaan when he came from
Paddan Aram” alert the reader that the Lord has fulfilled His promise to Jacob at
Bethel just prior to entering into exile with Laban in Paddan Aram to bring him
back home to Canaan (See Genesis 28:15).
Genesis 33:19 He bought the piece of land where he had pitched his tent
from the hand of the sons of Hamor, Shechem's father, for one hundred pieces
of money. (NASB95)
“Piece” is the noun chelqah, which refers to a well defined field or tract of land.
“Land” is the noun sadheh, which means, “field” and refers to a well defined
field or land without walls or fences.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
183
Therefore, Jacob buys a tract of land for his flocks just outside the city of
Shechem as indicated by the statement in Genesis 33:18 that Jacob “camped by
the city” and in Genesis 33:19 by the phrase “where he had pitched his tent.”
The name “Hamor” literally means, “donkey,” and he was the father of
Shechem who raped Dinah according to Genesis 34 and Genesis 34:2 records that
“Hamor” was a Hivite, which is significant.
At times the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites,
were called “Canaanites” but strictly speaking the nations who dwelt on the coasts
or river lowlands were called “Canaanite” (Nm. 13:29). Therefore, “Hamor” was a
Canaanite and the Canaanites were under a curse according to the prophecy of
Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 and thus Jacob’s family could not intermarry
with the Canaanites.
Now, we must remember that this curse upon Canaan was conditional meaning
that any Canaanite who placed their faith in the God of Israel, Jesus Christ, could
escape it. An example is Rahab the harlot who was a Canaanite and placed her
faith in the God of Israel, Jesus Christ and after a period of purification, was
brought into Israel’s society. Therefore, Jacob and his descendants, the Israelites
can have nothing to do with the Canaanites and this is witnessed by the fact that
Abraham prohibited Eliezer his servant from getting Isaac his son a Canaanite
woman and Isaac issued the same prohibition to Jacob.
The designation “Shechem’s father” anticipates the events of Genesis 34
where Shechem whose father is Hamor rapes Jacob’s daughter Dinah.
“Money” is the noun qositah, which is the name of a Hebrew monetary weight
of unknown weight and value.
The exact price is recorded in Genesis 33:19 signifying that the sale was final
and incontestable. By allowing Jacob, now Israel to buy land and settle among
them, the Canaanites and specifically, the Hivites were hoping to intermarry with
Jacob’s family and this we have seen was prohibited by the Lord as stipulated in
the prophecy of Noah.
If you recall in Genesis 23, Abraham sought to buy a piece of property as a
permanent possession from the Hittites in order to bury his wife and Sarah. We
saw that the Hittites were reluctant to sell their land to Abraham as a permanent
possession, which expressed a pervasive and deep rooted attitude throughout the
Middle East.
Knowing this reluctance on the part of Middle East landowners in the days of
the patriarchs, the fact that Hamor was willing to sell a piece of property to Jacob
was significant in that it demonstrated the desire of Hamor to marry into the family
of Jacob, which was very wealthy.
The wealth of Jacob’s family was very appealing to Hamor, making Jacob’s
family appealing to intermarry with and thus Hamor was more than willing to part
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
184
with a piece of property. This intermarriage would mean that the Canaanites would
absorb Jacob’s clan, making them a part of their culture and people, both of which
were decadent. Therefore, Jacob has made a bad decision by purchasing this tract
of land belonging to the Canaanites. The consequences of this decision are keenly
felt in Genesis 34, which records the rape of Jacob’s daughter Dinah by Shechem,
the son of Hamor.
Now, we must understand that the purchase of the land by Jacob and the
building of the altar were done by him in faith and were a testimony to the faith of
Jacob in the Lord’s promise to give him the land of Canaan. However, Jacob’s
decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked discernment in the sense that
he could not perceive clearly and understand the dangerous situation he put himself
in since the Canaanites sold him the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his
family, which he was prohibited from doing.
His decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked acuteness of judgment
and understanding of the consequences of such a purchase since the Canaanites
sold Jacob the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his family, which he was
prohibited from doing according to the prophecy of Noah.
Discernment stresses accuracy in reading character or motives and so Jacob’s
decision to purchase land from Hamor lacked discernment since Jacob did not
accurately read the character and motive of Hamor in selling him the tract of land.
Jacob’s decision to purchase land and build an altar to the Lord at Shechem was
lacking in discernment since it was not God’s will that he build the altar at
Shechem but at Bethel since he had made a vow to the Lord over twenty years
before to build an altar at Bethel and worship the Lord there (Genesis 28:20-21).
Jacob proposed to give a tithe to the Lord, which would provide the means to
build and maintain the altar to worship the Lord, which the pillar began.
Genesis 33:20 Then he erected there an altar and called it El-Elohe-Israel.
(NASB95)
The building of the altar was designed so that Jacob with his family and
servants could publicly worship the Lord, which expressed Jacob and his
household’s total dedication and devotion to the Lord.
“El-Elohe-Israel” literally means, “God, the God of Israel” signifying that
Jacob is identifying his new self with the living God and claims the land in his
name and would distinguish Israel from the Canaanites whose language they speak
(See Genesis 31:47).
By assigning this name to the altar he constructed, Jacob was testifying publicly
that the God of his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac was also his God as
well (See Genesis 28:21).
Although Jacob returned to the land of Canaan, he was wrong to settle at
Shechem since he made a vow to the Lord to Bethel to return there and build an
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
185
altar to worship the Lord in thanksgiving for prospering, and protecting him while
in exile and fulfilling His promise to return him safely to the land of Canaan.
Once he departed from Succoth, he should have kept right on going to Bethel.
There was no reason for Jacob to stop just twenty miles to the west at Shechem. So
it appears that Jacob was getting lazy and procrastinating. He had just experienced
a great victory spiritually with Esau but it appears he got complacent and lazy and
procrastinated.
Throughout his life, Jacob demonstrates tremendous passivity as in the case of
letting his mother Rebekah manipulate him until the age of forty and his inability
to confront Laban for twenty years for cheating him of his wages. His passivity
was demonstrated also with his wives, where he let them order him around and
treated him as a stud for hire.
Jacob’s lack of discernment resulting in his failure to go to Bethel and fulfill his
vow to the Lord there resulted in the rape of Dinah since if he went to Bethel as he
should have, the rape of Dinah would never have taken place.
Jacob’s Daughter, Dinah is Raped by Shechem
Genesis 34 gives us the record of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Levi killing
Shechem, his father Hamor and all the men of the city of Shechem in retaliation for
Shechem raping their sister Dinah.
In Genesis 34:1-4, we read of Shechem, son of Hamor raping Jacob’s daughter
by Leah, namely, Dinah.
If you recall, in Genesis 33:18-20 we saw Jacob moving from Succoth, crossing
the Jordan River and returning to the land of Canaan and settling in Shechem.
Then, in Genesis 33:19 we saw him buying a tract of land from Hamor who was a
Hivite and the Hivites were called “Canaanites.”
The Canaanites were under a curse according to the prophecy of Noah recorded
in Genesis 9:24-27 and thus Jacob’s family could not intermarry with the
Canaanites.
If you recall, Abraham prohibited Eliezer his servant from getting Isaac his son
a Canaanite woman and Isaac issued the same prohibition to Jacob. By allowing
Jacob, now Israel to buy land and settle among them, the Canaanites and
specifically, the Hivites were hoping to intermarry with Jacob’s family and this we
have seen was prohibited by the Lord as stipulated in the prophecy of Noah.
This intermarriage would mean that the Canaanites would absorb Jacob’s clan,
making them a part of their culture and people, both of which were decadent.
Remember, the Lord has made Jacob extremely wealthy and so he would be
appealing to the Canaanites to intermarry with. Therefore, Jacob has made a bad
decision by purchasing this tract of land belonging to the Canaanites. The
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
186
consequences of this decision are keenly felt in Genesis 34, which records the rape
of Jacob’s daughter Dinah by Shechem, the son of Hamor.
Now, we must understand that the purchase of the land by Jacob and the
building of the altar were done by him in faith and were a testimony to the faith of
Jacob in the Lord’s promise to give him the land of Canaan. However, Jacob’s
decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked discernment in the sense that
he could not perceive clearly and understand the dangerous situation he put himself
in since the Canaanites sold him the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his
family, which he was prohibited from doing.
His decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked acuteness of judgment
and understanding of the consequences of such a purchase since the Canaanites
sold Jacob the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his family, which he was
prohibited from doing according to the prophecy of Noah.
Discernment stresses accuracy in reading character or motives and so Jacob’s
decision to purchase land from Hamor lacked discernment since Jacob did not
accurately read the character and motive of Hamor in selling him the tract of land.
Jacob’s decision was lacking in discernment since it was not God’s will that he
build the altar at Shechem but at Bethel since he had made a vow to the Lord over
twenty years before to build an altar at Bethel and worship the Lord there (See
Genesis 28:20-21).
Although Jacob returned to the land of Canaan, he was wrong to settle at
Shechem since he made a vow to the Lord to Bethel to return there and build an
altar to worship the Lord in thanksgiving for prospering, and protecting him while
in exile and fulfilling His promise to return him safely to the land of Canaan.
Once he departed from Succoth, he should have kept right on going to Bethel.
There was no reason for Jacob to stop just twenty miles to the west at Shechem. So
it appears that Jacob was getting passive and lazy and procrastinating. He had just
experienced a great victory spiritually with Esau but it appears he got complacent
and lazy and procrastinated.
Throughout his life, Jacob demonstrates tremendous passivity as in the case of
letting his mother Rebekah manipulate him until the age of forty and his inability
to confront Laban for twenty years for cheating him of his wages. His passivity
was demonstrated also with his wives, where he let them order him around and
treated him as a stud for hire.
Jacob’s lack of discernment resulting in his failure to go to Bethel and fulfill his
vow to the Lord there resulted in the rape of Dinah since if he went to Bethel as he
should have, the rape of Dinah would never have taken place.
Genesis 34:1 Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to
Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
187
Dinah is the seventh child that Leah bore to Jacob and only girl and her birth is
recorded in Genesis 30:21.
Jacob did not have other daughters besides Dinah (cf. 37:35 and 46:7). In
Genesis 46:7-19, the term “daughters” is used with reference to Jacob’s
“granddaughters” and not to other daughters besides Dinah since Dinah is singled
out as being his only daughter and the daughters of Jacob’s son are listed. The term
for “daughters” in the Hebrew can be used to describe a “granddaughter” and not
just a “daughter.”
The name “Dinah” means, “judgment” since the name is the feminine form of
the word din meaning “judgment.”
The long definition of Dinah’s relationship to her parents is unusual indicating
that Dinah did not receive the love and affection that she should have from her
father Jacob because she was the daughter of Leah who Jacob did not love as much
as Rachel. It implies that Jacob was indifferent towards Dinah because he loved
Rachel more than her mother Leah.
Her brothers Simeon and Levi were also affected by Jacob’s indifference since
they take the law into their own hands as the result of their father’s indifference to
their sister’s rape.
Bruce K. Waltke, “The narrator’s continual identification of the father-daughter
relationship exposes the shame of Jacob’s passivity in the events that follow”
(Genesis, A Commentary, page 461).
The noun na`arah, “her” in Genesis 34:3 indicates that Dinah was of
marriageable age meaning she was approximately thirteen or fourteen years of age.
Also indicating that Dinah was approximately thirteen or fourteen years of age
at this point in the narrative is that in Genesis 34:4 the noun yaladh, which means,
“young girl” is used to describe her.
Dinah’s decision to leave her family’s encampment to enter a Canaanite city
without a chaperone was improper since in the ancient world girls of a
marriageable age would not leave a rural encampment to go unchaperoned into an
alien city. It was also a poor decision because Jacob’s family who were Shemites
as we have noted were not to have relationships with the Canaanite because of
their godless and immoral lifestyle.
However, Dinah’s bad decision to associate with the Canaanite women is
directly related to her father’s poor example when he purchased land from Hamor
who was a Canaanite. So Dinah’s decision to associate with the Canaanite women
was a case of “like father, like daughter.”
As we have noted, the Canaanites sold Jacob the land because they wished to
intermarry with him because he was very wealthy. Dinah’s rape came about
because Jacob failed to exhibit appropriate distancing from the Canaanites and as a
result exposes her to sexual defilement from the Canaanites who were notoriously
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
188
sexually immoral. Therefore, the rape of Dinah is the result of poor leadership and
passivity of Jacob her father.
Genesis 34:2 When Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the
land, saw her, he took her and lay with her by force. (NASB95)
Genesis 34:2 records that “Hamor” was a Hivite, which is significant. The
Hivites settled in the land of Canaan and were displaced by Israel under Joshua
(Ex. 3:8, 17; 13:5; 23:23; 33:2; 34:11; Deut. 7:1; Josh. 9:1).
At times the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites,
were called “Canaanites” but strictly speaking the nations who dwelt on the coasts
or river lowlands were called “Canaanite” (Nm. 13:29).
Therefore, “Hamor” was a Canaanite and the Canaanites were under a curse
according to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 and thus Jacob’s
family could not intermarry with the Canaanites.
As we noted earlier, Abraham prohibited Eliezer his servant from getting Isaac
his son a Canaanite woman and Isaac issued the same prohibition to Jacob. In fact,
in Genesis 26:35, Esau’s Hittite wives who were also Canaanites brought grief to
his parents, Isaac and Rebekah because their godless lifestyle was repulsive to his
parents who possessed a covenant relationship with the Lord.
Not only did Abraham seek a wife for Isaac among the Arameans rather than
the Canaanites but also Isaac did as well for Jacob. The reason for this is that
Abraham and Isaac and the Arameans were descendants of Shem (i.e. Semitic)
who according to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 were in the
line of Christ.
Unlike the Canaanites, Aramean women embraced the faith of their husbands,
unlike the Canaanite women who seduce their husbands to join their lifestyles (See
Genesis 24:4; 26:34-35; 31:50).
The Canaanites were idolatrous (Deut. 29:17), involved in the occult (Deut.
18:9-10) and gross immorality (Lev. 18), which archaeology confirms. The Lord
used the nation of Israel under Joshua to pour out His judgment upon the
Canaanites for their immoral degeneracy (Gen. 15:16; 19:5; Lev. 18; 20; Deut.
12:31). The Canaanites were defeated on the battlefield, destroyed, or integrated
with other nations or enslaved to Israel (Gen. 14:1-16; 15:18-21; Ex. 3:7-10; Deut.
1-3; Josh. 10-19).
Shechem’s father was Hamor who was the leader of the Hivites who Jacob
purchased property from just outside the city.
Notice that Genesis 34:2 describes Hamor as the prince of the land and not the
city “because the city-state of Shechem in pre-Israelite times extended its control
over a vast area that at one time included the central hill country as far as the
borders of Jerusalem and Gezer to the south and Megiddo to the north, a domain of
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
189
about 1,000 square miles. Egyptian and Akkadian texts reflect this situation” (The
JPS Torah Commentary, The Jewish Publication Society, page 233).
Hamor is described as a “prince” and not with the usual designation for the
head of a Canaanite city-state. His unusual title indicates that as ruler of Shechem
he had dominion over rural territory as well as the urban center.
This title does “not” mean that he had absolute power however and in fact
Genesis 34:20-23 reveals that he does not act as a king in this situation with Dinah
since he calls a town meeting in order to present his plans before the citizens and
obtains approval by means of persuasive argument rather than by a royal decree.
“Took” is the verb laqach, which means that Shechem sent messengers to
“fetch, retrieve, summon” Dinah in order to add her to his harem.
“Lay” is the verb shakhav, which is used as a euphemism for sex and is never
used for loving marital intercourse in Genesis but only for illicit or forced sex such
as Lot’s daughters with Lot (19:32-35); the Philistines with Rebekah (26:10);
Shechem with Dinah (34:2, 7); Reuben with Bilhah (35:22); Potiphar’s wife with
Joseph (39:7, 10, 12, 14).
“By force” is the verb `anah, which is in the piel (intensive) stem indicates that
Shechem “raped” Dinah.
Under the Mosaic Law, which was not yet given to the nation of Israel at this
point in history, Shechem would have been compelled to marry Dinah and pay
fifty shekels, which was an unusually large present (“bride-price”) to her father
(see Deuteronomy 22:28-29).
Genesis 34:3 He was deeply attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and
he loved the girl and spoke tenderly to her. (NASB95)
The statement “He (Shechem) was deeply attracted to Dinah” literally means
in the Hebrew that his “soul clung” to Dinah’s soul.
“Was deeply attracted” is the verb davaq, which denotes the passionate aspect
of personal love for the opposite sex, though it is not used of sexual intimacy but
rather conveys the sense of loyalty, fidelity, commitment and affection for
someone.
“Loved” is the verb ‘ahev, which denotes Shechem’s sexual attraction for
Dinah. This same verb is used of Jacob’s love for Rachel in Genesis 29:18.
The statement He “spoke tenderly to her” in the Hebrew literally means that
Shechem “spoke to the heart of the young woman who is of the age to be married.”
This statement reveals that after the rape Shechem attempted to comfort Dinah and
assured her that he loved her and would do right by her and marry her.
In fact, to demonstrate that he was a man of his word, he took her into his own
house according to Genesis 34:26. These three verbs in Genesis 34:4 express
Shechem’s tender love and affection for Dinah and commitment to marry her and
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
190
offset the three verbs in Genesis 34:3 that express his sexual aggression and lack of
self-control.
Genesis 34:4 So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, “Get me this
young girl for a wife.” (NASB95)
Since marriages were arranged in the days of the patriarchs we see Shechem
ordering his father to negotiate with Dinah’s family so that he can marry her.
Shechem’s command “Get me this young girl for a wife” reveals at least three
things about his personality and character.
First of all, it reveals that he is a spoiled little rich boy who gets whatever he
wants since he is the son of top of politician in the town and is impolite and never
says “please.”
Secondly, it reveals the depth of his physical and emotional attraction to Dinah
in that he must have her as his wife.
Thirdly, it reveals Shechem’s desire to do right by Dinah after taking her by
force and raping her.
As we noted earlier, Deuteronomy 22:28-29 does not prescribe death for the
rape of an unmarried or unengaged woman but marriage with a heavy monetary
penalty and without possibility of divorce if the father consents (cf. Exodus 22:1617; 2 Samuel 13:16). The picture given to us in Genesis 34:2-4 is that Shechem’s
aggressive sexual behavior towards Dinah has turned to personal love, affection
and care and concern for Dinah to the extent that he is willing to commit to her and
marry her.
The fact that Hamor never rebukes his son Shechem for raping Dinah and
Shechem never apologizes to Dinah for his conduct reveals that the Shechemite or
Canaanite culture was immoral and decadent and raping a woman was a common
occurrence in Canaanite towns.
Jacob’s Passive Response to the Rape of Dinah
In Genesis 34:5-7, we have the record of Jacob’s response to the rape of his
daughter Dinah as well as the reaction of his sons.
Genesis 34:5 Now Jacob heard that he (Shechem) had defiled Dinah his
daughter; but his sons were with his livestock in the field, so Jacob kept silent
until they came in. (NASB95)
“Defiled” is the verb tame’, which means that Shechem’s rape of Dinah
“dishonored” or, “disgraced” her because he was an uncircumcised man, an
unbeliever and not a part of the covenant people led by Jacob, now Israel.
This expression “he (Shechem) had defiled Dinah” expresses the seriousness
of Shechem’s rape of Dinah since it was a crime against God’s covenant people,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
191
which Dinah was a part of and it was an attack on God’s holiness and a crime that
affected the entire community alienating it from God.
Therefore, the rape of Dinah by Shechem was not only a serious crime against
Dinah herself but a crime against God’s covenant people, Israel and thus an attack
upon God’s holiness, which was represented by the covenant people, Israel.
The phrase “his (Jacob’s) daughter” emphasizes the relationship between
Jacob and Dinah, which leads the reader to expect a fierce and angry reaction from
Jacob, like David upon hearing of the rape of Tamar (2 Samuel 13:21). However,
instead, Jacob says and does absolutely nothing but rather waits until his sons
arrive.
The statement “Jacob kept silent” condemns Jacob’s passivity and indifference
to the rape of his daughter and violence against the covenant people of God, Israel,
which was an attack upon God’s holiness, which Israel represented to the world.
Though silence may be appropriate under certain circumstances, the use of the
phrase “his daughter” and the statement, “Jacob kept silent” are used by the
narrator Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in order to condemn Jacob’s
indifferent and passive behavior.
There should have been “righteous indignation” i.e. justified anger on the part
of Jacob not only because of what Shechem did to his daughter but also because it
was an attack on God’s covenant people, Israel and thus an attack upon the Person
of God, and thus His holiness, which Israel represented before the world.
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the narrator Moses censures Jacob’s
passivity and indifference in the face of his daughter’s rape by contrasting his
reaction to that of his sons. They were furious but Jacob was not thus reflecting
once again that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah who is the mother of Dinah.
Evidently, Jacob did not consider the rape of his own daughter important
enough to immediately send for his sons. It appears that after Jacob dealt with the
problems of Laban and Esau, that he didn’t want to deal with any more problems
but rather wanted to spend the rest of his life in peace and tranquility, with no
problems. However, this problem with Dinah he brought on himself because he
failed to depart from Succoth and go directly to Bethel to fulfill his vow to the
Lord to build an altar to worship the Lord there.
Genesis 34:6 Then Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to
speak with him. (NASB95)
Initially, the negotiations between the two families begin with father speaking
with father but then Jacob’s sons take over the negotiations from their father once
they have arrived. As we have noted in our study of the marriage of Rebekah and
Isaac, it was customary for the brothers to negotiate the marriage of their sisters.
Genesis 34:7 Now the sons of Jacob came in from the field when they heard
it; and the men were grieved, and they were very angry because he had done a
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
192
disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter, for such a thing
ought not to be done. (NASB95)
Once Jacob’s sons heard of the rape of their sister they head in from the field.
How they found out is not revealed and who told them is not revealed as well but
we can assume that word traveled quickly through the countryside of their sister’s
rape and quickly reached their ears.
The intense emotional reaction of Jacob’s son upon hearing of the rape of their
sister, which is justified stands in stark contrast to the lack of emotion and apparent
indifference on the part of Jacob to the crime against his own daughter.
Jacob’s lack of emotion demonstrates that he does not consider the rape a moral
outrage and an attack against God’s covenant people, who he is the leader of and
therefore if an attack on God’s people it is an attack upon God’s holiness. Jacob’s
reaction to the rape of his daughter is comparable to that of Shechem and his father
Hamor, who both find nothing offensive about the rape.
Both men feel that since Shechem truly loves Dinah, they can overlook the
crime and simply settle the matter by negotiating a financial settlement for the
marriage, which appears to be what Jacob desired since later he rebukes his sons
for killing Hamor and Shechem and does not express moral outrage for the crime.
Jacob’s response to his son’s killing Shechem and his father Hamor for the rape
of their sister Dinah indicates that Jacob at this point in his life wanted no trouble
and lived in fear of the Canaanites. Therefore, he was willing to overlook the crime
against his daughter and his people and feels he would provoke the Canaanites to
violence if he became angry with them over the rape of Dinah.
The angry reaction of Jacob’s sons exposes Jacob’s passivity and indifference
and lack of moral outrage against this attack upon God’s covenant people, Israel.
The causal clause “because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying
with Jacob's daughter, for such a thing ought not to be done” presents the
“reason” why Jacob’s sons were enraged and burning with righteous indignation.
“Disgraceful thing” is composed of the noun nevalah, which means,
“disgraceful” and the adverb me’odh, which means, “very,” therefore, the rape of
Dinah was considered by Jacob’s sons as “very disgraceful” since it was a flagrant
violation of the moral standard in Israel.
The term “Israel” is an “anachronism” meaning it is not used of Jacob but
rather for the nation that originated from him, thus indicating that Jacob’s sons
considered the rape of their sister, not only a crime against her but a crime against
their nation, which demanded action.
Apparently, the sons of Jacob appreciated the honor bestowed upon them as a
family and believed in the promises the Lord bestowed upon Abraham, Isaac and
their father Jacob that their family was to carry on the line of Christ and to inherit
the blessings, promises, privileges and responsibilities of the Abrahamic Covenant.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
193
They believed in the promises given to Abraham, Isaac and their father Jacob and
knew that their family was destined to be the greatest of all the nations, from which
the Messiah would come.
Jacob’s sons knew and believed in God’s purpose to raise up a holy nation
through their family and that maintaining national integrity and purity was
essential to assure God’s continued blessing upon them. Not only did they resent
the rape of their sister for the sake of their sister Dinah but also because it
disrupted that national purity.
The statement “for such a thing ought not to be done” means that for
society’s own self-protection, such heinous crimes such as rape and murder can
never be tolerated or left unpunished in the society of the nation of Israel or in any
civilized society.
The question arises as to what kind of punishment should be administered to
Shechem. Under the Mosaic Law in Israel, the rape of an “unengaged” woman like
Dinah did “not” demand the death penalty. Rather it required restitution in the
form of fifty shekels be paid by the offender to the family of the victim, which
constitutes the “bride-price.” (Exodus 22:16-17) Also, the offender was required to
marry the victim if the father agreed to it and the offender could never divorce her
(Deuteronomy 22:25-29).
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 involved the case where a “single” woman was seized
and raped and the crime was discovered. Since this did not involve a breach in a
relationship, as it did with adultery, the punishment was less.
Deuteronomy 22:25-27 involves a case where a woman is raped who is engaged
to another man. The offender was to be put to death since legally she was
considered married to the man she was engaged to, thus it would constitute
adultery on the part of the offender, which demanded the death penalty. Of course,
the engaged woman who was raped was not put to death because the sex was
against her will.
Hamor Proposes Intermarriage to Jacob
Genesis 34:8-12 records Shechem’s father Hamor proposes that Jacob’s family
intermarry with his.
Genesis 34:8 But Hamor spoke with them, saying, “The soul of my son
Shechem longs for your daughter; please give her to him in marriage.”
(NASB95)
Jacob’s sons take control of the negotiations with Hamor. Hamor’s statement
“the soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter” expresses the fact that
Shechem is infatuated with Dinah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
194
Amazingly, yet demonstrating their immoral degeneracy, neither Shechem nor
his father Hamor offer an apology for the crime or express any remorse
whatsoever. Hamor speaks as if the rape of Dinah had never occurred, which
further infuriates her brothers. He deals with the family of Jacob only on account
of his son’s love interests and omits mention of the crime as though nothing had
ever happened.
Furthermore, Dinah is held captive in Shechem’s home and is never brought
home, which again further enrages Jacob’s sons and well it should have.
Genesis 34:9 “Intermarry with us; give your daughters to us and take our
daughters for yourselves.” (NASB95)
Hamor proposes marriage between his and Jacob’s family, which is out of the
question for the family of Jacob since the Canaanites were under a curse according
to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27.
Later on the Mosaic Law prohibited the Israelites from intermarrying with the
Canaanites since the latter would take the former away from their relationship with
God and lead them into idolatry, which would result in divine discipline upon the
nation of Israel (See Deuteronomy 7:1-4).
Satan, who is the great enemy of the nation of Israel, is behind this proposal
since acceptance of this proposal would have meant the absorption of the Israelites
by the Canaanites and the loss of their identity, thus preventing the birth of the
Messiah.
The question arises as to how Jacob’s sons were to secure wives for themselves
in the land of Canaan if they were prohibited from marrying Canaanite women.
After the conflict between the Arameans and Jacob, the option of returning to
Paddan Aram to secure a wife was essentially ruled out.
More than likely, since Jacob had four different wives, they could have married
among themselves even as Esau married the daughters of Ishmael. Also, Jacob’s
sons could have married Canaanite women if they accepted Christ as their Savior
and adhered to having their children circumcised, which was required by God of
His covenant people.
Remember that this curse upon Canaan was conditional meaning that any
Canaanite who placed their faith in the God of Israel, Jesus Christ, could escape it.
An example is Rahab the harlot who was a Canaanite and placed her faith in the
God of Israel, Jesus Christ and after a period of purification, was brought into
Israel’s society.
Genesis 34:10 “Thus you shall live with us, and the land shall be open
before you; live and trade in it and acquire property in it.” (NASB95)
Hamor presents an economic proposal to Jacob and his sons and urges them to
consider the economic advantages of such an arrangement. This economic proposal
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
195
would be very tempting to the family of Jacob who were nomadic herdsman and
therefore, resident aliens.
A resident alien was a person who moved into an area where he had neither
land nor clan ties and would be without traditional tribal legal support and
protection and would be vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Therefore, the
proposal to Jacob and his sons by Hamor would be tempting since it would be a
valuable provision to resident aliens like Jacob and his sons and would meet the
basic need of a resident alien.
However, it also presents the greatest temptation and obstacle to the covenant
people of God, Israel, namely the lust of the eyes and flesh. This temptation
originates with the cosmic system of Satan and is one that God’s people have been
frequently exposed to throughout history. This economic proposal is based upon
intermarriage with the Canaanites and so therefore by accepting it, would be
disobeying God’s will, which prohibited marriage to the Canaanites.
Acceptance of this proposal would in effect be love for the cosmic system of
Satan, which believer’s are prohibited from doing (See 1 John 2:15-17). So
Hamor’s economic proposal would be appealing to the lust patterns of the old
Adamic sin natures of Jacob’s family as well as the lust of their eyes. Therefore,
Satan has inspired this economic proposal to take Jacob’s family away from the
plan of God for their family.
Also, in Genesis 34:23, Hamor’s proposal was designed to absorb all the wealth
of Jacobs’ family into Shechemite society.
Genesis 34:11 Shechem also said to her father and to her brothers, “If I
find favor in your sight, then I will give whatever you say to me.” (NASB95)
Shechem interrupts his father Hamor and begins to speak to both Jacob and
Dinah’s brothers, inviting them to name their price for the bride-price.
Genesis 34:12 “Ask me ever so much bridal payment and gift, and I will
give according as you say to me; but give me the girl in marriage.” (NASB95)
The terms “bridal payment” (Hebrew: mohar) is a reference to the “brideprice” which refers to the compensation paid to the family of the bride for the loss
of the bride’s presence and services and her potential offspring and would
demonstrate proof to the bride’s family that she would be well cared for by
bridegroom.
The “bride-price” must not be confused with a “dowry,” since the latter was
provided by the bride’s family whereas the former was provided by the groom.
In the case of a rape of an unengaged virgin, the Mosaic Law demanded
payment of fifty shekels of silver and marriage without the possibility of divorce
according to Deuteronomy 22:28-29.
The “gift” refers to a ceremonial gift that would be given to Dinah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
196
Shechem’s offer expresses the fact that he recognizes that he needs to make
restitution for the rape of Dinah.
Shechem’s demand “Give me the girl in marriage” demonstrates his
infatuation, personal love and affection for Dinah.
“Girl” is the noun na`arah, which signifies that Dinah was of marriageable age
meaning she was approximately thirteen or fourteen years of age and was
considered a “young woman.”
Jacob’s Sons Respond with a Deceitful Proposal
Genesis 34:13-17 records Jacob’s sons responding to Hamor and Shechem’s
proposals by deceitfully proposing circumcision as the condition to be met by them
and their constituents in order for Jacob’s family to accept Hamor’s proposals.
Genesis 34:13 But Jacob's sons answered Shechem and his father Hamor
with deceit, because he had defiled Dinah their sister. 14 They said to them,
“We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for
that would be a disgrace to us. 15 Only on this condition will we consent to
you: if you will become like us, in that every male of you be circumcised, 16
then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for
ourselves, and we will live with you and become one people. 17 But if you will
not listen to us to be circumcised, then we will take our daughter and go.”
(NASB95)
Genesis 34:25 reveals that Simeon and Levi are involved in these negotiations
with Shechem and his father Hamor and are the ones who hatched the deceitful
plan to propose that the men of Shechem submit to circumcision as the condition to
be met in order for Jacob’s family to accept Hamor’s proposals.
In Genesis 49:5-7, Jacob under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit rebukes
Simeon and Levi for their conduct in dealing with the rape of Dinah indicating that
these two alone hatched the plan and that Jacob was totally unaware of their
intentions and was thus innocent of murder.
The fact that Jacob’s sons responded to Hamor’s proposals with deceit reveals
that the fruit does not fall too far from the tree since Jacob’s sons manifest the
deceitful character that originated from the old Adamic sin nature of their father
Jacob.
“Circumcised” is the verb mul, which refers to the act of cutting of the foreskin
of the male’s penis and was given as a sign to Abraham and his biological
descendants that they were set apart by God and yet was not given to justify or
save them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
197
Genesis 17:9-14 records that the Lord gave Abraham and his descendants the
ritual of circumcision to observe as a sign to ratify the covenant that He established
with Abraham when he left Haran.
The ceremony of circumcision consisted in cutting away the foreskin, the hood
or fold of skin covering the head of the male organ, which was generally done by
means of a sharp knife, but in more primitive times sharp stones were used (Ex.
4:25; Josh. 5:2, flint knives).
The sexual act and reproductive organs and processes were created by God to
be enjoyed by both the man and the woman in marriage and received the full
blessing of God (Gen. 1:28; 9:1). But with the Fall of Adam and the Woman, the
sex organs and sex act became vehicles of sin and corruption since Satan led man
into sexual debauchery, corrupting the institution of marriage in every conceivable
way in order to stop God’s purpose for man and his redemption. Therefore, we see
a symbolic meaning of the act of circumcision where the cutting of the foreskin
spoke of a surgical removal, a complete separation, from the sins of the flesh so
widely prevalent in the world around Abraham and his descendants.
The nations and tribes around Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were involved in sins
largely centered in the misuse of the male organ in adultery, fornication and
sodomy. Circumcision symbolized to the Jewish man that he was a member of an
elect nation, a peculiar people, distinctly holy before God, in relation to sexual
conduct, so it came indirectly to speak of holiness in every phase of life. Therefore,
the organ of the male body that was used for procreation is consecrated to God (cf.
Deut. 30:6; Jer. 4:4) and failure to submit to circumcision demonstrated one’s overt
unwillingness to obey the Lord (cf. Leviticus 20:7).
According to Genesis 17:9-14 and Romans 4:1-11, circumcision was to be the
distinguishing mark upon the organ of procreation among Abraham’s biological
descendants, the Jews who had entered into the Abrahamic covenant and served as
confirmation of Abraham’s lineage to fulfill their covenantal responsibility. The
ordinance of circumcision could “not” save man but was to be the distinguishing
sign of the Jewish nation from the other nations.
God has not commanded circumcision of the flesh for Christians (Acts 15;
Galatians 5). Circumcision of the flesh is useless unless there is a circumcision of
the heart, which refers to exercising faith alone in Christ alone resulting in
regeneration (Deuteronomy 30:6). Therefore, faith in Christ is what is important to
God and not whether you are circumcised or not (Colossians 2:11).
Abraham was first justified by his faith and then he was given circumcision as a
badge or a mark that he was saved and set apart by God (See Romans 4:1-13). The
first Church Council in Jerusalem that is recorded in Acts 15 recognized in the
Scriptures that a Jew does not get saved through the practice of circumcision but
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
198
through faith alone in Christ, thus the Gentiles were not required to be circumcised
(Galatians 6:15).
Therefore, even if the Shechemites submitted to circumcision, they did not
become a member of God’s covenant people and were still under the Canaanite
curse unless they exercised faith in the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ. The
moral outrage as expressed by Jacob’s sons towards the rape of their sister was
totally justified and appropriate but the manner in which they dealt with the rape of
their sister was “not” justified and totally inappropriate. They dishonored God by
using circumcision as the means to immobilize Shechem and Hamor and theirs
subjects so that they could be murdered. The very holiness that Jacob’s sons
honored by expressing anger over the rape of their sister Dinah, they dishonored by
murdering the Shechemites.
Jacob and his sons should have done the following in dealing with this problem
with the rape of Dinah. First of all, they should have prayed to God for guidance in
this difficult situation.
Secondly, they should have immediately demanded that Dinah be returned to
them and refused to negotiate her marriage to Shechem since the latter was a
Canaanite and Jacob’s family was prohibited from intermarrying with Canaanites
according to Noah’s prophecy recorded in Genesis 9:24-27. The only possible way
that they could have entered into negotiations with Shechem was if he accepted the
Lord as His Savior and then submitted to the sign of the Abrahamic covenant,
which is circumcision.
As we noted under the Mosaic Law in Israel, the rape of an unengaged or
unmarried woman like Dinah did not require the death penalty. But rather, it would
have required fifty shekels of silver being paid to the victim’s family as the brideprice and there would not be a possibility of divorce if the father of the victim
agreed to marriage (See Exodus 22:16-17; Deuteronomy 22:25-29).
However, in Jacob’s day, the Mosaic Law was not yet given and furthermore,
Dinah was not raped by an Israelite but rather by a Canaanite and the family of
Jacob was prohibited from intermarrying Canaanites because of the prophecy of
Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27. Therefore, if Shechem did not become a
believer and then submit to circumcision, then Jacob and his sons should have
asked for the return of Dinah.
No military action would have been required but rather Jacob and his sons
should have simply taken Dinah and then separated from the Canaanites as they
should have done in the first place. However, if Shechem did not return Dinah,
then that would have been considered an act of war, which would have called for
military action in order to rescue Dinah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
199
If Shechem did return Dinah, then Simeon and Levi should have done nothing
to him and his father and the inhabitants of their city but rather should have waited
for the Lord to deal with Shechem and Hamor in His perfect timing.
Romans 12:19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for
the wrath of God, for it is written, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL
REPAY,” says the Lord. (NASB95)
The military action taken later by Simeon and Levi when they killed all the men
of the city of Shechem was totally unnecessary and inappropriate because Dinah
was not a prisoner of war but rather the object of a man’s infatuation and love and
affection (See Genesis 34:3, 19)!
Shechem and Hamor Sell Their Scheme to Their Subjects
In Genesis 34:18-24, we see Shechem and Hamor deceitfully selling to their
subjects the proposed condition of circumcision so as to get Jacob’s sons to agree
to their intermarriage and economic proposals.
Genesis 34:18 Now their words seemed reasonable to Hamor and Shechem,
Hamor's son. (NASB95)
The terms of the agreement did not sound strange to Shechem and Hamor since
circumcision was not exclusive to Israel. But was also performed by several Asian
Oriental groups such as the Muslims as well as the Edomites, Moabites,
Ammonites, and was also practiced by Egyptian priests and those who wanted to
be initiated into their sacred mysteries.
Circumcision among these nations was a rite of passage but was not performed
on infants, thus the sign of circumcision given to Abraham to be performed on
infants eight days old was unique in the ancient world. Therefore, Shechem and his
father Hamor agree to the condition of circumcision without hesitation.
Of course, this would have been against the will of God since the prophecy of
Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 prohibited the Israelites from intermarrying with
the Hivites who were a branch of the Canaanites. Furthermore, circumcision was
“not” the means by which a Gentile became a part of God’s covenant people Israel,
but rather it was through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, the fact that the
Shechemites agreed to submit to circumcision without having faith in the Lord
God, Jesus Christ was meaningless and thus the condition was meaningless and
deceitful.
Jacob’s sons were correct in opposing the mixing of the chosen seed with the
seed of the Canaanites but wrong in adopting the means they selected to achieve
their end. This demonstrates that they were “chips off the old block,” Jacob since
they too, like their father in his younger days, thought that the ends justified the
means.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
200
Shechem and Hamor readily agree to the terms of the agreement because it was
their intent to intermarry with the Israelites all along and dispossess them of their
possessions. This is indicated in that Shechem and Hamor sold Jacob a tract of
land, which was unusual since Middle East landowners in the days of the
patriarchs were reluctant to sell land to nomadic herdsman like Jacob.
If you recall in Genesis 23, Abraham sought to buy a piece of property as a
permanent possession from the Hittites in order to bury his wife Sarah but the
Hittites were reluctant to sell their land to Abraham as a permanent possession,
which expressed a pervasive and deep rooted attitude throughout the Middle East.
Knowing this reluctance on the part of Middle East landowners in the days of
the patriarchs, the fact that Hamor was willing to sell a piece of property to Jacob
was significant in that it demonstrated the desire of Hamor to marry into the family
of Jacob, which was very wealthy.
The wealth of Jacob’s family was very appealing to Hamor, making Jacob’s
family appealing to intermarry with and thus Hamor was more than willing to part
with a piece of property. This intermarriage would mean that the Canaanites would
absorb Jacob’s clan, making them a part of their culture and people, both of which
were decadent.
Genesis 34:19 The young man did not delay to do the thing, because he was
delighted with Jacob's daughter. Now he was more respected than all the
household of his father. (NASB95)
“Delighted” is the verb chaphets, which expresses Shechem’s “infatuation”
with Dinah and his great sexual desire and personal love towards her because of
her physical beauty and character as a person.
“Infatuation” is the state of having a foolish, unreasoning and all-absorbing
passion for someone. Shechem’s infatuation with Dinah gave him a lack of
discernment so that he was blinded by the real intent of the terms of the agreement
presented to him and his father by Jacob’s sons.
The statement “he (Shechem) was delighted with Jacob’s daughter (Dinah)”
corresponds with the statement in Genesis 34:3.
The statement “he (Shechem) was more respected than all the household of
his father” means that Shechem was respected among his fellow Hivites because
of his high social position as the son of Hamor and his accompanying wealth as the
son of Hamor. This statement does “not” mean that he was respected or honored
because of his character but rather because of his high social position and that he
was as a result very wealthy.
Shechem’s social status among the Hivites would enable him to sell to his
fellow citizens the terms of the agreement presented to him by Jacob’s son.
Genesis 34:20 So Hamor and his son Shechem came to the gate of their city
and spoke to the men of their city, saying, 21 “these men are friendly with us;
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
201
therefore let them live in the land and trade in it, for behold, the land is large
enough for them. Let us take their daughters in marriage, and give our
daughters to them.” (NASB95)
In the days of the patriarchs, the gate of the city was the place where the elders
of the city held a council to discuss both public and private business and legal
transactions as well as plans for war. A city gate was the physical symbol of
collective authority and power and was usually made of monumental edifices
shading the narrow passageway and side chambers of the city entrance and it was
here that the elders and officials sat on stone benches to adjudicate legal matters
and discuss local affairs.
The phrase “their city” appears twice in Genesis 34:30 emphasizing the power
and authority that Shechem and his father Hamor possessed over the Hivites in the
city of Shechem.
Hamor as ruler of Shechem had dominion over rural territory as well as the
urban center but did not have absolute power since he does not act as a king in that
he calls a town meeting in order to present his plans before the citizens and obtains
approval by means of persuasive argument rather than by a royal decree.
A comparison of Genesis 34:9-17 with Genesis 34:20-24 reveals that Hamor
and Shechem say nothing about their own personal involvement in the matter,
namely that Shechem desires to marry Dinah. They begin by attempting to sell
their fellow Hivites on the economic advantages of intermarriage with the
Israelites.
Their statement “these men (Jacob’s sons) are friendly with us” reveals their
lack of discernment and that the deception of Jacob’s sons was successful.
Genesis 34:22 “Only on this condition will the men consent to us to live
with us, to become one people: that every male among us be circumcised as
they are circumcised.” (NASB95)
In Genesis 34:22 Hamor and Shechem present to their fellow citizens the
condition attached to the agreement with the Israelites, namely, all their males
must be circumcised.
Genesis 34:23 “Will not their livestock and their property and all their
animals be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will live with us.”
(NASB95)
In Genesis 34:23, Hamor and Shechem present to their fellow citizens the
economic advantages of intermarrying with the Israelites and accepting the
condition attached to the agreement.
“Livestock” is the noun miqneh, which refers to sheep and goats.
“Property” is the noun qinyan, which denotes that which refers to the
Israelites’ material possessions.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
202
“Animals” is the noun behemah, which refers to all types of “domestic
animals,” which are creatures that are four footed and whose habitat is on land.
A comparison of Genesis 34:10 with Genesis 34:23 reveal that Hamor and
Shechem say nothing to their fellow Hivites that they had promised the Israelites
that by intermarrying with them that the Israelites could acquire Hivite property.
Instead they say to their fellow citizens that by agreeing to the condition of the
agreement with the Israelites that they the Hivites would absorb the Israelite
livestock, property and domestic animals. This reveals that the Hamor and
Shechem’s proposal of intermarriage with the Israelites was designed to absorb the
wealth of the Israelites and dispossess them of their possessions and so they are
guilty of double dealing.
Like many political leaders in the world today, Hamor and Shechem make their
own lust appear to be in the interest of the community. Hamor and Shechem were
not only dishonest and deceitful towards the Israelites but also with their own
fellow citizens. They were being deceitful with the Israelites just as the Israelites
were being deceitful with them.
Genesis 34:24 All who went out of the gate of his city listened to Hamor
and to his son Shechem, and every male was circumcised, all who went out of
the gate of his city. (NASB95)
The Hivites agree to submit to circumcision in order to take advantage of the
Israelites and gain wealth and without faith in Jesus Christ. The Hivites agree to
circumcise all their males because of their love for money and possessions, which
will subsequently lead to their deaths. Little did Hamor and Shechem and their
constituents realize that Jacob’s sons were out to avenge the rape of their sister
Dinah.
The repetition that appears in the statement “every male was circumcised, all
who went out of the gate of his (Hamor’s) city were circumcised” underscores
that not one male was left to defend the city.
The phrase “all who went out of the city” is a military term indicating that all
the men of Shechem that were liable for military service were circumcised thus
leaving them incapacitated and unable to defend their city and thus we can see that
the deception of Jacob’s sons was successful.
Jacob’s Sons Murder Shechem, Hamor and the Inhabitants of the City of Shechem
Genesis 34:25-29 presents to us the record of the murder of Shechem and his
father Hamor as well as all the men of the city of Shechem by Jacob’s sons in
retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
203
Genesis 34:25 Now it came about on the third day, when they were in pain,
that two of Jacob's sons, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, each took his
sword and came upon the city unawares, and killed every male. (NASB95)
“Simeon” was the second child that Leah bore to Jacob and his name means,
“the Lord has heard” according to Genesis 29:33.
“Levi” was the third child that Leah bore to Jacob and his name means, “my
husband will be attached to me” according to Genesis 29:34.
If you recall, Dinah was the seventh child that Leah bore to Jacob and only girl
and her birth is recorded in Genesis 30:21 and her name means, “judgment.”
Therefore, we can see that Simeon and Levi were Dinah’s “full” brothers and not
“half” brothers and thus she in turn was their baby sister.
Undoubtedly, Simeon and Levi took their servants along with them to kill the
inhabitants of Shechem since it would take more than just these two to kill all the
men of the city. They waited three days to attack the city since after three days the
pain from the circumcision would be at its worst.
“Killed” is the verb haragh, which is used in a technical legal sense of
murdering someone by violence.
The Word of God prohibits murder according to Exodus 20:13 and is one of the
sins that God hates according to Proverbs 6:16-19 and according to Genesis 9:6 is
to be punished through capital punishment.
“Unawares” is the noun betach, which means that Simeon and Levi and their
servants attacked the city of Shechem “unmolested” or in other words, they met
“no resistance” due to the fact that all the men of the city were incapacitated
because of the effects of being circumcised three days prior.
Genesis 34:26 They killed Hamor and his son Shechem with the edge of the
sword, and took Dinah from Shechem's house, and went forth. (NASB95)
The fact that Dinah was raped by Shechem and that Simeon and Levi took
Dinah from Shechem’s house indicates that Dinah was held against her will or in
other words she was held hostage by Shechem even though he treated her well
according to Genesis 34:3. Therefore, we can see that Shechem and his father
Hamor had never offered honest negotiations with Simeon and Levi who felt that
they were negotiating with a gun held to their heads.
The fact that Dinah was held hostage by Shechem indicates that Shechem and
Hamor had attempted to impose their will on Jacob’s family in the preceding
negotiations, thus, the Shechemites brought down this violence upon themselves.
The fact that Dinah was held hostage by Shechem further indicates that Jacob’s
sons were being made an offer by Shechem and Hamor that they couldn’t refuse.
Jacob’s sons did not have the option of declining Shechem and Hamor’s
proposal of intermarriage with Dinah held captive against her will by Shechem.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
204
Therefore, they felt justified and that they had no recourse but to attack the
Shechemites in order to rescue their sister.
Remember, Jacob’s sons were up against an entire city and therefore, felt
justified in using deceit in the negotiations with Hamor and Shechem. Of course,
they did have an option, which they did not use and which option was to go to the
Lord in prayer and ask for His guidance. Therefore, the course of action they took
against the Shechemites was not blind fury but part of a premeditated plan to
rescue their sister.
First they attacked the men of the city, which was followed by the killing of
Shechem and his father Hamor and then lastly, they freed their sister. Remember,
that they not only had to deal with all possible resistance but also future retaliation.
Although Simeon and Levi were justified in their anger due to the fact that their
sister Dinah was not only raped but also was held hostage by Shechem, they were
“not” justified in murdering innocent people, namely, the men of the city of
Shechem since they had nothing to do with the rape and kidnapping of Dinah.
They were also not justified in killing Shechem and his father Hamor since the
Lord never sanctioned such a thing.
Genesis 34:27 Jacob's sons came upon the slain and looted the city, because
they had defiled their sister. (NASB95)
The causal clause “because they defiled their sister” expresses Simeon and
Levi’s motive for killing the men of the city of Shechem and is not used by the
narrator to justify their actions but to emphasize that the looting was not done for
the love of money but to avenge the rape of their sister.
The fact that Simeon and Levi and their servants looted the city indicates that
they considered the rape of their sister and her being held hostage by Shechem as
acts of war requiring military action and the plundering of the city and the taking
of prisoners of war.
The actions of Simeon and Levi were totally unnecessary unlike Abraham’s
military action, which he took against the four Eastern Mesopotamian Kings to
rescue his nephew Lot. Military action was necessary and appropriate by Abraham
to rescue Lot since Lot who was a citizen of Sodom was taken as a prisoner of war
by the Four Eastern Mesopotamian Kings after they had defeated the Five Dead
Sea Kings (See Genesis 14:1-16).
The military action taken by Simeon and Levi was totally unnecessary and
inappropriate because Dinah was not a prisoner of war but rather the object of a
man’s infatuation and love and affection (See Genesis 34:3, 19)!
Genesis 34:28 They took their flocks and their herds and their donkeys,
and that which was in the city and that which was in the field; 29 and they
captured and looted all their wealth and all their little ones and their wives,
even all that was in the houses. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
205
The Lord would not have approved the plundering of Shechem, which was a
Canaanite city and He would not have approved of the taking captive the women
and children of the city since later on in Israel’s history, the Lord prohibited Israel
from plundering the Canaanites but rather everything had to be killed or destroyed
(See Deuteronomy 20:16-18).
Further indicating that Simeon and Levi were out of the will of God is the
inconsistency of their actions where they took the wives of the men of the city of
Shechem as hostages when God prohibited marriage to Canaanite women!
Simeon and Levi considered this plunder as the spoils of war but this was
totally unnecessary and inappropriate since Dinah was not a prisoner of war but
rather the object of a man’s infatuation and love and affection!
Jacob’s Reaction to the Murder of the Shechemites
We complete our study of Genesis 34 by noting Genesis 34:30-31, which gives
us the record of the reaction of Jacob and his sons to this event.
Genesis 34:30 Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have brought
trouble on me by making me odious among the inhabitants of the land, among
the Canaanites and the Perizzites; and my men being few in number, they will
gather together against me and attack me and I will be destroyed, I and my
household.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s reaction to the massacre of the men of the city of Shechem and the
plundering of that city by his sons Simeon and Levi reveals that he is out of
fellowship with God and again living according to his old Adamic sin nature.
Notice that Jacob never condemns his sons for the massacre, nor for abusing the
rite of circumcision or even for breach of contract! But rather, he simply fears the
consequences of their actions, which would make him unpopular with the
inhabitants of the land and could result in the death of himself and his household.
Jacob demonstrates no moral outrage or righteous indignation towards the
actions of his sons just as he failed to show no moral outrage or righteous
indignation for the rape of his own daughter Dinah. Not only this, but notice that
he shows no concern whatsoever for his daughter Dinah who has gone through a
harrowing experience of being raped, held hostage and seeing the massacre of
innocent people!
The patriarch cares more about himself and his own public relations rather than
his sons’ actions or the well-being of his own daughter or how the massacre of
Shechem misrepresented the holiness of God, which he and his family were to
reflect. His fear of retribution by the inhabitants of the area surrounding Shechem
reveals that he fails to take into consideration the Lord’s unconditional promise to
protect him and his household.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
206
The Lord had delivered him from Laban and Esau, when Jacob was in the right
but now he could not see how he could expect divine protection when his family
was obviously in the wrong.
Remember, Jacob had no idea that his sons were fixing to kill the Shechemites.
In Genesis 49:5-7, Jacob under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit rebukes Simeon
and Levi for their conduct in dealing with the rape of Dinah indicating that these
two alone hatched the plan and that Jacob was totally unaware of their intentions
and was thus innocent of murder.
Therefore, the criticism of Jacob for failing to rebuke Simeon and Levi for their
murderous plan is unwarranted since he never knew of their plan in the first place.
However, the criticism of Jacob for remaining silent while his sons proposed
circumcision as the condition for intermarriage with the inhabitants of Shechem
who were a Canaanite people is warranted since intermarriage with the Canaanites
was out of the question since they were under a curse according to Genesis 9:25.
Jacob failed as the leader of his family by remaining silent while his sons
proposed circumcision as the condition for intermarriage with the Canaanites. He
knew that this was wrong since his own father Isaac prohibited him from marrying
a Canaanite woman like his brother Esau.
In fact, this was the reason why Isaac sent him to Paddan Aram to marry an
Aramean woman, who were Shemites. Jacob should have taken control and
stopped the negotiations with Shechem and Hamor once he heard his sons propose
circumcision as a condition for intermarriage with the inhabitants of Shechem
since the Lord prohibited his family to intermarry with Canaanites.
He should have demanded that his daughter be returned to him and then
immediately leave the area and return to Bethel to fulfill his vow to the Lord.
Therefore, we see that the massacre of Shechem could have been avoided if Jacob
functioned in his role as the patriarch of the family and had taken control from the
beginning.
So we see that his criticism of his sons seemed to them as ridiculous and
hypocrisy on his part since he was complaining about the action they had taken but
what had “he” done? Had he forgotten that his daughter Dinah was raped by
Shechem, a Canaanite who then had the audacity to hold her hostage while he
negotiated a marriage agreement with Jacob’s family? Where was Jacob when
intermarriage with Canaanites was proposed to his family by Shechem and Hamor,
which was against the will of the Lord?
Later on the Mosaic Law prohibited the Israelites from intermarrying with the
Canaanites since the latter would take the former away from their relationship with
God and lead them into idolatry, which would result in divine discipline upon the
nation of Israel (See Deuteronomy 7:1-4).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
207
Satan, who is the great enemy of the nation of Israel, is behind this proposal
since acceptance of this proposal would have meant the absorption of the Israelites
by the Canaanites and the loss of their identity, thus preventing the birth of Christ.
If Jacob had known a better way to solve the problem with Dinah and Shechem,
then why didn’t he speak up? Where was Israel, the man who prevailed with God
and men by appropriating by faith the power of God in his life? Why didn’t Jacob
speak up when he knew his son’s proposal of circumcision was wrong and that
intermarriage with Canaanites was prohibited by God?
The statements made by Jacob as recorded in Genesis 34:30 reveal that he was
a people pleaser at this point in the narrative rather than a God pleaser. He wanted
to get along with his neighbors even if it meant compromising his relationship with
God and disobeying Him! So we can see that his sons thought that Jacob’s
criticism was total hypocrisy and unwarranted.
“By making me odious” is the verb ba’ash, which literally means, “to stink”
but is used in Genesis 34:30 figuratively by Jacob to describe the massacre of
Shechem by his sons as making him “abhorred” by the inhabitants of the area
surrounding Shechem.
The “Canaanites” lived in the land west of the Jordan River before the
conquest of Joshua and whose western border was the Mediterranean Sea (Gen.
13:12; Num. 33:51).
The “Perizzites” refers to a tribe of people who inhabited the mountainous
region eventually taken over by the tribes of Ephraim and Judah (cf. Josh. 11:3;
17:5; Judg. 1:4f.) and because they were related to the Canaanites, the term
“Perizzites” often refers to this entire group (cf. Gen. 13:7; 34:30).
According to Joshua 11:3 and 17:15, the “Perizzites” occupied the central hill
country, which would be the region of Shechem.
Genesis 34:31 But they said, “Should he treat our sister as a harlot?”
(NASB95)
Notice that Jacob’s sons use the phrase “our sister” and not “your daughter”
revealing the tremendous rift that has taken place between Jacob and his sons.
The rhetorical question put forth by Jacob’s sons to their father emphatically
asserts the anticipated negative answer and condemns Jacob. However, Jacob’s
prophecy concerning Simeon and Levi recorded in Genesis 49:5-7 condemns
Jacob’s sons.
Jacob failed in his leadership role in his family by remaining silent when his
boys proposed circumcision as the condition for intermarriage with the Canaanites
since he did not give appropriate guidance and direction to his children. Simeon
and Levi were justified in being angry for the rape of their sister and her being held
hostage but were wrong in the actions they took to deal with the problem.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
208
Chapter Ten: Jacob’s Return to Bethel
God Commands Jacob to Return to Bethel
Genesis 35 completes the eighth book in Genesis, which began in Genesis
25:19 and presents the family history of Isaac and in particular Jacob whose name
was later changed by the Lord to “Israel” who would carry on the line of Christ
and be the progenitor of the nation of Israel.
The following is an outline of Genesis 35: (1) Jacob fulfills his vow to God at
Bethel (Genesis 35:1-15). (2) Death of Rachel and Birth of Benjamin (Genesis
35:16-20) (3) Reuben’s Incest (Genesis 35:21-22a). (4) Jacob’s Genealogy
(Genesis 35:22b-26). (5) Death and Burial of Isaac at Hebron by Jacob and Esau
(Genesis 35:27-29).
The following is an outline of the first section contained in Genesis 35:1-15: (1)
God commands Jacob to ascend to Bethel and build an altar in fulfillment of his
vow (Genesis 35:1). (2) Jacob obeys, purges his household of idols and builds altar
(Genesis 35:2-7). (3) Death of Deborah (Genesis 32:8). (4) Preincarnate Christ
appears to Jacob and renews Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 35:9-13). (5) Jacob
rededicates the stone pillar and renews name of Bethel (Genesis 35:14-15).
Genesis 35:1 gives us the record of God commanding Jacob to go up to Bethel
and fulfill his vow to make an altar to worship Him there.
Genesis 35:1 Then God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and live
there, and make an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you fled
from your brother Esau.” (NASB95)
Jacob has not heard from God in approximately ten years when He gave Jacob
the command to leave Paddan Aram and return to Canaan (See Genesis 31:3),
which is indicated first of all from the age of Dinah in Shechem as compared to her
age at the time of Jacob’s departure. When Jacob left Paddan-aram, she must have
been a very young child, for Dinah was born after Leah had borne Jacob six sons
(cf. 30:21) and by the time Jacob was in Shechem, Dinah was of a marriageable
age (cf. 34:1ff.).
Secondly, we know that Joseph was seventeen when he was sold into slavery,
and this seems to be not too long after Jacob went to Bethel for the second time
(37:2). Since we know that Joseph was born at the end of Jacob’s fourteen year
contract with Laban (30:25-26), he would have been about six years old when
Jacob left Paddan-aram (cf. 31:41), thus, there is a period of nearly ten years
between Jacob’s departure from Paddan-aram and his final arrival at Bethel.
Notice that Moses does “not” use the covenant name of God Yahweh, “Lord”
but rather he uses Elohim, “God,” which emphasizes the sovereignty of God,
which refers to God’s complete power over all of creation, so that He exercises His
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
209
will absolutely, without any necessary conditioning by a finite will or wills.
Therefore, the noun Elohim, “God” emphasizes to the reader that God has
sovereignly determined to intervene to protect Jacob and prevent the inhabitants
surrounding Shechem to attack Jacob and his household, thus protecting the line of
Christ by commanding him to return to Bethel.
Also, the noun Elohim emphasizes that Jacob is under God’s authority, which is
expressed by God commanding him to leave Shechem and return to Bethel.
Furthermore, the noun Elohim, “God” also emphasizes the omnipotence of
God, which has protected Jacob from Laban, Esau and would now protect him
from the Canaanites and Perizzites whom Jacob feared would seek to attack him in
retaliation for the massacre of the Shechemites by his sons.
“Arise” is the verb qum, which is an idiomatic expression describing a
preparatory action needed to be taken so that a primary action can take place and
involves preparation to change location as God commands Jacob to return to
Bethel.
“Go up” is the verb `alah, which indicates that God is commanding Jacob to
“ascend” to Bethel since Shechem is approximately 1,880 feet above sea level and
Bethel approximately 2,890 feet above sea level.
God’s command to Jacob is a double entendre symbolizing Jacob’s spiritual
ascent to God since he has been in a spiritual trough ever since arriving in
Shechem where he procrastinated and made a poor decision by purchasing land
from Hamor, which led to the rape of his daughter Dinah and the massacre of the
city of Shechem.
“Bethel” literally means, “house of God” and was approximately ten miles
north of Jerusalem, which according to Genesis 28:19, was originally called
“Luz,” until Jacob changed the name to memorialize his encounter with the
preincarnate Christ.
Bethel was only thirty miles away from Shechem, and yet it was ten years since
Jacob’s return into Canaan and it was over thirty years since he had made his vow
to return to Bethel and build an altar there to worship the Lord.
“Live” is the verb yashav, which means, “to live in a place for a period of time”
and does “not” mean to live in a place permanently. Therefore, God wanted Jacob
to live in Bethel long enough to fulfill his vow and build the altar he promised to
build thirty years prior.
If you recall, in Genesis 28:10-21, Jacob never built an altar to the Lord since
he did not have any materials to do so, nor animals to sacrifice but promised to
return to Bethel and do so when God returned him to the land of Canaan.
“Altar” is the noun mizbeach, which was composed of material, constructed of
earth and stones and was the place Jacob and his family was to worship the Lord.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
210
This is the first time that God commanded one of the patriarchs to build an
altar. God reminds Jacob that approximately thirty years before that He had
appeared to him at Bethel while he was fleeing from Esau and promised to protect
and prosper Jacob and return him to the land of Canaan.
Therefore, in Genesis 35:1, God commands Jacob to return to Bethel to finish
what he began with the pillar and build an altar as he promised God some thirty
years before when he was fleeing Canaan because of Esau’s threat to kill him once
their father Isaac had died.
God has kept His promise to not only to protect and prosper Jacob while he was
in exile in Paddan Aram with his uncle Laban but also He fulfilled His promise to
bring him back to the land of Canaan safe and sound. Now it was time for Jacob to
keep his end of the bargain. God was rebuking Jacob by reminding Jacob of his
vow and commanding him to return to Bethel to fulfill it and build an altar there to
worship Him.
The content of the divine command informs us as to what Jacob had promised
to do when God returned him to the land of Canaan, namely, to build an altar there
in order to worship the Lord (cf. Numbers 3:2; Ecclesiastes 5:3-4).
Obedience to this command would take great faith on the part of Jacob since the
Canaanites and Perizzites would have been hostile due to the massacre by his
people of the city of Shechem.
Jacob Obeys God’s Command to Return to Bethel
In Genesis 35:2-7, we have the account of Jacob obeying God’s command to
return to Bethel and build an altar to Him there in fulfillment of the vow he made
to God thirty years before. Also, Genesis 35:8 records the death of Deborah who
was Rebekah’s nurse.
Genesis 35:2 So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him,
“Put away the foreign gods which are among you, and purify yourselves and
change your garments 3 and let us arise and go up to Bethel, and I will make
an altar there to God, who answered me in the day of my distress and has
been with me wherever I have gone.” (NASB95)
In preparation for his trip to Bethel, Jacob exercises his patriarchal and spiritual
authority over his household by purging it of idolatry, which led to the massacre of
the city of Shechem by Jacob’s sons.
“Put away” is the second person masculine plural hiphil imperative form of the
verb sur, which means, “to remove” the foreign gods that were being used by the
members of Jacob’s household.
“The foreign gods” are a reference to the teraphim, “household idols,” which
were small idols like figurines and were considered the family gods, which gave
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
211
the family protection and were kept on a god-shelf and were outlawed in Israel
(See 1 Samuel 15:23; 19:13; 2 Kings 23:24; Zechariah 10:2f.).
These gods were usually small figurines (two to three inches long), sometimes
carried on the body as charms, many of which archaeologists have discovered.
These “foreign gods” were acquired as part of the spoils of Shechem and were
undoubtedly used by the women of Shechem.
Also, they were used by the members of Jacob’s own household as indicated by
the masculine plural form of the verb sur, which means “all of you remove” the
foreign gods indicating that the command is directed towards Jacob’s own
household. It appears that the bad decision by Jacob to settle at Shechem not only
resulted in the rape of his daughter Dinah and the massacre of the city of Shechem
by his sons but it also appears to have exposed Jacob’s own sons to the idols of the
Shechemites.
The fact that Jacob’s sons were influenced by the idolatrous practices of the
Shechemites helps us to understand the reason why later on Israel’s history the
Lord commanded the Israelites to exterminate the Hittites, the Amorites,
Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites since these nations would be a bad
influence on them, leading them away from the worship of the Lord (cf.
Deuteronomy 20:17-28).
Idols open the door for demonic activity and the massacre carried out by
Simeon and Levi would show the presence of demons. This does not excuse the
behavior of the boys, but it makes it more plausible.
Deuteronomy 32:17 and 1 Corinthians 10:20 teach that the worship of idols is
connected to the worship of demons since the sacrificing to idols is in reality
sacrificing to demons who promote the worship of idols.
Therefore, it appears that Jacob’s sons and in particular Simeon and Levi were
demonically influenced, which resulted in their brutally killing all the men of the
city of Shechem as well as Hamor and his son Shechem.
Again, this does “not” excuse their actions since they chose to be involved in
the worship of idols, which opened them to demonic influence. Demonic
“influence” has to do with demons influencing the human soul whereas demon
“possession” has to do with demons indwelling the human body. The latter of
which can only take place in an unbeliever since demons will never indwell the
body of a believer since the believer’s body is permanently indwelt by all three
members of the Trinity (See Ephesians 4:5, Colossians 1:27, Romans 8:11).
Simeon and Levi were demonically “influenced” and not “possessed” since they
were believers.
Idolatry is the worship of something created as opposed to the worship of the
Creator Himself. Scores of references to idolatry appear in the Old Testament.
Exodus 20:3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
212
Exodus 20:23 “You shall not make other gods besides Me; gods of silver or
gods of gold, you shall not make for yourselves.” (NASB95)
Idolatry is not only the giving to any creature or human creation the honor or
devotion, which belongs to God alone, but also is putting anything ahead of your
relationship with God and which would prevent you from doing His will (1 Cor
10:14; Gal 5:20; Col 3:5; 1 Peter 4:3).
Ultimately in the New Testament idolatry came to mean, not only the giving to
any creature or human creation the honor or devotion which belonged to God
alone, but the giving to any human desire a precedence over God's will (1 Cor
10:14; Gal 5:20; Col 3:5; 1 Peter 4:3).
The command “remove the foreign gods, which are among you” means that
Jacob’s household must not only get back in fellowship with the Lord, which was
lost due to the practice of idolatry but they are to be dedicated and devoted to the
Lord by being obedient to Him (See Joshua 24:14, 23; Judges 10:16; 1 Samuel 7:34; 2 Chronicles 33:15).
The command to “purify yourselves” involves the confession of the sin of
idolatry to the Father as well as experiential sanctification, which is accomplished
by obedience to the Word of God.
Without the confession of sin and subsequent obedience to God’s Word,
sanctification can “not” be experienced by the believer. “Sanctification” is a
technical theological term for the believer who has been “set apart” through the
Baptism of the Spirit at the moment of salvation “in order to serve God
exclusively” and describes the process of producing the holiness of God in the
believer.
In Old Testament Israel and with the patriarchs there were purification rituals,
which symbolized the confession of sin and obedience to God and included the
bathing of the body, washing clothes and abstaining from sexual intercourse (See
Leviticus 14:8-9; 22:6-7; Numbers 8:7). These purification rituals symbolized the
rejection of idolatry and serving God exclusively (See Deuteronomy 7:25-26;
Jeremiah 2:23; 7:30).
The command “change your garments” symbolized the change of state by the
soul of the believer from a life of disobedience to obedience as well as a life
dedicated and devoted to God by means of the rejection of idolatry and obedience
to His Word.
The command “let arise and go up to Bethel and I will make an altar there
to God” expresses Jacob’s desire and intention to obey God’s command recorded
in Genesis 35:1 and fulfill his vow to build an altar there to worship the Lord.
“God” is not the usual Elohim but rather the singular form of the noun, which is
El in order to express a contrast between the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
who is the one and only true God and the foreign gods of the Canaanites.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
213
Obedience to God’s command to return to Bethel would take great courage on
the part of Jacob and his family since they would be traveling through potentially
hostile territory as a result of the massacre of Shechem by Jacob’s sons.
“The day of my distress” is a reference to the day Jacob left his father and
mother thirty years before as a result of Esau threatening to kill him because he
deceived their father into bestowing the blessing of the birthright upon him rather
than Esau.
“God who…has been with me wherever I have gone” is an acknowledgement
by Jacob that God has been faithful to him by fulfilling His promise that He made
to him at Bethel thirty years before to be with him, which is recorded in Genesis
28:15.
Genesis 35:4 So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods which they had and
the rings which were in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the oak which
was near Shechem. (NASB95)
Jacob’s family and those outside of his immediately family respond to the
exercise of his patriarchal and spiritual authority by handing over their foreign
gods to him to dispose of them. The earrings were given to Jacob because they too
were connected with the idolatrous practice of worshipping idols.
“Hid” is the verb taman, which means, “to hide an object so that it cannot be
found,” thus Jacob hid these teraphim and earrings so that they could not be found
so as to be used again by the Israelites.
“The oak that was near Shechem” is a reference to “the oak of Moreh” in
Shechem where the Lord first appeared to Abraham when he arrived from Haran
and was a well-known pagan site of worship in the days of the patriarchs (See
Genesis 12:6-9).
Genesis 35:5 As they journeyed, there was a great terror upon the cities
which were around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Jacob.
(NASB95)
“Great terror” is mistranslated and should be translated “the terror of God”
since the Hebrew text contains the noun chittah, “terror” and the noun Elohim,
“God.” Therefore, the terror experienced by the inhabitants that surrounded
Jacob’s family was a terror produced by God and prevented the surrounding cities
from attacking Jacob’s family.
The fact that God had to intervene to protect Jacob’s family indicates quite
clearly that the cities surrounding Shechem wanted to destroy Jacob’s family when
they heard that Shechem had been massacred by Jacob’s sons.
The fact that Jacob’s family was influenced by the kingdom of darkness by
being exposed to the idolatrous practices of the Canaanites and that God had to
intervene to protect Jacob’s family from the cities surrounding Shechem indicates
that Satan was seeking to destroy Jacob’s family.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
214
Satan was seeking to destroy Jacob’s family since they were the progenitors of
the nation of Israel, from which Christ would come who would destroy the works
of the devil and would fulfill the Abrahamic and Palestinian covenants and would
rule for a thousand years in Jerusalem with Israel as head of the nations.
Genesis 35:6 So Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of
Canaan, he and all the people who were with him. (NASB95)
Genesis 35:6 records Jacob obeying God’s command and arriving back in
Bethel, which was only thirty miles away from Shechem. The fact that God had
induced a panic upon the cities surrounding Shechem and that Jacob had arrived
with his entire family safely in the land of Canaan and back in Bethel was
fulfillment of the Lord’s promises to Jacob at Bethel thirty years before to be with
him and bring him back to Canaan (See Genesis 28:15-21).
Genesis 35:7 He built an altar there, and called the place El-bethel, because
there God had revealed Himself to him when he fled from his brother.
(NASB95)
The statement “he (Jacob) built an altar there (at Bethel)” reveals that Jacob
fulfilled his vow to build an altar at Bethel to worship the Lord when the Lord
brought him back to Canaan (See Genesis 28:22).
“God’s house” is a reference to both the altar and the place the Lord appeared
to Jacob when he fled thirty years before from his brother Esau.
The altar memorializes that God revealed Himself to Jacob at Bethel when he
was fleeing his brother Esau thirty years before, which is expressed by the name
“El-bethel.”
Genesis 35:8 Now Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, died, and she was buried
below Bethel under the oak; it was named Allon-bacuth. (NASB95)
Deborah’s name means, “honeybee” and she is described as Rebekah’s nurse.
The fact that Deborah’s name is mentioned indicates how highly regarded she was
not only by the family of Jacob but also by God the Holy Spirit who inspired
Moses to memorialize her death. That she was highly regarded and revered by
Jacob’s family is indicated by naming the oak tree, which they buried her under as
“Allon-bacuth,” which means, “the oak of weeping.”
The fact that Deborah’s death is recorded and not Rebekah’s is a rebuke of
Rebekah indicating God’s displeasure with her ordering Jacob to deceive her blind
husband Isaac into bestowing the blessing of the birthright upon Jacob rather than
Esau.
Jacob had known Deborah is entire life. She had come with Rebekah from
Paddan Aram when Rebekah left to marry Isaac (See Genesis 24:59) and she took
care of Jacob like a nanny. Of course, she did not go with Jacob when he fled Esau.
The fact that Deborah is recorded in Genesis 35:8 as being a member of Jacob’s
household clearly indicates that Jacob visited his father while he was living in
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
215
Shechem and demonstrates proof that Rebekah was dead at this time. More than
likely, when Jacob returned to visit his father at Hebron and found that his mother
was dead, and that Deborah was not really needed, he urged Deborah to join his
household to serve as a “senior advisor” to his servants as well as a surrogate
grandmother to his children.
God Appears to Jacob
In Genesis 35:9-13, we see the preincarnate Christ appearing to Jacob and
reconfirming the change of his name to “Israel” and reconfirming the promises of
the Abrahamic Covenant.
Genesis 35:9 Then God appeared to Jacob again when he came from
Paddan-aram, and He blessed him. (NASB95)
The statement “God appeared to Jacob” is a “theophany,” which is a technical
theological term used to refer to a visible or auditory manifestation of the Son of
God before His incarnation in Bethlehem (Gen. 32:29-30; Ex. 3:2; 19:18-20; Josh.
5:13-15; Dan. 3:26). This is the fifth time that the preincarnate Christ
communicated with Jacob either audibly or both visibly and audibly (Genesis
28:10-22; 31:10-13; 32:24-32; 35:1).
Therefore, after Jacob obeyed the Lord’s command to return to Bethel and
fulfill his vow to build an altar to worship the Lord, the Lord once again
communicated with Jacob by manifesting Himself both visibly and audibly. He did
so in order to reconfirm that He had changed Jacob’s name to Israel and also to
reconfirm or reiterate that Jacob was inheriting the promises of the Abrahamic
Covenant and carrying on the line of the Messiah.
Evidently, the Lord had to reiterate and reconfirm to Jacob that He indeed had
changed his name to Israel so as to reassure Jacob that He had a plan for Jacob’s
life even though Jacob had failed in his responsibility as the spiritual leader in his
family at Shechem. Jacob had not acted in a manner consistent with his new name
“Israel” and so the Lord sought to reassure Jacob that He had not given up on him.
This theophany and the reconfirmation and a reaffirmation that Jacob would
inherit the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant was to reassure Jacob that the
Lord had not forsaken him because of his failure at Shechem. Though Jacob had
been unfaithful at Shechem and had delayed ten years before returning to Bethel
and fulfilling his vow to the Lord to build an altar to worship Him there, God had
remained faithful to Jacob and would continue to do so (cf. 2 Timothy 2:13).
The mention of Jacob’s return “from Paddan Aram” is to draw the reader’s
attention to the fact that the Lord fulfilled His promise to Jacob to bring him back
to the land of Canaan and which promise is recorded in Genesis 28:15.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
216
The fact that the Lord fulfilled His promise to Jacob to bring him back safe and
sound to his homeland demonstrates the faithfulness of God.
“Blessed” is the verb barakh means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.”
Jacob would be “blessed” or in other words, “endued with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity and longevity” by means of the Word of God since the Word
of God is “alive and powerful” according to Hebrews 4:12.
God would bless Jacob through six promises, which are contained in Genesis
35:10-12. Therefore, the statement “He (God) blessed him (Jacob)” means that
Jacob would be the recipient and beneficiary of the omnipotence of God, which
would be manifested in time by the Lord fulfilling six promises through Jacob and
his descendants (spiritual and biological), which are recorded in Genesis 35:10-12.
These six promises that are recorded in Genesis 35:10-12 echo the promises the
Lord made to Jacob at Bethel, which are recorded in Genesis 28:13-14 and echo
the promises given to his father Isaac, which are recorded in Genesis 26:4. They
also echo the blessing that his father Isaac pronounced upon him before he left
home, which is recorded in Genesis 28:3-4.
The Lord’s promises to both Jacob and Isaac and the blessing of his father
bestowed upon him before he left home were a “reconfirmation” of the promises
made to Abraham that are recorded in Genesis 12:2-3, 7, 13:14-18, 15:1-6, 18,
17:1-8 and 22:17.
In Genesis 26:3-4, Isaac received reconfirmation of the promises of the
Abrahamic Covenant by means of a theophany. In Genesis 26:23-25, the Lord
appeared in a theophany to Isaac at Beersheba and gave him reassurance by
reconfirming to him the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant. In Genesis 28:3-4,
the blessing that Isaac bestowed upon Jacob before he left home echoes the
promises of the Abrahamic covenant. In Genesis 28:14-15, God’s reiteration of the
promises to Abraham and Isaac assures Jacob of God’s faithfulness.
Genesis 35:10 God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; You shall no longer
be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name. Thus He called him Israel.”
(NASB95)
The statement “You shall no longer be called Jacob but Israel shall be your
name” echoes the Lord’s statement to Jacob at Peniel after wrestling with Jacob,
which is recorded in Genesis 32:28.
After Jacob wrestled with the Lord at Peniel, the Lord changed Jacob’s name to
“Israel” and here the Lord reiterates and reconfirms and reaffirms to Jacob that
this is still the case.
The name “Jacob” means, “heel catcher” implying someone who is a
“deceiver” and a “supplanter,” which is a person who takes the place of another by
force, scheming or strategy.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
217
“Israel” is the proper noun yisra’el, which means, “one who fights and
overcomes with the power of God” since the Lord states the reason for the name is
that Jacob has fought with both God and men and has prevailed.
Therefore, the promise “You shall no longer be called Jacob but Israel shall
be your name” is not only a promise but a reaffirmation to Jacob that would
impress upon him the need to live his life in a manner that is consistent with the
meaning of his new name.
He would live his life in a manner that is consistent with the meaning of his
new name by appropriating by faith in prayer the promises that God had given to
him just as he did prior to being reunited with Esau (See Genesis 32).
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His first promise to Jacob and
empower him to live in a manner consistent with the meaning of his new name
yisra’el, “Israel,” which means, “one who fights and overcomes with the power of
God” (See Genesis 35:10).
The bestowal of the name “Israel” upon Jacob constituted the essence of the
blessing that he requested from the Lord recorded in Genesis 32:26.
The name yisra’el, “Israel” memorializes the historical event of Jacob
wrestling the preincarnate Christ, and which wrestling match symbolized Jacob’s
struggles in life with men, which in reality were with God. The name “Israel”
represents the character of his new divine nature whereas the name “Jacob”
represents the character of his old Adamic sin nature, which will be permanently
eradicated at his physical death. Therefore, the emphasis of the name change to
“Israel” implies that Jacob would experience the fulfillment of these six promises
during the millennial reign of Christ when he will live permanently in his new
nature that God gave him, which is signified by the name “Israel.”
Genesis 35:11 God also said to him, “I am God Almighty; Be fruitful and
multiply; A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings
shall come forth from you.” (NASB95)
The title El Shaddai, “God Almighty” emphasizes the omnipotence of God and
describes the Lord as being able to bring to pass that which He has promised to
Jacob.
The expression “God Almighty” (Hebrew: El Shaddai) was first used by God
of Himself when speaking to Abraham as recorded in Genesis 17:1 and was used
by Isaac when blessing Jacob as recorded in Genesis 28:3. Therefore, the title El
Shaddai, “God Almighty” signifies that the six promises contained in Genesis
35:10-12 echo Isaac’s prophecy about Jacob, which is recorded in Genesis 28:3-5
and also recalls the covenant with Abraham recorded in Genesis 17:1-8.
The Lord’s promise to Jacob that he would “be fruitful and multiply” echoes
the prophecy of Isaac concerning Jacob, which is recorded in Genesis 28:3 and
means that the Lord would give Jacob the capacity to be prolific in that he would
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
218
be the progenitor of a multitude of children in both a biological and spiritual sense.
This promise means that the Lord would endue Jacob and his descendants with the
ability to be prolific in terms of posterity.
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His second promise to Jacob that
he would “be fruitful and multiply” and endue him with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity (offspring in great numbers) and longevity (See Genesis
35:11).
The promise “a nation…shall come from you” in a “near” sense refers to the
nation of Israel (saved and unsaved) and in a “far” sense it refers to saved Israel
during the millennial reign of Christ.
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His third promise to Jacob that
he would be the progenitor of “a nation,” and endue Jacob with power to be the
progenitor of the nation of Israel (See Genesis 35:11).
The promise “a company of nations…shall come from you” was fulfilled and
continues to be fulfilled in a “spiritual” sense through those individuals who
exercised faith alone in Christ alone (John 3:1-7; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:26-28).
The expression “a company of nations…shall come from you” refers to a
community of nations that will originate from Jacob and echoes the Lord’s promise
to his grandfather Abraham that he would become “the father of a multitude of
nations” (Genesis 17:4-5) and “the father of nations” (Genesis 17:6).
The Lord’s promise to Abraham to make him “the father of a multitude of
nations” and Isaac’s desire that the Lord would make Jacob a “company of
peoples” and the Lord’s promise to Jacob that “a company of nations…shall
come from you” would be fulfilled in both a “biological” and “spiritual” sense.
In a “biological” or “racial” sense, the “company of nations” that would
originate from Jacob would be the nation of Israel. In a “spiritual” sense the
“company of nations” that would originate from Jacob be all those who exercise
faith alone in Christ alone who would be composed of all nations and races, both
male and female, slave and freeman (John 3:1-7; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:26-28). This
is how the Lord’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3 that in him “all the
families of the earth would be blessed” would be accomplished.
In the same way, that Abraham became a father in a “spiritual” sense to those
individuals who exercised faith in Christ so also Jacob would become the father in
a “spiritual” sense to all those who exercised faith in Christ.
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His fourth promise to Jacob and
endue him with power to be the progenitor of “a company of nations” in a
“spiritual” sense through all those who exercise faith alone in Christ alone.
The promise that “kings shall come forth from you” echoes the Lord’s
promise to Abraham, which is recorded in Genesis 17:6, 16 and is a reference to
primarily to the kings of Israel (Gen. 35:11; 49:10; 2 Sam. 7:8-16) and the Lord
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
219
Jesus Christ. Since the promise that “kings shall come forth from you” is a
reference to the Kings of kings, the Lord Jesus Christ, it is therefore related to the
“Davidic” Covenant, which like the “Abrahamic” Covenant, was an unconditional
covenant meaning its fulfillment was totally dependent upon God’s faithfulness.
The “Davidic” covenant deals with the dynasty that will rule the nation of Israel
as indicated in 2 Samuel 7:16 where God promised David that a descendant of his
would sit on his throne forever.
The “Davidic” covenant is reconfirmed throughout the Old Testament (Isa. 9:67; Jer. 23:5-6; 30:8-9; 33:14-17, 20-21; Ezek. 37:24-25; Dan. 7:13-14; Hos. 3:4-5;
Amos 9:11; Zech. 14:4, 9).
The Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of David, will literally fulfill this covenant
during His millennial reign.
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His fifth promise to Jacob and
endue him with power to be the progenitor of the kings of Israel and the greatest
King of them all, the Lord Jesus Christ (See Genesis 35:11).
Genesis 35:12 “The land which I gave to Abraham and Isaac, I will give it
to you, and I will give the land to your descendants after you.” (NASB95)
The promise of “land” is a reference to the “Palestinian Covenant,” which was
a confirmation and enlargement of the original “Abrahamic” covenant and
amplified the land features of the “Abrahamic” covenant (Gen. 13:14-15; 15:18).
The “Palestinian” Covenant stipulated that the descendants of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob who exercise faith alone in Christ alone would not only come into
permanent possession of the land of Canaan but also most of the land in Turkey,
East Africa, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and Red Sea, Syria, Iraq, Jordan since
the boundaries of this land grant are on the Mediterranean, Aegean Sea, Euphrates
River and the Nile River (See Genesis 15:18).
The Lord promises that this land would be given to Abraham’s descendants and
this promise was fulfilled to a certain extent by Israel under Joshua (Josh. 21:4345; cf. 13:1-7) and David and Solomon (1 Kgs. 4:20-25; Neh. 9:8).
The “Palestinian” covenant will have its literal and ultimate fulfillment during
the millennial reign of Christ (Isa. 11:11-12; Jer. 31-37; Ezek. 34:11-16; Hos. 1:1011; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Micah 4:6-7; Zeph. 3:14-20; Zech. 8:4-8).
“Your descendants” refers to Jacob’s “biological” descendants, which would
be the nation of Israel and it refers to his “spiritual” descendants, which would be
anyone, Jew or Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ as their Savior.
In a “near” sense “Your descendants” refers to the nation of Israel (saved and
unsaved) and in a “far” sense it refers to saved Israel during the millennial reign of
Christ.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
220
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His sixth and final promise to
Jacob and endue him and his descendants (spiritual and biological) with power to
possess the land of Canaan (See Genesis 35:12).
Though Jacob was still a resident alien in the land of Canaan, it was really his
according to God’s promise and would be possessed by him and his descendants
through faith in Christ during the millennial reign of Christ.
Genesis 35:13 Then God went up from him in the place where He had
spoken with him. (NASB95)
The fact that God ascended from Jacob at Bethel where He had spoken to Jacob
indicates that this revelation was not in the form of a dream or vision but an actual
face to face visit from the preincarnate Christ.
Jacob Responds to Theophany and Divine Promises
In Genesis 35:14-15, Jacob responds to the theophany and divine promises by
constructing a limestone pillar and renewing the name of Bethel.
Genesis 35:14 Jacob set up a pillar in the place where He had spoken with
him, a pillar of stone, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured
oil on it. 15 So Jacob named the place where God had spoken with him,
Bethel. (NASB95)
Genesis 35:14-15 records Jacob responding to the theophany and reaffirmation
from the Lord regarding his new name “Israel” and the reconfirmation of the
promises of the Abrahamic Covenant just as he responded the first time the Lord
appeared to him thirty years prior when he was leaving Canaan to see Laban.
Genesis 28:16-22 records a five-fold response from Jacob whereas Genesis
35:14-15 records a four-fold response.
In both instances, Jacob responds to the theophany and divine promises by
erecting a stone pillar, pouring oil on the pillar and naming the place of the divine
revelation Bethel.
The first time the Lord appeared to Jacob at Bethel, Jacob spoke and made a
vow whereas the second time he does neither.
Genesis 35:7 records Jacob fulfilling this vow by building an altar, which he
never did the first time since he had no animals with him to sacrifice whereas the
second time the Lord has prospered him with large flocks.
The second time the Lord appeared to Jacob at Bethel, Jacob pours a drink
offering on the stone pillar, which he never did the first time.
Jacob’s five-fold response to the first time the Lord appeared to him at Bethel
and his four-fold response the second time were acts of worship in that he had
“reverence” and “respect” for God and was in “awe” of Him and expressed his
“wonder” towards Him.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
221
Psalm 68:35 O God, You are awesome from Your sanctuary. The God of
Israel Himself gives strength and power to the people. Blessed be God!
(NASB95)
Worship is adoring contemplation of God as He has been revealed by the Holy
Spirit in the Person of Christ and in the Scriptures and is also the loving ascription
of praise to God for what He is, both in Himself and in His ways and is the bowing
of the soul and spirit in deep humility and reverence before Him.
Genesis 35:14, “Jacob set up a pillar in the place where He had spoken
with him, a pillar of stone, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also
poured oil on it.”
“Pillar” is the noun matstsevah, which denotes a single upright stone pillar set
up as a monument and a memorial to mark the spot where the Lord had appeared
to him and made promises to him.
Jacob erects a stone pillar as a monument to mark the spot where the
preincarnate Christ had appeared to him and made promises to him just as he did
thirty years before when he left Canaan to go into exile in Paddan Aram with
Laban (See Genesis 28:10-22). However, the first stone pillar did “not” accompany
an altar, which Jacob builds a second time in obedience to the Lord’s command
recorded in Genesis 35:7.
Also, Jacob never poured a drink offering on the first stone pillar but he does so
when he constructs the second pillar. Jacob did not build an altar the first time
since he had no animals with him to sacrifice and only had his staff with him when
he made the trip to Paddan Aram according to Genesis 32:10.
The fact that Jacob constructs this pillar implies that this is “not” a rededication
of the first one he built thirty years before since if the first one was still standing
there would be no need to construct another one.
This is the third and final time that we see Jacob erecting a pillar to memorialize
an event. We have noted already the first and third pillars and the second pillar was
erected by Jacob according to Genesis 31:45 as a witness to the oral contract
between him and his uncle Laban and called it “Galeed,” which is the Hebrew
term for “witness heap.”
“Drink offering” is the noun nesekh, which is derived from the verb nasaskh,
which also appears in Genesis 35:15 and is translated “poured out.”
Genesis 35:14 records for the first time in the Bible someone employing a
“drink offering” to worship God.
Notice that the “drink offering” is poured on the limestone pillar rather than
the altar since the altar has to do with the sacrifice of Christ whereas the pillar dealt
with Jacob’s dedication and devotion to the Lord.
The “drink offering” was originally established in Israel as an appropriate form
of worship (Exodus 29:40-41; Leviticus 23:13; Numbers 28). Although Jacob is
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
222
the first person recorded in the Bible to present a “drink offering” to the Lord, it
was not until after the Exodus from Egypt that the laws governing the “drink
offering” were established.
The “drink offering” is not mentioned in the five Great Levitical offerings
since the sole emphasis of these offerings is upon the Person and Work of Christ.
The procedure for the “drink offering” is simply outlined in Numbers 28. The
liquid normally employed for a “drink offering” was wine (yayin, Ex. 29:40; Nm.
15:5, 7, 10), or other fermented drink (shekar Nm. 28:7) and on at least one
occasion water was “poured out to the Lord” (2 Sm. 23:16; 1 Chr. 11:18).
The “drink offering” was not to be consumed by the priest but rather was to be
offered to the Lord. The “drink offering” presented by Jacob, and prescribed by
the Lord through Moses for the children of Israel in Numbers and Leviticus
emphasized the believer’s dedication to the Lord since it was not to be consumed
by the priest, but rather offered totally and completely to the Lord as a sweet
aroma.
The fact that the “drink offering” was not to be consumed by the priest but
rather was to be offered to the Lord emphasizes the believer’s giving of himself
completely to God in order to fulfill His will.
The fact that the “drink offering” was not to be consumed by the priest but
rather was to be offered to the Lord implies that the believer must deny self,
sacrifice self in order to fulfill God’s will (cf. Luke 9:23-24; 22:42; John 12:2426).
Just as he did after his first encounter with the Lord, Jacob pours oil on top of
the limestone pillar, which was an expression of his dedication, devotion,
consecration and gratitude to the Lord and recognition of the gracious promises
that the Lord made to him (See Genesis 28:18; Exodus 30:25-29; Leviticus 8:1012).
The “oil” poured on the limestone pillar by Jacob represents the Holy Spirit
because of oil’s power to sustain and fortify with energy. Therefore, the anointing
oil of the Old Testament was a symbol of being empowered by the Spirit of God
for the duties of the office to which a person was consecrated (Lev 8:12; 1 Sam
10:1,6; 16:13-14; Isa 61:1).
Therefore, “oil” poured on the limestone pillar by Jacob represents the Holy
Spirit who would empower Jacob and his descendants to fulfill the six promises
that the Lord made to Jacob that are recorded in Genesis 35:9-13.
Genesis 35:15 So Jacob named the place where God had spoken with him,
Bethel. (NASB95)
“Bethel” literally means, “house of God” and is approximately ten miles north
of Jerusalem and only thirty miles away from Shechem and according to Genesis
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
223
28:19, it was originally called “Luz,” until Jacob changed the name to memorialize
his encounter with the preincarnate Christ.
If you recall, the first time that the Lord appeared to Jacob, he names the place
“Bethel,” and as we see he does it again after encountering the Lord the second
time, which seems redundant on Jacob’s part. However, Jacob was alone in his
first encounter with the Lord but he has his family with him and many servants and
the Shechemite women and children the second time around. Therefore, those who
were believers were sharing in Jacob’s worship of the Lord and for those who were
unbelievers in his entourage, namely, the Shechemite women, Jacob’s worship of
the Lord would be as a witnessed to them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
224
Chapter Eleven: The Birth of Benjamin and the Death of Rachel
Next, we will study the birth of Benjamin and the death of Rachel, which is
recorded in Genesis 35:16-20. According to Genesis 35:27, Jacob leaves Bethel in
order to see his father at Mamre of Kiriath-arba, which is Hebron. During this
journey from Bethel to Hebron, Jacob’s favorite wife Rachel dies giving birth to
his twelfth son Benjamin and also his oldest son Reuben commits incest with his
concubine Bilhah. Therefore, we see Jacob going from spiritual elation and
euphoria at Bethel to heartache and sadness due to the death of Rachel but then joy
due to the birth of Benjamin and back again to heartache and sadness due to his
oldest son Reuben having sex with his concubine Bilhah.
Genesis 35:16 Then they journeyed from Bethel; and when there was still
some distance to go to Ephrath, Rachel began to give birth and she suffered
severe labor. (NASB95)
“They” refers to Jacob and his household as well as those women and children
that were taken captive at Shechem.
“Journeyed” is the verb nasa`, which means, “to pull up” stakes that stabilize a
tent and is a technical term for “breaking camp.”
“Bethel” literally means, “house of God” and is approximately ten miles north
of Jerusalem.
Jacob did “not” disobey God by leaving Bethel since in Genesis 35:1, God
commanded Jacob to live at Bethel for a period of time long enough to fulfill his
vow, which is indicated by the meaning of the verb yashav, “live,” which appears
in Genesis 35:1 and does “not” mean to live in a place permanently.
Since Jacob has fulfilled his vow, we see that he leaves Bethel for two reasons:
(1) In order to seek grass for his flocks, which was not in abundance at Bethel
whose terrain, is limestone. (2) In order to see his father “Isaac at Mamre of
Kiriath-arba that is Hebron.” (See Genesis 35:27).
“Ephrath” is the proper noun `ephrathah, which means, “fruitful region,”
which according to Genesis 35:19 is the older name of “Bethlehem.”
Genesis 35:16 records that “when there was still some distance to go to
Ephrath (Bethlehem), Rachel began to give birth and she suffered severe
labor.”
This statement describes Jacob traveling in a southerly direction along the main
north-south route through the hills from Bethel to Hebron, which would place the
birthplace of Benjamin and the death and grave of Rachel somewhere north of
Jerusalem. This is confirmed by 1 Samuel 10:2, Jeremiah 31:15 and Joshua 18:25,
which imply that Rachel wept for her children near Ramah in the territory of
Benjamin (Word Biblical Commentary, volume 2: Genesis 16-50; Gordon J.
Wenham, Nelson Reference and Electronic, page 326).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
225
In a manner, which is characteristic of the Hebrew language, in this passage the
narrator presents the birth of Benjamin in summary fashion (“Rachel began to
give birth”) and then details of this birth follow (“She suffered severe labor”).
The statement “she suffered severe labor” is the piel (intensive) form of the
verb qashah, which literally means, “she had a difficult time” in childbirth.
Genesis 35:17 When she was in severe labor the midwife said to her, “Do
not fear, for now you have another son.” (NASB95)
The midwife comforts Rachel by informing that her child survived the difficult
labor and that God had answered her prayer for another son and which prayer is
recorded in Genesis 30:24 by the naming of her first son Joseph, whose name
means, “May the Lord give me another son.”
Genesis 35:18 It came about as her soul was departing (for she died), that
she named him Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin. (NASB95)
The name “Ben-oni,” which Rachel gave her son as she was dying means, “son
of my sorrow,” which expressed her anguish and pain she experienced while
giving birth to him. However, Jacob did not want his son to feel guilty for the
death of his mother but rather wanted him to feel loved and that he was fortunate to
have him and so he changed the child’s name to “Benjamin,” which means, “son
of my right hand.” The right hand in the ancient world denoted power or a man’s
strength.
“Benjamin” was the lone full brother of Joseph since they had the same mother
“Rachel” whereas the mothers of Jacob’s other ten sons were Leah, Bilhah and
Zilpah (See Genesis 30:22-24, Genesis 35:18, 43:29).
“Benjamin” was also the only one of Jacob’s sons that was born in the land of
Canaan since his other eleven sons and his daughter Dinah were born in Paddan
Aram.
Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah were born in Paddan Aram according to Genesis
29:31-33, Issachar, Zebulun according to Genesis 30:14-21, Gad, Asher according
to Genesis 30:9-13, Dan, Naphtali according to Genesis 30:1-8, Joseph according
to Genesis 30:22-24 and Dinah according to Genesis 30:21.
Like his eleven brothers, “Benjamin” became the progenitor of one of the
twelve tribes of Israel, which bears his name. He is the focal point of the encounter
of Joseph and his brothers in Egypt when the former was the prime minister of
Egypt and unrecognized by his brothers.
In Genesis 46:21 the immediate descendants of Benjamin number ten, whereas
in Numbers 26:38-40 only seven are enumerated, and some even under different
names. This difference is probably owing to the circumstance that some of the
direct descendants of Benjamin died at an early period, or, at least, childless.
At the first census during the Exodus the tribe of Benjamin numbered 35,400,
ranking eleventh, but increased to 45,600 at the second census, ranking seventh.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
226
The Benjamites were men of war and famous slingers (Gen. 49:27; Judg. 3:15; 1
Ch. 8:40; 12:2) and were the first tribe in Israel to oppose the Philistines.
To Benjamin belongs the distinction of giving the first king to the Jews, Saul
being a Benjamite (1 Sam. 9:1-2; 10:20-21) and they also supported David in his
reign.
Jacob’s prophecy regarding Benjamin’s descendants future lot, and the
development of his personal character in his tribe, is brief: “Benjamin is a
ravenous wolf; In the morning he devours the prey, and in the evening he
divides the spoil” (Gen. 49:27).
The events of history cast light on that prediction, for the ravening of the wolf is
seen in the exploits of Ehud the Benjamite (Judg. 3), in Saul's career, and
especially in the whole matter of Gibeah, so carefully recorded in Judges 20 and
Saul of Tarsus, who was the great persecutor of the church (Acts 8-9).
Other Benjamites of distinction were the prophet Jeremiah (1:1), Esther and
Mordecai (Est. 2:5), and of course the apostle Paul (Rm. 11:1; Phlp. 3:5).
Genesis 35:19 So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that
is, Bethlehem). (NASB95)
There is great irony in the fact that Rachel died in childbirth since if you recall,
in frustration she complained to Jacob to “give me children or I will die” (See
Genesis 30:1) and ultimately it was the gift of children, which killed her.
Rachel’s death like the death of every human being is the sovereign decision of
God based upon the integrity of God and omniscient knowledge of all the facts.
Ecclesiastes 3:1 There is an appointed time for everything, a time for
everything under heaven. 2 There is a time to be born and there is a time to
die. (NASB95)
Psalm 116:15 Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His godly
ones. (NASB95)
Ecclesiastes 7:1b The day of one’s death is better than the day of one’s
birth. (NASB95)
The death of a member of the human race is not ruled by chance or fate but
according to the providence of God, which expresses the fact that the world and
our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God.
“Physical” death is the separation of the human soul (and in the case of the
believer, the human spirit also) from the body (Matt. 8:22; Rom. 8:38-39; 2 Cor.
5:1-8; Phil. 1:20-21; 2:27, 30).
The believer’s physical body goes to the grave at physical death and his soul
and human spirit go to be face to face with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:8).
The believer will receive a resurrection body at the resurrection of the church,
which is called by theologians, the “rapture” of the church.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
227
1 Corinthians 15:54 But when this perishable will have put on the
imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come
about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory.”
(NASB95)
Jesus Christ’s death on the Cross has freed us from the fear of death.
Hebrews 2:14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He
Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might
render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil 15 and
might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their
lives.”
Physical death cannot separate the believer from the love of God (Rom. 8:3839).
Life hangs by a very fine thread that can be snapped at any moment and should
motivate the believer to use the remainder of his time on earth to execute God’s
plan for his life to become like Christ.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
228
Chapter Twelve: The Incest of Reuben
Genesis 35:21-22 presents to us the record of the incest of Reuben who has sex
with his father’s concubine, Bilhah.
Genesis 35:21 Then Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the
tower of Eder. (NASB95)
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the narrator, Moses, employs the name
“Israel” rather than “Jacob,” which is significant since it indicates that Jacob is
living in a manner that is consistent with the meaning of his new name and is thus
in the will of God.
The name “Israel” appears in Genesis 35:21 and 22 in order to establish
Jacob’s authority over his household and nation, which is attacked by Reuben
having sex with his concubine Bilhah.
The name yisra’el, “Israel” memorializes the historical event of Jacob
wrestling the preincarnate Christ, and which wrestling match symbolized Jacob’s
struggles in life with men, which in reality were with God.
“Israel” is the proper noun yisra’el, which means, “one who fights and
overcomes with the power of God” since the Lord states the reason for the name is
that Jacob has fought with both God and men and has prevailed.
The name “Jacob” means, “heel catcher” implying someone who is a
“deceiver” and a “supplanter,” which is a person who takes the place of another by
force, scheming or strategy.
Therefore, the name “Israel” represents the character of his new divine nature
whereas the name “Jacob” represents the character of his old Adamic sin nature,
which will be permanently eradicated at his physical death.
“The tower of Eder” (or Migdal Eder) was simply a watchtower built to help
shepherds protect their flocks from robbers (v. 21; cf. 2 Kings 18:8; 2 Chron.
26:10; 27:4). Since the time of Jerome, the early church father who lived in
Bethlehem, tradition has held that Eder lay very close to Bethlehem (Dr. Thomas
L. Constable, Notes on Genesis 2005 Edition, page 224).
Genesis 35:22 It came about while Israel was dwelling in that land, that
Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine, and Israel heard of
it. (NASB95)
“Dwelling” is the verb shakhan, which means, “to temporarily dwell in a
particular geographical location,” thus indicating Israel’s desire to stay at the tower
of Eder on a temporary basis before he moved on to see his father at Hebron.
“Reuben” was the first son that Leah bore to Jacob while in Paddan Aram
according to Genesis 29:32 and his name means, “the Lord has seen my affliction.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
229
The name “Bilhah” means, “carefree” and she was given to Jacob by Rachel to
be used as a concubine and bore Jacob two sons, Dan and Naphtali according to
Genesis 30:1-8.
Bilhah’s relationship to Jacob as his “concubine” is identified to the reader.
“Concubine” is the noun pileghesh, which refers to the fact that Bilhah was a
second-class wife, acquired without payment of bride-money and possessing fewer
legal rights (see Genesis 30:4; Judges 19:1-4).
The people in Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s culture regarded a concubine as a
secondary wife with some, but not all, of the rights and privileges of the primary
wife so in effect Bilhah became Jacob’s concubine. In the Old Testament period, a
concubine was a legal wife but one of secondary rank and she could be sent away
with a small gift. Therefore, the children of a concubine did not have the same
legal rights as the wife and so the inheritance would go to the child of the wife
rather than the concubine.
Having a concubine was often a sign of wealth and was recognized as a status
symbol. The following men had concubines: (1) Nahor (Gen. 22:24) (2) Abraham
(Gen. 25:6) (3) Jacob (Gen. 35:22) (4) Eliphaz (Gen. 36:12) (5) Saul (2 Sam. 3:7)
(6) David (2 Sam. 5:13; 15:16; 16:21) Solomon (1 Kings 11:3).
As we saw in our study of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar in Genesis 16, men and
their wives sought concubines when the wife could not bear children. In these
situations, wives presented their maidservants to their own husbands.
As Genesis 22:24 records, children of a concubine were not viewed as
illegitimate but were considered part of the family.
“Lay” is the verb shakhav, which is used as a euphemism for sex and is never
used for loving marital intercourse in Genesis but only for illicit or forced sex such
as Lot’s daughters with Lot (19:32-35); the Philistines with Rebekah (26:10);
Shechem with Dinah (34:2, 7); Reuben with Bilhah (35:22); Potiphar’s wife with
Joseph (39:7, 10, 12, 14).
In Genesis 35:22, the verb shakhav indicates that Reuben and Bilhah had illicit
sex in the sense that the two were not only committing adultery but also incest
since Bilhah was Jacob’s concubine or secondary wife.
There is no indication from the original language of Genesis 35:22 or any other
portion of Scripture that indicates that Bilhah was raped by Reuben since the verb
`anah, “by force” is never employed by the writer indicating a rape had taken place
as when Shechem raped Dinah.
The fact that Reuben had sex with his father’s wife was not only the sin of
dishonoring his father but also an act of rebellion against his father’s authority.
Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be
prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you.” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
230
1 Samuel 15:23 “For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and
insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry.” (NASB95)
This incident between Reuben and Jacob’s concubine, Bilhah is motivated by
Reuben’s love for his mother Leah rather than sexual lust since by defiling Bilhah,
he makes certain that with Rachel’s death her maid cannot supplant Leah as chief
wife (Compare 2 Samuel 15:16; 16:22; 20:3).
The Mosaic Law prohibited incest because it dishonors the father and required
the death penalty for both the man and the woman (See Leviticus 18:8; 20:11;
Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20).
Furthermore, it is interesting that according to secular ancient Near Eastern
culture, by having sex with his father’s concubine Reuben is attempting to usurp
Jacob’s authority in his household (Compare 2 Samuel 3:7-8; 12:7-8; 16:21-22; 1
Kings 2:13-25). Consequently, Reuben is deprived of leadership in the future as
the firstborn of Jacob as reflected in the prophecy of Jacob concerning him (See
Genesis 49:3-4).
As noted in Genesis 34, Simeon and Levi have also been disqualified for
leadership because of massacring all the men of the city of Shechem and Hamor
and his son Shechem for the rape of their sister Dinah. Therefore, Leah’s fourth
son, Judah will assume the leadership in the family and in fact would be the one to
carry on the line of Christ.
The fact that Genesis 35:22 records Jacob, now Israel having heard of Reuben
having sex with his concubine Bilhah appears to demonstrate once again his
passiveness and lack of moral outrage towards this incident. However, this is not
the case since Genesis 49:3-5 reveals how Jacob feels about this incident and the
use of the name “Israel” and not “Jacob” indicates that at this time he was living in
a manner consistent with his new name.
Genesis 49:3 “Reuben, you are my firstborn; My might and the beginning
of my strength, preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. 4
Uncontrolled as water, you shall not have preeminence, because you went up
to your father's bed; Then you defiled it -- he went up to my couch.”
(NASB95)
The fact that Israel’s response to his son’s actions is delayed and not recorded
until Genesis 49:3-4 reveals a spiritual principle expressed by Solomon in
Ecclesiastes 8:11-12.
Ecclesiastes 8:11 Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed
quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to
do evil. 12 Although a sinner does evil a hundred times and may lengthen his
life, still I know that it will be well for those who fear God, who fear Him
openly. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
231
Chapter Thirteen: Jacob Arrives in Hebron and the Death of Isaac
Genesis 35:27-29 presents the record of Jacob arriving at Hebron and the death
and burial of Isaac by his twin sons, Esau and Jacob and completes the eighth book
in Genesis, which began in 25:19.
Genesis 35:27 Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre of Kiriath-arba
(that is, Hebron), where Abraham and Isaac had sojourned. (NASB95)
The name “Kiriath-arba” means, “the city of Arba” and was older name of
“Hebron” according to Judges 1:10, Joshua 14:15, and 15:13.
“Hebron” was located nineteen miles southwest of Jerusalem, on the way to
Beersheba and was 3,040 feet above sea level, dominating a beautiful and fruitful
area and ancient oaks (terebinths) filled the area.
“Mamre” was located in “Hebron” as indicated by the phrase “that is,
Hebron” and received its name from its owner, Mamre, who was a chief of the
Amorites who sought security in an alliance with Abram and was blessed because
of Abram (cf. Gen. 14:13, 24).
The “oaks of Mamre” evidently were a grove of terebinth trees that was owned
by Mamre, which was the location of Abram’s encampment when he came up
from Egypt according to Genesis 13:18, 14:13 and 18:1.
The word “sojourned” is the Hebrew verb gur, which refers to a specific legal
status of a person who lives as a resident alien and is in a dependent legal status
and is not a native.
The verb gur, “sojourned” signifies Jacob’s status as a “resident alien”
meaning that while he lived in the land of Canaan he possessed neither land nor
clan ties and was without traditional tribal legal support and protection and was
vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by the Canaanites.
Genesis 35:28 Now the days of Isaac were one hundred and eighty years. 29
Isaac breathed his last and died and was gathered to his people, an old man of
ripe age; and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him. (NASB95)
Isaac outlived his father Abraham by five years since Abraham died at one
hundred seventy-five years of age according to Genesis 25:7 and Isaac also
outlived his half-brother Ishmael by forty three years since Ishmael died at one
hundred thirty-seven years of age according to Genesis 25:17.
“Breathed his last” is the verb gawa, which pictures the act of drawing one’s
last breath.
“Died” is the verb muth, which denotes the general act of dying.
The expression gathered to his people” is always used with reference to
believers (Abraham in Genesis 25:8; Ishmael in Genesis 25:17; Isaac in Genesis
35:29; Jacob in Genesis 49:33; Aaron in Numbers 20:24, 26; Deuteronomy 35:20).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
232
The fact that Isaac was said to be “gathered to his people” does “not” refer to
his death and burial because he was not buried with his ancestors but rather it
refers to his life after death with those who before him died in faith such as Adam,
Eve, Abel, Enoch, Noah and Abraham.
Prior to the ascension of Jesus Christ, which is recorded in Acts 1:9-11, Old
Testament saints when they died went to a compartment of Hades, which the Lord
Jesus Christ referred to as “Abraham’s bosom” in Luke 16 and called “Paradise”
when He spoke to the thief on the Cross.
“Paradise” or “Abraham’s bosom” is known as “Sheol” in the Old Testament
and “Hades” in the New Testament and the Scriptures reveals that it contains four
compartments: (1) Paradise: the place of the departed souls of believers before the
resurrection of Christ (Lk. 23:39-43; Eph. 4:8-9) who were transferred to heaven
after the resurrection and ascension of Christ (Eph. 4:10). (2) Torments: the
temporary fire for the souls of unbelievers from all dispensations (Lk. 16:19-31)
who will be transferred to the Great White Throne Judgment that concludes human
history and from there will be cast in the Lake of Fire forever (Rev. 20:11-15). (3)
Tartarus: the abode of the fallen angels of Genesis 6 who had sex with woman in
order to corrupt the human race and prevent the incarnation of the Son of God (1
Peter 3:18-22; 2 Peter 4; Jude 6). (4) The Abyss: the place of imprisonment for the
demons who violated certain rules for angelic creation and will be released during
the Tribulation (Lk. 8:30-31; Rom. 10:7; Rev. 20:1-3).
Prior to the resurrection, ascension and session of the Lord Jesus Christ, Old
Testament saints when they died did not go to the third heaven but rather to
Paradise. These Old Testament saints such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ascended
with Jesus Christ into heaven as part of our Lord’s triumphal procession as victor
in the angelic conflict and were part of the booty from our Lord’s victory that was
accomplished through His death and resurrection.
Ephesians 4:8 Therefore it says, “WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH, HE
LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO
MEN.” (NASB95)
“He led host a host of captives” refers to Old Testament saints that were
temporarily residing in the second compartment of Hades called Paradise (Lk. 16;
23:43).
Like his father Abraham, Isaac is said to have “died in a ripe old age” (See
Genesis 25:8 and 15:5), which emphasizes that both men lived a long life and thus
died at an elderly age.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
233
Chapter Fourteen: Jacob Suffers the Loss of Joseph
In the original Hebrew text, Genesis 37:1 is grammatically connected to
Genesis 36 and completes the ninth major section of Genesis, which began in
Genesis 36:1. We must also remember that the original Hebrew and Greek texts
did not have chapter divisions and were not inspired by God.
Genesis 37:1 is called a “colophon” meaning it is a note that comes at the end
of a book, thus the statement regarding Jacob in Genesis 37:1 is simply a note that
comes at the end of the ninth section in the book of Genesis.
Genesis 37:1 Now Jacob lived in the land where his father had sojourned,
in the land of Canaan. (NASB95)
The statement “Jacob lived in the land where his father had sojourned, in
the land of Canaan” is an unusual addition to the account of Esau’s descendants
and is used in direct contrast with the statement contained in Genesis 36:8, “So
Esau…settled in the hill country of Seir.”
Therefore, the statement “Jacob lived in the land where his father had
sojourned, in the land of Canaan” is employed to demonstrate the geographical
and spiritual division between Jacob and Esau and their descendants.
Genesis 37:1 is called a “Janus” section book, which is a term named after the
Roman god of doorways with one head and two faces looking in opposite
directions and is a term applied to a literary unit that looks back and forth to unite
the units before and after. Therefore, Genesis 37:1 looks back at Genesis 36 and
the account of Esau’s descendants settling in Seir and looks forward to Jacob and
his sons in the land of Canaan, thus this passage serves to contrast Jacob’s
commitment to the land of Canaan with Esau’s migration to Mount Seir.
Genesis 37:2 begins the tenth and final section of the book of Genesis, which
ends at Genesis 50:26. Genesis 37:2 presents to us the account of Jacob’s sons and
Joseph giving his father Jacob a slanderous report of his brothers.
Genesis 37:2 These are the records of the generations of Jacob. Joseph,
when seventeen years of age, was pasturing the flock with his brothers while
he was still a youth, along with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his
father's wives. And Joseph brought back a bad report about them to their
father. (NASB95)
“These are the records of the generations of Jacob” is the phrase `elleh
e
tol dhoth ya`aqov, which introduces the tenth and final section to the book of
Genesis, which ends in Genesis 50:26 and contains the account of Jacob’s family,
and primarily deals with Joseph and Judah.
The account of Jacob’s family brings the book of Genesis to its climatic
conclusion. This tenth book or section deals primarily with the transformation of
Jacob’s sons under the care and protection of God.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
234
There is a tendency to identify this last section of Genesis as the “story of
Joseph,” but this is not technically accurate since Moses referred to Genesis 36 as
the “records of the generations of Esau” (36:1, 9) and in Genesis 37:2 Moses
entitled this section “the records of the generations of Jacob.”
We must not forget that Jacob will not pass off the scene until Genesis 49,
where we find the account of his death and so in this last section, is an account of
God’s working in the life of Jacob and of his sons through the instrumentality of
Joseph. Joseph is certainly the central figure in these chapters, but he is not the
only figure since God is forming a nation out of all the sons of Jacob and not just
Joseph.
Joseph’s sojourn in Egypt and his ultimate elevation to the post of prime
minister under Pharaoh makes possible the preservation of Jacob and his sons, as
well as teaching all of them some valuable spiritual lessons.
The account of Jacob’s family begins in Canaan but ends in Egypt with the
confident expectation of returning to Canaan as the Lord had promised them. This
account between Canaan and Egypt is driven by conflict with family and
authorities of power as illustrated by the following: (1) Genesis 37-38: The family
of Jacob in conflict in Canaan (2) Genesis 39-41: Joseph in conflict with the
imperial power of Egypt (3) Genesis 42-44: The family of Jacob in conflict in
Canaan and Egypt (4) Genesis 45-47: The family of Jacob reconciled in Egypt (5)
Genesis 48-50: The family of Jacob blessed in Egypt but looking in faith to
Canaan.
This tenth and final section in the book of Genesis is characterized by striking
symmetry containing nine pairings that point to the providence of God, which
states that our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God.
Nine Pairings: (1) Joseph has two dreams (37:5-10) and two problems with his
brothers (37:2-11; 12-36) (2) Tamar’s successful seduction of Judah is followed by
Potiphar’s wife’s unsuccessful seduction of Joseph (38:1-30; 39:1-23) (3) Joseph
interprets two dreams of his prison mates (40:1-23) and two dreams of Pharaoh
(41:1-40) (4) Joseph’s brothers devise two plans to deal with him (37:21-27) and
he devises two plans to deal with them (42:14-20) (5) Joseph’s brothers make two
trips to Egypt (42:1-38; 43:1-34) (6) Joseph’s steward tests Joseph’s brothers and
then Joseph himself tests Judah (44:1-13, 14-34) (7) Narrator twice records Jacob’s
family’s migration to Egypt (46:1-27; 46:28-47:12) (8) Jacob blesses Joseph and
sons (48:1-22) and then all his sons (49:1-28) (9) Jacob dies (49:33-50:13) and
Joseph dies (50:22-26).
As the account of Jacob’s sons begins, we see Joseph and Judah are immature,
however, through divine discipline the character of these men is developed and
refined.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
235
The narrator in Genesis 37:2-11 conveys to the reader three events that lead to
Joseph being sold into slavery by his brothers: (1) Joseph slanders his brothers
(37:2) (2) Jacob gives Joseph a beautiful royal robe (37:3-4) (3) Joseph shares two
dreams with his brothers (37:5-11).
The name “Joseph” is yoseph, which literally means, “He adds,” which is a
play on the verb yasaph, “to add” and is also a prayer for another child,
foreshadowing the birth of Benjamin.
“Joseph” was the eleventh son of Jacob that was born in Paddan Aram and he
was the first child that Rachel bore to Jacob according to Genesis 30:22-24.
Joseph’s life is divided into three segments: (1) Birth to Seventeen Years of
Age (Genesis 30:24-37:2) (2) Seventeen to Thirty Years of Age (Genesis 37:241:46) (3) Thirty Years to Death (Genesis 41:46-50:26).
It is interesting that Joseph lived the first seventeen years of his life with his
father Jacob and Jacob lives with Joseph for the last seventeen years of his life (See
Genesis 47:28), which reveals the providence of God in the lives of these two men.
“His brothers” refers to the sons of Jacob’s primary wife Leah since the writer
makes a distinction between these children and those of his concubines, who are
identified as “the sons of Zilpah” and “the sons of Bilhah.”
There is no evidence exegetically or contextually that would indicate as some
commentators propose that Joseph was given authority by his father Jacob over his
brothers.
The preposition `eth, which appears in the prepositional phrase “along with his
brothers” is used to denote accompaniment and is never used in the Scriptures to
denote authority “over” a person or thing. Furthermore, the noun na`ar, which is
translated in the New American Standard as “youth” denotes someone who is
inexperienced implying that Joseph was learning the occupation of being a
shepherd.
The richly ornamented robe that Joseph received from his father Jacob did
“not” indicate his authority over his brothers but rather simply expressed that Jacob
favored Joseph over his brothers and expressed his desire that Joseph be the future
ruler of the family.
Even though Jacob’s desire was for Joseph to rule the family eventually, Joseph
was too immature and too inexperienced to be the chief shepherd over the family
flocks and herds, not to mention to be head of the family since he was only
seventeen years of age.
So it appears that Leah’s sons were the keepers of the flock while Joseph was
an undershepherd or an assistant shepherd along with the sons of his father’s
concubines. Together, Joseph and the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah were learning how
to be shepherds from the sons of Jacob’s primary wife Leah. In fact, Joseph was
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
236
closer in age to the sons of Jacob’s concubines than he was to Leah’s older sons,
Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah.
Shepherding was perhaps the most common occupation in ancient Israel and
was an integral part of family life in Israel. The reason why Jacob put Joseph with
the sons of his concubines was to protect Joseph from the jealousy of Leah’s sons
who resented Jacob favoring Joseph’s mother Rachel over their mother Leah and
his favoring Joseph over them.
As we have noted in detail in our studies of Genesis 29-30, Jacob favored
Rachel over Leah and this favoritism produced resentment among the sons of
Leah. If you recall, in our studies of Genesis 35:22, Reuben who was the first son
that Leah bore to Jacob while in Paddan Aram committed adultery and incest with
Jacob’s concubine Leah, who was Rachel’s maid, which was an act of rebellion
against Jacob for favoring Rachel and Joseph over him and his mother Leah. This
incident between Reuben and Jacob’s concubine, Bilhah is motivated by Reuben’s
resentment of Jacob and his love for his mother Leah rather than sexual lust since
by defiling Bilhah, he makes certain that with Rachel’s death her maid cannot
supplant Leah as chief wife (Compare 2 Samuel 15:16; 16:22; 20:3).
So we see that Jacob puts Joseph with the sons of his concubines rather than
with Leah’s sons even though he is the favorite son of his favorite wife Rachel
since he wants to protect Joseph from the jealousy of Leah’s sons.
Furthermore, Jacob wanted to protect Joseph from the idolatry and immorality
of Leah’s sons since it appears that Simeon and Levi were involved in Canaanite
immorality and idolatrous practices, which led to them being demonically
influenced resulting in their brutally killing all the men of the city of Shechem.
The fact that Simeon and Levi were involved in the idolatrous practices of the
Canaanites is implied by the text of Genesis 35:2-3 when Jacob commands his
entire household to get rid of their foreign gods!
Deuteronomy 32:17 and 1 Corinthians 10:20 teach that the worship of idols is
connected to the worship of demons since the sacrificing to idols is in reality
sacrificing to demons who promote the worship of idols. Demonic “influence” has
to do with demons influencing the human soul whereas demon “possession” has to
do with demons indwelling the human body. The latter of which can only take
place in an unbeliever since demons will never indwell the body of a believer since
the believer’s body is permanently indwelt by all three members of the Trinity (See
Ephesians 4:5, Colossians 1:27, Romans 8:11). Simeon and Levi were demonically
“influenced” and not “possessed” since they were believers.
This Canaanite influence upon Leah’s sons is further revealed in Genesis 38,
which records Judah’s involvement with Canaanite immorality and his marriage to
a Canaanite woman who rejected the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Therefore,
Jacob puts Joseph with the sons of his concubines even though Joseph is his
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
237
favorite son of his favorite wife Rachel in order to protect Joseph from the jealousy
of the sons of his other primary wife Leah and their immoral conduct and
idolatrous practices.
Genesis 37:2 These are the records of the generations of Jacob. Joseph,
when seventeen years of age, was pasturing the flock with his brothers while
he was still a youth, along with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his
father's wives. And Joseph brought back a bad report about them to their
father. (NASB95)
“Bad report” is composed of the primary particle `eth, which is used to mark
the noun dibbah as the direct object and is not translated and then we have the
feminine singular noun dibbah, “slanderous report” and also we have the adjective
ra`, “evil.”
The noun dibbah is derived from davav, which can have the following
meanings depending upon the context in which it is used: (1) “to go slowly and
gently” (2) “to creep about” and hence “to slander” (3) “to flow gently” or “drip.”
In Akkadian the word is a technical term for a “legal case” or “slander.”
However, the Hebrew rarely uses this legal sense and in most cases the sense
conveyed by the noun is a “negative report” or “a rumor.”
The noun dibbah appears nine times in the Old Testament (Gen. 37:2; Num.
13:32; 14:36, 37; Ps. 31:13; Prov. 10:18; 25:10; Jer. 20:10; Ezek. 36:3) and is
always used in a negative sense of an untrue report about someone or something
and when used with reference to people, the noun dibbah refers to defamation and
slander.
Slander refers to defamation, which is publishing or speaking maliciously or
falsely anything that would injure or harm a person’s reputation and so slander is a
malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report. Joseph slandered his brothers
meaning he reported to Jacob their father a malicious and false report that
misrepresented his brothers to Jacob their father, thus, we can see the first reason
why Joseph was hated by his brothers.
At seventeen years of age, the picture the Holy Spirit draws of Joseph is that of
a spoiled brat and tattle tale who was involved with the sin of slander, which is
evil. The adjective ra` modifies dibbah and describes Joseph’s report to his father
as “evil.”
Based on their previous behavior in massacring the Shechemites (See Genesis
34) and involvement with Canaanite idolatry (See Genesis 35:2-3) and Canaanite
immorality (See Genesis 38), it is likely that Joseph’s half-brothers were doing
wrong from which Joseph should have rightly distanced himself. However, the
Scriptures teach that he should have operated in love and drew a veil and
concealed the transgression of his brothers (cf. 1 Peter 4:8; Proverbs 10:12; 11:1213; 12:23).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
238
It appears that Joseph was very moral as manifested in his refusal to commit
adultery with Potiphar’s wife (See Genesis 39:6-18) and his brothers were very
immoral as manifested in Judah’s involvement with sexual immorality with
Canaanite women (See Genesis 38). Therefore, it appears that Joseph was a “moral
degenerate” and his brothers were “immoral degenerates” in the sense that Joseph
spoke evil of his brothers for their immorality and thought because he was moral
that he was superior to his brothers. So the picture we get of Joseph and his
brothers is that Joseph was a “goody two shoes” whereas his brothers were “hellraisers.”
Joseph’s Brothers Treat Him Unfairly
In Genesis 37:3, Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit employs the
name “Israel” rather than “Jacob” in order to emphasize that the unfair treatment
by Joseph’s brothers against him and his ending up in Egypt was a manifestation of
the providence of God. The providence of God is the divine outworking of the
divine decree, the object being the final manifestation of God’s glory and expresses
the fact that the world and our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God.
Genesis 37:3 Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons, because he
was the son of his old age; and he made him a varicolored tunic. (NASB95)
The statement “Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons, because he was
the son of his old age” not only expresses that Jacob favored Joseph over his other
sons but also expresses that God sovereignly cared for all Jacob’s sons, which is
indicated by the name “Israel,” which is divine in origin.
The name “Israel” was given to Jacob by the preincarnate Christ after their
wrestling match at Peniel according to Genesis 32:28.
The name “Israel” memorializes the historical event of Jacob wrestling the
preincarnate Christ, and served as a perpetual reminder to Jacob to not depend
upon his own power and ability but rather to depend and rely upon the power of
God to deal with problems with people and adversities in life.
After Jacob’s failure with his family at Shechem, the Lord reconfirmed this
name change at Bethel according to Genesis 35:10 in order to reaffirm to Jacob His
plan for his life and to impress upon Jacob the need to live his life in a manner that
is consistent with the meaning of his new name.
In Genesis 37:3, the name “Israel” emphasizes that God has control over the
situation between Joseph and his brothers and has figured it into His plan since the
name “Israel” is divine in origin and is used in the context of Joseph’s brothers
resenting him because Jacob their father favored Joseph over them.
The name “Israel” implies that Joseph’s brother’s resentment of him and their
selling him into slavery and Joseph ending up in Egypt was figured into the divine
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
239
decree and was a part of the providence of God, which is the outworking of the
divine decree, the object being the final manifestation of God’s glory.
Genesis 45:5-8 records that after Joseph revealed himself to his brothers in
Egypt, he told them that God sent him to Egypt in order to keep the family of
Jacob alive in the sense that God decreed from eternity past that he would be sold
into slavery and arrived in Egypt in order to fulfill God’s will to preserve his
family alive.
In Genesis 50:14-20, after Jacob died, Joseph’s brothers were worried that he
might exact revenge on them, Joseph reassured his brothers that it was God’s plan
for him to be sold into slavery and end up in Egypt and suffer undeservedly in
order to preserve their family.
The statement “Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons” expresses that
Jacob favored Joseph over his other sons since Joseph was the first son of Jacob’s
favorite wife Rachel who suffered many years of infertility before giving birth to
him.
Jacob was very disappointed in the behavior of his three older sons whose
mother was Leah since Genesis 34 records Simeon and Levi being the
masterminds of the massacre at Shechem and Genesis 35:22 records Reuben,
Jacob’s oldest son as committing adultery and incest with his concubine, namely,
Rachel’s maid Bilhah.
Notice, that this statement “Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons” does
“not” say that Israel did not love his other sons but rather that he loved Joseph
“more” than them implying obviously that he “did” love his other sons but it was
not as affectionate as his love for Joseph.
This statement echoes the statement found in Genesis 29:30, “So Jacob went
in to Rachel also, and indeed he (Jacob) loved Rachel more than Leah, and he
served with Laban for another seven years.”
Notice, also that this statement in Genesis 29:30, like the one in Genesis 37:3
does “not” say that Jacob did not love Leah but rather he loved Rachel “more”
than Leah implying obviously that he “did” have love for Leah but it was not as
passionate and affectionate as his love for Rachel.
The fact that Jacob favored Joseph over his other sons was wrong and actually
fueled his sons’ hatred of Joseph. Favoritism had a long history in Jacob's family
such as Isaac’s preference for Esau and Rebekah’s for Jacob, and Jacob favoring
Rachel over Leah.
As we have noted in detail in our studies of Genesis 29-30 and 37:2, Jacob
favored Rachel over Leah, which produced resentment among the sons of Leah. If
you recall, in our studies of Genesis 35:22, Reuben who was the first son that Leah
bore to Jacob while in Paddan Aram committed adultery and incest with Jacob’s
concubine Leah, who was Rachel’s maid, which was an act of rebellion against
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
240
Jacob for favoring Rachel and Joseph over him and his mother Leah. This incident
between Reuben and Jacob’s concubine, Bilhah is motivated by Reuben’s
resentment of Jacob and his love for his mother Leah rather than sexual lust since
by defiling Bilhah, he makes certain that with Rachel’s death her maid cannot
supplant Leah as chief wife (Compare 2 Samuel 15:16; 16:22; 20:3). Therefore,
you would think that Jacob, now Israel would have learned his lesson to not play
favorites since he was the victim of such favoritism and that his favoring Rachel
over Leah produced problems in his home.
However, it appears that he has not learned his lesson and therefore, he will pay
a huge price in that Joseph will be sold into slavery by his brothers and end up in
Egypt and not see his father for over twenty years due to the fact that the sons of
Leah resented that their father favored Joseph over them.
The fact that Jacob, now Israel favored Joseph over the sons of his concubines
and Leah’s sons does “not” excuse what Joseph’s brothers did to him in selling
him into slavery.
The causal clause “because he (Joseph) was the son of his old age” reveals
the primary reason why Israel preferred Joseph over his other sons and means that
Joseph was the baby in the family even though Benjamin was born after him.
“Old age” is expressing the condition of advanced age of Jacob. Joseph was
born when Jacob, now Israel was 91 years of age and was the last of his sons born
in Paddan Aram. The fact that Jacob was 91 years of age when Joseph was born is
indicated by the following: Genesis 47:9 records that Jacob was 130 years old
when he was reunited with Joseph and Genesis 41:46 records Joseph as 30 years
old when he became prime minister of Egypt. Therefore, since Joseph became
prime minister of Egypt at thirty and at the beginning of the seven years of
prosperity, Joseph was 37 years of age at the end of these seven years of
prosperity.
In Genesis 45:6, after reuniting with his brothers, Joseph mentions to his
brothers that two years of famine had already transpired and that five more
remained. Right after this conversation that Joseph had with his brothers, Jacob
moved to Egypt and was reunited with Joseph according to Genesis 46. Therefore,
the fact that Joseph was 37 after the seven years of prosperity and that he met his
father after two years of famine indicates that Joseph was 39 years of age when he
was reunited with his father Jacob and his brothers during the seven years of
famine.
So if Joseph was 39 years of age when he was reunited with his father Jacob
and became prime minister at 30 and was sold into slavery at 17, then Joseph was
in Egypt for 22 years when he was reunited with his father Jacob. Furthermore,
since Jacob was 130 years old and Joseph was 39 years of age when they were
reunited, then Jacob was 91 years old when Joseph was born.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
241
The noun zequnim, “old age” is used in Genesis 44:20 to describe Jacob’s
relationship to Benjamin. Therefore, in Genesis 37:3, the term does “not” refer to
the spiritual superiority of Joseph over his brothers as some commentators contend
meaning that he was a “wise son” or was wise beyond his years since the term is
also used of Jacob’s relationship to Benjamin. This interpretation is further
confirmed in that Joseph did “not” demonstrate much wisdom by giving his father
a slanderous report concerning his brothers, nor does he demonstrate much wisdom
by bragging about his two dreams, which reveal that he would rule over his
brothers. Therefore, it is clear that at this point in his life, Joseph was “not”
superior to his brothers in wisdom, however, he did receive revelation from God
through the two dreams and so in that sense he was blessed, not superior since his
brothers did not receive any revelations from God in a dream.
The statement “because he (Joseph) was the son of his (Israel’s) old age”
implies that Joseph was spoiled by his father because Joseph was born in his old
age and also was the firstborn son of his favorite wife Rachel.
Israel expresses his love for Joseph and that he favors him over his others sons
by making for him a kethoneth passim, which the New American Standard
translates “a varicolored tunic.”
The King James translates this Hebrew expression “a coat of many colours,”
while the NIV renders it, “a richly ornamented robe” and the RSV calls it, “a
long robe with sleeves.” The Message Bible translates this Hebrew expression “an
elaborately embroidered coat” while the Amplified Bible renders it “a
[distinctive] long tunic with sleeves.”
“Varicolored tunic” is composed of the feminine singular form of the noun
kuttoneth, which means, “tunic” and the masculine plural form of the noun pas,
which means, “long tunic with long sleeves.”
The only other place in the Old Testament that the expression kethoneth passim
appears is in 2 Samuel 13:18-19 where it is mentioned as the distinctive dress of
virgin daughters of royalty as the one worn by King David’s virgin daughter
Tamar.
The noun kuttoneth means, “tunic,” which was the basic garment in the ancient
world, the equivalent of the modern slacks and shirt. There is considerable
disagreement as to how pas should be translated since some say it refers to the
color and ornamentation of the garments and others say it refers to the length of the
garments. Many translations follow the Targums (Aramaic translations of Hebrew
Old Testament), Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament) and
Vulgate (Latin translation of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New
Testament) by translating the word “coat of many colors.” Others follow the
Midrashic (Exegetical and Commentaries of the Hebrew Old Testament)
translation “coat with long sleeves” by supposing pas means, “flat of hand or foot.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
242
In Aramaic and Rabbinic Hebrew pas means, “the palm of the hand and the sole
of the foot.” Therefore, it appears that this tunic extended to the wrists and ankles
of a person, which is significant since men in the days of the patriarchs did not
work in long sleeves but rather in short sleeves while those in long sleeves were
the overseers or employers of those in short sleeves.
The etymology kuttoneth and pas does “not” appear to indicate that the coat that
Jacob gave to Joseph was multicolored. However, the passion for various colours
was popular among people of the Middle East in the days of the patriarchs as it still
is today among the Arabs and the country people of the Middle East, who are fond
of dressing their children in this gaudy attire. But since the art of interweaving
various patterns was introduced, “the coats of colors” are different now from what
they seem to have been in patriarchal times, and bear a close resemblance to the
varieties of tartan.
This kethoneth passim, “long sleeved robe” was a mark of distinction indicating
exemption from labor which was the peculiar privilege of a king or a prince.
Therefore, Joseph’s brothers resented him because this long sleeved robe marked
him as exempt from work and expressed Israel’s desire that Joseph rule over his
brothers. So while this long sleeved coat exempted Joseph from work, his brothers
were in short sleeves working, which led of course to their resenting Joseph.
The kethoneth passim, “long sleeved robe” would express publicly Israel’s
desire to give Joseph the family birthright, which he received according to 1
Chronicles 5:2. This long sleeved robe signified publicly that Israel favored
Joseph over his other sons and would express publicly Israel’s desire that Joseph
succeed him as the ruler of the family. Therefore, this long sleeved garment
expressed publicly Israel’s rejection of Reuben in receiving the birthright as a
result of committing adultery and incest with his concubine Bilhah as well as his
rejection of Simeon and Levi as well for being the ringleaders in the massacre of
Shechem.
Up to this point in the narrative we have seen two elements that contribute to
Joseph’s brothers resenting him: (1) In Genesis 37:2, Joseph’s slanders his brothers
to his father. (2) In Genesis 37:3, Israel gives Joseph a long sleeved robe, which
marks him out to be the future possessor of the birthright and ruler of the family.
Genesis 37:4 His brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his
brothers; and so they hated him and could not speak to him on friendly terms.
(NASB95)
Genesis 37:4 records Joseph’s brothers’ reaction to their father favoring Joseph
over them and giving Joseph preferential treatment.
John Schultz, “The reaction of Joseph’s brothers to the love Jacob bestows upon
them is hatred for Joseph. Joseph ultimately suffers more from his father’s love
than he benefits from it. The attitude of the other sons indicates that they craved for
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
243
love from their father, which they did not receive. There must have been an
immense amount of strife and jealousy in the family. The tension between the two
sisters carried over to their sons. Leah’s sons must have prided themselves on the
fact that they were the sons of Jacob’s actual wife. Everybody must have looked
down upon the boys of the slave girls. But the hatred toward Joseph surpasses
every other feeling. It probably gave a sense of unity between them, as a common
enemy usually does” (Genesis, page 165).
“They hated” is the verb sane, which expresses an emotional attitude toward
someone or something, which is abhorred, disdained or opposed and which desires
to have no relationship or amiable reconciliation.
Therefore, Joseph’s brothers possessed in their souls an emotional attitude
toward him, in which they abhorred, disdained or opposed him and desired to have
no relationship with him or amiable reconciliation with him.
Joseph’s Two Prophetic Dreams
In Genesis 37:5-11, we will see Joseph having two prophetic dreams, which he
relates to his brothers resulting in their plotting to kill Joseph but instead sell him
into slavery.
In the days of the patriarchs, dreams were a common means of divine
communication and were of a prophetic nature, which Joseph’s brothers would be
well aware of. Joseph’s dream was a revelation from God and was prophetic in
nature, revealing to Joseph not only his future but those of his brothers and father.
However, Joseph and his brothers, and his father did not grasp the significance of
the dream until all the elements of the dream were fulfilled in time.
This is the fifth dream we have seen thus far in our studies of the book of
Genesis (Abimelech-Genesis 20; Jacob-Genesis 28:12-15; Jacob-Genesis 31:1012; Laban-Genesis 31:24). In each of these four dreams, God spoke audibly to
Abimelech, Jacob twice and Laban, however, God never speaks to Joseph in his
dream and so his dream is the first in which God never speaks.
The dreams of Abimelech, Jacob and Laban were theophanies or
Christophanies, which are theological terms used to refer to either a visible or
auditory manifestation of the Son of God before His incarnation in Bethlehem.
In Abimelech’s dream, he received an auditory manifestation of the Son of God
whereas Jacob received in his dream at Bethel both a visible and auditory
manifestation of the Son of God and in his last dream, Jacob received only an
auditory manifestation. Therefore, Joseph’s dream forms a transition in the primary
means by which God communicated with men from theophanies, which appear in
Genesis 1-36 to divine providence as manifested in Genesis 37-50.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
244
The fact that Joseph receives this divine revelation in a dream at the beginning
of the story of his being sold into slavery by his brothers and ending up in Egypt
reveals these things were decreed by God in eternity past so as to raise up the
nation of Israel to represent Him and to bring the Savior into the world and to
glorify Himself. This dream at the beginning of Joseph’s ordeal reveal that God
was in control of Joseph’s circumstances and that his being sold into slavery by his
brothers and ending up in Egypt were due to the providence of God.
The providence of God is the divine outworking of the divine decree, the object
being the final manifestation of God’s glory and expresses the fact that the world
and our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God. Therefore, Joseph’s two
dreams, which appear in Genesis 37:5-11, are a revelation of God’s sovereign will
for Joseph and his entire family.
Joseph’s two dreams, which are recorded in Genesis 37:5-11, predict his own
career and the arrival of his entire family in Egypt to buy food and bow down to
him as the prime minister of Egypt. Both dreams speak of his family being under
his authority at some point in the future, which was fulfilled when Joseph became
prime minister of Egypt and his brothers unknowingly bowing down to him.
The doubling of the dream emphasizes that Joseph’s family will indeed bow
down to Joseph and that the matter is firmly decided by God and will come to pass.
An isolated dream might be misinterpreted but two dreams with the same meaning
confirm the interpretation.
Also, these dreams, which contain revelation from God about the future of
Joseph’s family and himself served as a great encouragement to Joseph while he
was incarcerated for thirteen years in Egypt. In our day and age, the Scriptures,
which are revelation from God concerning our future (See 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter
1:20-21), serve as encouragement to us when we go through adversity and
underserved suffering in our lives.
The revelation from God that Joseph received in his two dreams constituted the
“Word of God” for him whereas here in the church age, the Word of God appears
in the original languages of Scripture.
Genesis 37:5 Then Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his brothers,
they hated him even more. (NASB95)
In the Hebrew text, the statement “they hated him even more” literally means,
“They added more to their hate of him” and is a play on Joseph’s name, which
means, “He adds” revealing God’s sovereign control over the life of Joseph. The
hatred and resentment of his brothers towards Joseph, the favoritism of his father
towards him, Joseph telling of the dreams to his brothers and father, as well as his
being sold into slavery and ending up in Egypt did not happen by chance or fate
but because God ordained for it to take place in order to fulfill His plan for Jacob’s
family and to bring glory to Himself. In eternity past, God not only figured the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
245
hatred and resentment of Joseph’s brothers towards him as well as his father
favoring him over his brothers but also He figured Joseph’s bad decision to tell his
dreams to his brothers.
Up to this point in the narrative we have seen three elements that contribute to
Joseph’s brothers resenting him: (1) In Genesis 37:2, Joseph’s slanders his brothers
to his father. (2) In Genesis 37:3, Israel gives Joseph a long sleeved robe, which
marks him out to be the future possessor of the birthright and ruler of the family.
(3) Joseph’s two prophetic dreams that appear in Genesis 35:5-11.
“They hated” in both Genesis 37:4 and 5 is the verb sane, which expresses an
emotional attitude toward someone or something, which is abhorred, disdained or
opposed and which desires to have no relationship or amiable reconciliation.
Therefore, Joseph’s brothers possessed in their souls an emotional attitude toward
him, in which they abhorred, disdained or opposed him and desired to have no
relationship with him or amiable reconciliation with him.
Joseph’s brothers are following in the footsteps of Cain who hated his brother
Abel because the Lord accepted Abel’s blood offering and rejected his grain
offering and then acted on that hate by murdering his brother Abel.
Joseph is the object of the “passive” form of hate at the hands of his brothers,
which is expressed by the statement “they…could not speak to him on friendly
terms.” Then, in Genesis 37:18-36, Joseph is the object of the “active” form of
hate at the hands of his brothers when they threw him into a pit and threatened to
murder him but then decided to sell him into slavery.
“They hated” means that Joseph’s brothers possessed in their souls an
emotional attitude toward him, in which they abhorred, disdained or opposed him
and desired to have no relationship with him or amiable reconciliation with him.
The statement “he (Joseph) told it to his brothers” implies that Joseph is
bragging about this dream since in context, Joseph has already slandered his
brothers to his father revealing a rivalry between Joseph and his brothers. Also,
indicating that Joseph is bragging here is that Joseph obviously knew that his
brothers resented him already for their father favoring him over them and so to
relate this dream to them would only serve to antagonize his brothers further.
Therefore, Joseph’s boasting about the two prophetic dreams was a sin on his part
and contributed to his being sold into slavery by his brothers and then finally
ending up in Egypt.
Joseph’s proud boasting of the dreams reveals his immaturity and is in direct
contrast to his father’s reaction to the dreams, which is silent meditation upon them
as recorded in Genesis 37:11. The divine revelation that Joseph received from God
in two dreams was given to him by God for his own edification and encouragement
that God had a plan for his life and not so he could brag and intimidate his family.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
246
The fact that these two dreams that Joseph had came to pass reveals that they
were from God, however, Joseph’s use of this divine revelation was not ordained
by God.
Genesis 37:6 He said to them, “Please listen to this dream which I have
had; 7 for behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf rose
up and also stood erect; and behold, your sheaves gathered around and bowed
down to my sheaf.” (NASB95)
The phrase “Please listen” and “behold” express Joseph’s excitement as a
result of receiving not only divine revelation in a dream but also that God has
ordained for him to rule over his brothers, which will not take place until he is
taught humility.
Genesis 37:6-7 records Joseph’s first dream and was “agricultural” as indicated
the binding of sheaves, which foreshadows the context in which Joseph’s brothers
would bow down to him. While he was prime minister of Egypt, Joseph’s brothers
bowed down to honor him and not knowing it was Joseph and they did so in order
to purchase grain to keep from starving due to the seven year famine that covered
the entire earth. Genesis 42:1-3 records ten of Joseph’s brothers bowing down to
him while he was prime minister in Egypt in order to purchase grain from him due
to the great famine that covered the entire earth at that time for seven years.
In fact, the first dream/prophecy recorded in Genesis 37:6-7 was fulfilled in
stages: (1) Joseph’s brothers bowed once to honor him while he was prime minister
of Egypt (See Genesis 42:6). (2) Joseph’s brothers bowed down twice to honor him
while he was prime minister of Egypt (See Genesis 43:26, 28). (3) Joseph’s
brothers throw themselves at Joseph’s feet (See Genesis 50:18).
Genesis 37:8 Then his brothers said to him, “Are you actually going to
reign over us? Or are you really going to rule over us?” So they hated him
even more for his dreams and for his words. (NASB95)
Joseph’s brothers understood clearly the meaning of the dream that Joseph
would one day rule over them and they resented him even more than they already
did. The two rhetorical questions put forth by Joseph’s brothers express their
sarcasm and contempt for Joseph. Indirectly and unknowingly, Joseph’s brothers
oppose the sovereign will of God since it was God the Holy Spirit who had given
Joseph this revelation concerning his future and that of his father and brothers.
The terms “reign” and “rule” indicate that Joseph’s brothers understood his
dream to mean that Joseph would reign over them as a monarch and would have
dominion and rule over them. This was fulfilled when Joseph became the prime
minister of Egypt and ruled the entire world with the exception of Pharaoh (See
Genesis 41:38-44; 45:8-26; Deuteronomy 33:16).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
247
Furthermore, Joseph’s first dream reveals that God has chosen Joseph to receive
the birthright meaning the rights of the firstborn and would receive the double
portion of the inheritance since Jacob adopts Joseph’s two sons (See Genesis 48:5).
The statement “So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his
words” is the third time in this passage that Joseph’s brothers were said to have
hated him and indicates the intensity of hostile emotions towards Joseph was
increasing.
The plural “dreams” appears rather than the singular “dream,” which appears
to be odd since up to his point in the narrative Joseph has related only one dream,
however, the word is used in the plural because it is an “abstract” noun signifying
the sleeping state of Joseph when receiving divine revelation.
The term “words” is the noun davar, which refers to the “content” of the dream
since the word denotes “that which is spoken,” thus negating any idea that it refers
to the “manner” in which Joseph communicated the dream.
Joseph’s brothers did not hate him because of the way he communicated the
dream to them but simply because of the content of the dream itself, which
conveyed to them that Joseph their baby brother would rule over them.
Genesis 37:9 Now he had still another dream, and related it to his brothers,
and said, “Lo, I have had still another dream; and behold, the sun and the
moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” (NASB95)
Where the first dream was “agricultural,” the second, which appears in Genesis
37:9 is “celestial” and emphasizes the idea that is expressed in the first dream. In
the ancient world, astrological symbols such as the sun, moon and stars represented
rulers and so therefore, Joseph’s second dream anticipated the elevation of Joseph
as ruler over his entire family, which took place when he became prime minister
and his family came under his authority.
The “sun” refers to Jacob, now Israel and the “moon” refers to Leah and not
Rachel since the latter died while giving birth to Benjamin after Jacob left Bethel
according to Genesis 35:19. Rachel died when Joseph was six or seven years of
age and the fact that he had this dream at seventeen years of age indicates clearly
that she was already dead when Jacob lived in Hebron where Isaac his father
sojourned according to a comparison of Genesis 37:1 with Genesis 35:27.
The “eleven stars” refers to Joseph’s brothers who would be Reuben, Simeon,
Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad, Asher, Dan, Naphtali, and Benjamin.
This same image appears in Revelation 12:1 with the only difference being that
in Joseph’s dreams there were eleven stars whereas in Revelation 12:1 there are
twelve since Joseph is included among the stars in John’s vision.
Genesis 37:10 He related it to his father and to his brothers; and his father
rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have had? Shall I
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
248
and your mother and your brothers actually come to bow ourselves down
before you to the ground?” (NASB95)
Jacob rebukes Joseph for his dream since he is said to have bowed down also to
Joseph, which initially appeared to Joseph as an attack upon his authority as the
father of the family. Jacob’s rhetorical question expresses his disgust and that he
initially did not consider Joseph’s dream as revelation from God but rather the
boasting of a spoiled little brat.
Joseph’s brothers remain silent here because their father’s rebuke is sufficient
for them. Joseph’s brothers must have loved for him to be rebuked by their father
and taking their side since Joseph was their father’s favorite.
“Your mother” refers to Leah since Rachel was dead at this point in Joseph’s
life, which must have pleased Leah’s sons since Jacob favored Rachel over Leah
while Rachel was alive.
Genesis 37:11 His brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the
saying in mind. (NASB95)
“Jealous” is the verb qana, which is a mental attitude sin directed toward
another, which is resentful, intolerant and suspicious of another’s success,
possessions or relationships and is vigilant in maintaining or guarding something.
Joseph’s brothers were jealous of Joseph in the sense that they desired the
position that God had ordained for Joseph in the dream. They were resentful and
intolerant and suspicious of Joseph and his success that was prophesied of him in
Joseph’s dream. They were also guarded over their position as the older brothers of
Joseph and did not tolerate Joseph and considered him a rival.
Joseph’s brothers were under Satanic influence by being jealousy towards
Joseph since jealousy is demonic in origin (cf. James 3:13-16). Envy is also
included in the list of sins produced by the old sin nature in both the believer and
unbeliever (Rom. 1:29; Gal. 5:21; Titus 3:3; 1 Pet. 2:1). Jealousy leads to murder
(Rom. 1:29; Gal. 5:20). The jealousy of Joseph’s brothers towards him expressed
itself when they plotted his murder and by selling him into slavery. The fact that
Jacob is recorded as having kept Joseph’s dream in his mind indicates that he did
not discount what Joseph related to him since God had communicated His will to
Jacob in the past by means of dreams.
Joseph’s Brother Attempt to Kill Him
In Genesis 37:12-24, we will see Joseph’s brothers attempting to kill Joseph but
are restrained by Reuben who suggests an alternative plan to throw Joseph into a
cistern and let him die by natural causes. However, Reuben’s real intent was to buy
time so he could deliver Joseph at a more opportune moment when his brothers
were not around.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
249
Genesis 37:12 Then his brothers went to pasture their father's flock in
Shechem. 13 Israel said to Joseph, “Are not your brothers pasturing the flock
in Shechem? Come, and I will send you to them.” And he said to him, “I will
go.” (NASB95)
“Shechem” is approximately thirty-five miles north of Jerusalem and fifty
miles north of Hebron, directly west of the Jabbok River and approximately twenty
miles from the Jordan in the land of Canaan.
Just a few years before, Shechem was the site of one of the darkest days in the
history of the nation of Israel for it was the place where Simeon and Levi and their
servants killed Shechem, his father Hamor and all men of the city of Shechem in
retaliation for Shechem raping their sister Dinah (See Genesis 33:18-34:31).
Jacob owned land in Shechem since Genesis 33:19 records that Jacob purchased
a tract of land just outside the city of Shechem from Hamor, Shechem’s father for
one hundred pieces of money.
Since Shechem was approximately fifty miles north of Hebron, this would be
quite a journey for Israel’s sons to travel to feed the family flocks. However, it was
not uncommon for shepherds to lead their flocks many miles from home in search
of pasture. In fact, it is still common for Bedouin shepherds in that land to move
northward as the summer progresses since there is more rain and better water
supply the further north one travels.
Even so, it does “not” make good sense that Israel’s sons would go near
Shechem since the massacre of that city had only taken place a few years before
and God had to intervene and protected them from being attacked by the
Canaanites and the Perizzites (See Genesis 35:5).
Even though Israel owned land in Shechem, he could “not” have agreed to this
trip by his sons to Shechem since Genesis 34:30 records that Israel feared that the
Canaanites and Perizzites would attack his family in retaliation for his sons killing
all the men of Shechem. Therefore, the idea to go to Shechem had to originate with
Israel’s sons, which is further indicated in that Israel voices his concern to Joseph
about the safety of his sons and thus, sends Joseph.
Also, it is implied that Israel’s sons had sent word to Israel that they were at
Shechem since Israel himself did not send them to Shechem but rather the visit to
Shechem originated with Israel’s sons.
Israel’s sons went to Shechem even though they knew that their father feared
retaliation from the Canaanites and Perizzites because they were attempting to get
back at their father for the long sleeve colorful coat that he gave to Joseph, which
symbolized his desire to bestow the birthright upon Joseph rather than on one of
them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
250
Furthermore, Israel’s sons would not be afraid of this trip to Shechem and in
particular Simeon and Levi would be embolden and would not fear the Canaanites
and Perizzites since they easily dispatched with the Hivites in Shechem.
The name “Israel” is used rather than “Jacob” emphasizing that the plot to kill
Joseph and the selling of him into slavery by his brothers as well as Joseph ending
up in Egypt as prime minister was according to the plan of God.
Since the name “Israel” is divine in origin, it implies that Joseph’s brothers plot
to kill him and his being sold into slavery by them and his ending up in Egypt as
prime minister was a part of God’s sovereign will that is based upon His
omniscient knowledge of all the facts concerning what will take place in the future.
The name “Israel” implies that the events in the life of Israel’s sons were
figured into the divine decree and was a part of the providence of God, which is the
outworking of the divine decree, the object being the final manifestation of God’s
glory.
The statement “I will go” expresses Joseph’s obedient response to his father’s
command to check to see if his brothers are safe in Shechem, and which obedience
reveals another reason why Joseph was Israel’s favorite.
Genesis 37:14 Then he said to him, “Go now and see about the welfare of
your brothers and the welfare of the flock, and bring word back to me.” So he
sent him from the valley of Hebron, and he came to Shechem. (NASB95)
“Welfare” is the noun shalom, which in context means, “safety” indicating that
Israel was concerned about the “safety” of his sons and his flocks they were
shepherding in the area of Shechem.
Israel’s concern for the welfare of his family and his flocks was not without
foundation since as we noted earlier, Shechem was the city where Israel’s sons
massacred the city of Shechem in retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah. In
fact, Genesis 34:30 records Israel’s concern for the safety of his family after the
massacre of Shechem where he communicates to Simeon and Levi his fear that
inhabitants of Canaan would get wind of the massacre of Shechem and then
retaliate against Israel’s family.
The fact that Israel sent his beloved Joseph emphasizes that Israel was very
concerned and feared for the safety of his sons and flocks since he would never
risk the safety of his beloved Joseph unless it was for good reason. At this point in
the narrative, Israel was residing in “the valley of Hebron,” which was just
outside of the city of Hebron since the city of Hebron is located 3,040 feet above
sea level, dominating a beautiful and fruitful area filled with ancient oaks called
terebinth trees. “Hebron” was located fifty miles south of Shechem, which is
approximately a two day journey.
Genesis 37:15 A man found him, and behold, he was wandering in the
field; and the man asked him, “What are you looking for?” 16 He said, “I am
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
251
looking for my brothers; please tell me where they are pasturing the flock.” 17
Then the man said, “They have moved from here; for I heard them say, ‘Let
us go to Dothan.’” So Joseph went after his brothers and found them at
Dothan. (NASB95)
This scene where Joseph gets lost in the wilderness keeps the reader in suspense
by delaying the confrontation of Joseph with his brothers and by heightening our
awareness of the danger Joseph faces so far removed from his father Israel.
The appearance of an unidentified man is another manifestation of the
providence of God, which expresses the fact that this was not an accident that this
unidentified man came along to help Joseph but rather was a part of God’s eternal
plan.
“Dothan” is the proper noun dothan, which means, “two wells” and is
approximately fifteen miles north of Shechem and is located on a hill surrounded
by a flat, fertile valley and is known for its rich pastureland. It is interesting that
even today shepherds from the Hebron area still come to Dothan to take advantage
of the great water supply as well as well as caravans and camel trains.
Beginning in Genesis 37:18, the scene shifts to the encampment of Joseph’s
brothers and views things from their perspective and enables the reader to
eavesdrop on their conversation.
Genesis 37:18 When they saw him from a distance and before he came
close to them, they plotted against him to put him to death. 19 They said to
one another, “Here comes this dreamer! 20 Now then, come and let us kill him
and throw him into one of the pits; and we will say, ‘A wild beast devoured
him.’ Then let us see what will become of his dreams!” (NASB95)
Joseph’s brothers could see him coming from a distance because of the
distinctive long sleeved colorful coat he was wearing that was given to him by
their father, which in turn reminded them of Joseph’s dreams. Notice that it doesn’t
take long for Joseph’s brothers to decide to kill him indicating that they had been
thinking about the idea for quite some time.
“They plotted against” is the verb nakhal, which means, “to conspire against”
someone. To conspire against someone is to “agree together, especially secretly to
do something wrong, evil or illegal” and the word “conspiracy” refers to an “evil,
unlawful, treacherous or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more
persons.” Therefore, the verb nakhal indicates that Joseph’s brothers with the
exception of Benjamin, Reuben and Judah agreed together in secret to murder
Joseph.
The statement “Here comes this dreamer” in the Hebrew text literally means,
“the lord of the dreams.” To be the “lord” of something means that you are an
expert or a specialist in a particular area of endeavor. Therefore, Joseph’s brothers
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
252
mock him by identifying him as “this master-dreamer” or in other words, Joseph
who in his dreams is master over his brothers.
The statement “this master-dreamer” is sarcastic, contemptuous mockery of the
dreams God gave to Joseph indicating that his brothers had decided to prove his
dreams were fantasy by killing him and that they considered Joseph good for
nothing else but dreaming.
“Kill” is the verb haragh, which is used in a technical legal sense of murdering
someone by violence.
The Word of God prohibits murder according to Exodus 20:13 and is one of the
sins that God hates according to Proverbs 6:16-19 and according to Genesis 9:6 is
to be punished through capital punishment.
Joseph’s brothers become bold and conspire to kill him because their father is
not around to restrain them and they have murdered before when they killed all the
men of the city of Shechem in retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah. Joseph’s
brothers conspired to murder him and then throw his body down into one of the
cisterns, which caught the runoff from the rains and were commonly located at the
bottom of the hills.
Archaeologists have found a large number of cisterns all over Israel, which are
bottle shaped pits hewn out of rock for retaining water and range from 6 to 20 feet
in depth.
Undoubtedly, Simeon and Levi are the master minds behind this plan since they
were the master minds of the massacre at Shechem and they were the older sons of
Leah, who held the greatest resentment of Joseph since Jacob favored Joseph’s
mother Rachel over Leah.
Genesis 37:21 But Reuben heard this and rescued him out of their hands
and said, “Let us not take his life.” 22 Reuben further said to them, “Shed no
blood. Throw him into this pit that is in the wilderness, but do not lay hands
on him” -- that he might rescue him out of their hands, to restore him to his
father. 23 So it came about, when Joseph reached his brothers that they
stripped Joseph of his tunic, the varicolored tunic that was on him; 24 and
they took him and threw him into the pit. Now the pit was empty, without any
water in it. (NASB95)
The verbs “stripped,” “took,” and “threw” conveys the speed and roughness of
the brothers’ assault on Joseph. Joseph’s brothers immediately strip off his long
sleeved colorful coat that their father gave him, which symbolized their father’s
desire to give the birthright to Joseph rather than them and for Joseph to rule the
family.
The fact that Leah’s oldest son Reuben attempts to stop this plot to murder
Joseph clearly indicates that he was not a part of the conspiracy.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
253
The statement “Let us not take his life” is an inaccurate translation but rather
should be translated “we will emphatically not take his life.”
Reuben orders his brothers to not shed Joseph’s blood but rather throw him into
a cistern and let nature do him in, which had some definite advantages, and so the
plan was agreed to. By exerting his authority as the oldest brother in the family and
ordering that Joseph not be killed and ordering instead that he be thrown into the
pit, Reuben was apparently seeking to buy some time, intending to rescue Joseph
and return him back home to the safety of their father when the others were not
around.
Therefore, Reuben in effect saves Joseph’s life since if he was not there to stop
his brothers, they would have murdered Joseph, which again is another
manifestation of the providence of God in the life of Joseph.
Reuben hid his motives for having Joseph thrown into a pit rather than
murdered because he feared his brothers would not listen to him, which reveals
that his younger brothers did not respect him.
Even so Reuben should have dealt with his brothers more forcefully and never
should have suggested a compromise solution by throwing Joseph into the pit, but
rather should have emphatically stated that Joseph would not be killed. Reuben’s
attempt to solve this problem with cunning and a crafty scheme rather than a more
forward honest approach backfires on him since when his back is turned his
brothers sell Joseph into slavery. However, it is very commendable that Reuben at
least made this attempt since he of all the brothers should have resented Joseph the
most since he was the oldest and was rejected by his father for committing incest
with his concubine Bilhah.
Joseph undoubtedly realized that Reuben was trying to save him and years later
he indicated he remembered Reuben’s actions by holding Simeon, the next oldest
of the sons rather than Reuben, captive in prison (See Genesis 42:24).
The statement “now the pit was empty” explains why Joseph did not drown
when he was thrown into the cistern.
We can just imagine Joseph advancing towards his brothers, totally
unsuspecting of their fierce resentment and hatred towards him and how astonished
and terrified he must have been at their fierce and brutal treatment. Genesis 42:21
records that Joseph was greatly distressed in his soul and pleaded for mercy with
his brothers to not throw him into the pit and to not sell him into slavery.
Joseph’s Brothers Sell Him into Slavery
Genesis 37:25-28 records Joseph’s brothers selling him into slavery.
Genesis 37:25 Then they sat down to eat a meal. And as they raised their
eyes and looked, behold, a caravan of Ishmaelites was coming from Gilead,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
254
with their camels bearing aromatic gum and balm and myrrh, on their way to
bring them down to Egypt. (NASB95)
Genesis 37:25 records that Joseph’s brothers had a meal together after they
threw Joseph into the empty cistern and Genesis 42:21 records that Joseph was
filled with fear and pleaded with his brothers while they ate their meal together.
Therefore, we can see from a comparison of Genesis 37:25 with Genesis 42:21
reveal the cold, insensitive and indifferent attitude of Joseph’s brothers towards
him, which was a manifestation of the “passive” form of hate.
The “active” form of hate is expressed by unjustifiable hostility and antagonism
towards another, which expresses itself in malicious words and actions whereas the
“passive” form of hate is manifested by coldness, by isolation, by exclusion,
unconcern for your fellow human being. Joseph’s brothers manifested the “active”
form of hate by attempting to murder him until Reuben intervened.
The fact that Joseph’s brothers sat down to eat while Joseph was pleading with
them to free him demonstrates a total lack of pity and no sense of guilt or remorse.
Ironically, the next meal that the brothers will have in Joseph’s presence will be
with Joseph at the head of the table as prime minister of Egypt (See Genesis 43:3234). Undoubtedly, Joseph’s brothers would take the time during the meal to discuss
amongst themselves the fate of Joseph.
Evidently, Reuben was not at this meal as indicated in that he was not present
when the brothers sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites according to Genesis 37:29-30. It
is not stated why Reuben was not at this meal since if he was, Joseph would never
have been sold into slavery. He might have gone back to take care of the flocks
since his brothers were so occupied with Joseph.
The statement “they raised their eyes” refers to the fact that Joseph’s brothers
looked up from their meal.
The words “looked, behold” signals that what Joseph’s brothers are about to
observe, though unknown to them and Joseph, would be of great significance to
their family and consequently, of great significance in the history of the nation of
Israel and the salvation of the world.
The significance of Joseph being sold into slavery was that it was the first step
in fulfilling the prophecy the Lord gave to Abraham in Genesis 15:13-14 that his
descendants, the Israelites would be enslaved for four hundred years (round
number, actual number 430) in Egypt but would be delivered by God.
At this point in the narrative, Joseph and his brothers were located in Dothan,
which was 15 miles north of Shechem and resided close to the main trade route
through Palestine, the Via Maris, which cuts across the plain of Jezreel from the
Sea of Galilee to pass along the coastal plain to Egypt (Y. Aharoni, Land of the
Bible, pages 41-49). Therefore, it was a common occurrence for caravans to pass
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
255
through the area of Dothan since it was close to the main trade route through
Palestine to Egypt.
“Ishmaelites” is the proper noun yishme`e’li and they were the descendants of
Ishmael and his twelve sons whose father was Abraham and his mother was Hagar
(See Genesis 16; 21:9-21; 25:12-18).
Not only was Abraham the father of the nation of Israel that originated with
Jacob’s twelve sons but also he was the father of the Arabs through his son Ishmael
and his twelve sons (Gen. 17:20; 21:13; 25:12-18). Therefore, Jacob’s sons were
related to the Ishmaelites by blood since they both descended from Abraham.
“Gilead” is the proper noun gil`adh, which means, “rocky region” and is a
mountain region east of the Jordan River 3,000 feet above sea level, extending
about 60 miles from near the south end of the Sea of Galilee to the north end of the
Dead Sea.
“Gilead” is about 20 miles wide and is bounded on the west by the Jordan
River, on the south by the land of Moab, on the north by the Yarmuk River, and on
the east by the desert.
If you recall, Jacob fled to Gilead from Laban his father-in-law (Gen 31:21).
The balm of Gilead, an aromatic resin used for medical purposes, was exported
to Tyre and elsewhere (Ezek 27:17) and the Ishmaelites who carried Joseph into
Egyptian bondage also traded in Gilead balm (Gen 37:25), which appears in
Egyptian records as a healing salve (cf. Jer. 8:22; 46:11).
Genesis 37:26 Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it for us to kill
our brother and cover up his blood?” 27 Come and let us sell him to the
Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him, for he is our brother, our own
flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. (NASB95)
Now, we see that Judah takes the lead in comes up with an idea. “Judah” was
the fourth child that Leah bored to Jacob and his name means, “I will praise the
Lord” according to Genesis 29:35.
Reuben’s idea of dumping Joseph in the pit (empty cistern) left the problem of
Joseph unresolved. The fact that Judah intervenes and actually acknowledges that
Joseph is their brother is a sign that like Reuben, Judah had a conscience in that his
idea to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites prevented Joseph’s murder.
Judah’s proposal appears cruel on the surface but it appears that he recognized
during the meal that Simeon and Levi were determined to treat Joseph harshly so
in a desperate attempt to save Joseph’s life he presents this proposal.
Further indicating that Judah, like Reuben was attempting to prevent the murder
of Joseph is that later on after Joseph has been sold to the Ishmaelites, Genesis
38:1 records that Judah separated from his brothers when no apparent reason is
given, thus implying that Judah did “not” agree with his brothers’ plans to murder
Joseph.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
256
Even though Judah’s proposal only substituted one evil for another since like
murder, kidnapping was a capital offense (See Exodus 21:16; Deuteronomy 24:7),
his rationale was that Joseph was better off alive than dead, even if it meant he
would spend the rest of his life a slave.
Evidently, while Reuben was away with the flocks, the conversation during the
meal returned to murdering Joseph and so Judah intervenes to save Joseph.
By selling Joseph into slavery, Judah reminds his brothers that they would then
not be guilty of murder, which indicates that Judah had a conscience before God in
that he knew that murder was a capital offense that demanded capital punishment.
The Word of God prohibits murder according to Exodus 20:13 and is one of the
sins that God hates according to Proverbs 6:16-19 and according to Genesis 9:6 is
to be punished through capital punishment.
Joseph could be killed either by violence or by leaving him in the empty cistern
to die of exposure and/or starvation.
Judah’s question, “What profit is it for us to kill our brother?” is design to
conceal his true intention to prevent Joseph’s murder by appealing to his brothers’
lust of money.
The phrase “cover up his blood” is a biblical idiom in that since the time of
Cain, the blood of a murder victim was said to “cry out” for justice, thus uncovered
blood served as a constant reminder of a crime and as an incitement to revenge.
Therefore, this phrase reveals Judah’s respect for the laws of God, which prohibit
murder.
It appears that both Judah and Reuben feared for their own lives after seeing
what Simeon and Levi did to the Shechemites and so they don’t reveal their
intentions to save Joseph.
Genesis 37:28 Then some Midianite traders passed by, so they (Joseph’s
brothers) pulled him up and lifted Joseph out of the pit, and sold him to the
Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. Thus they brought Joseph into Egypt.
(NASB95)
The “Midianites” were the descendants of “Midian” the fourth son of Abraham
and Keturah according to Genesis 25:1-2 and were a well-known Arabian tribe east
of the Gulf of Aqabah and the Red Sea. They traded in gold and incense according
to Isaiah 60:6, Genesis 37:25, 28, and did this from Moab to Sinai and Ephah
according to Numbers 22:4, 7, Judges 6-8.
“Keturah” became Abraham’s concubine after Sarah’s death (See 1 Chronicles
1:32; Genesis 25:1) and she bore Abraham six sons (Genesis 25:2).
Abraham was the father of one branch of the Arabs by Hagar through Ishmael
and his twelve sons as well as the father of another branch of Arabs by Keturah
and their six sons (Gen. 17:20; 21:13; 25:12-18).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
257
Keturah’s name, which means, “perfume, fragrance” signifies the trade of her
sons.
The names “Ishmaelites” and “Midianites” in Genesis 37:25, 27, 28, 36 and
Genesis 39:1 are synonymous terms, which is confirmed by Judges 8:24, which
says of the Midianites “they had golden earrings, because they were
Ishmaelites.”
Evidently, the descendants of Ishmael and Midian intermarried (See Genesis
25:2, 17-18; 29:9) since both were descended from Abraham, Ishmael’s mother
was Hagar and Midian’s was Keturah.
Therefore, the word “they” refers to Joseph’s brothers since the names
“Ishmaelites” and “Midianites” are referring to the same group of individuals.
The use of these two terms in Genesis 37 indicates that the term “Ishmaelite”
was a generic term or general designation for “nomadic traders” or “desert tribes”
whereas “Midianite” indicates a specific ethnic affiliation. Or in other words, the
term “Midianites” in Genesis 37 refers to a specific ethnic affiliation among the
league of desert tribes or nomadic traders known by the generic use of the term
“Ishmaelites.”
The Hebrew text of Genesis 37:28 literally reads, “They dragged and lifted
Joseph out from the cistern and they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty
pieces of silver and they brought Joseph to Egypt.”
The three-fold repetition of Joseph’s name in the original Hebrew text
emphasizes that Joseph being sold into slavery and brought to Egypt was an
extremely important and providential event in the family of Jacob and in the
history of the nation of Israel in its infancy.
Joseph’s brothers sold him for “twenty shekels of silver” which was the value
of a boy between the ages of five and twenty years of age according to Leviticus
27:5, thus Joseph was sold for this amount.
The average price of a slave of full physical maturity was thirty shekels
according to Exodus 21:32, which was the price for which our Lord was betrayed
by Judas.
At the time, Joseph’s brothers thought that they had finally rid themselves of
Joseph but unwittingly they have contributed to fulfilling Joseph’s dreams and
God’s purpose, which was to rule over them as the prime minister of Egypt.
Jacob’s Sons Deceive Him
Genesis 37:29-33 presents to us the record of Jacob’s sons deceiving him into
believing that Joseph was killed by a wild animal.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
258
Genesis 37:29 Now Reuben returned to the pit, and behold, Joseph was not
in the pit; so he tore his garments. 30 He returned to his brothers and said,
“The boy is not there; as for me, where am I to go?” (NASB95)
The fact that Genesis 37:29 records Reuben as “returning” to the pit (the empty
cistern) indicates that he was not present when his brothers sold Joseph to the
Midianites. A comparison of Genesis 37:29 with 30 reveals that the brothers had
left the vicinity of the pit and went about their business.
Reuben knowing they were gone evidently came back secretly, with the
intention of freeing Joseph from the pit. However, to his great surprise and dismay,
Joseph is gone.
The fact that Reuben’s brothers do “not” respond to his questions as to the
whereabouts of Joseph and their lack of surprise that Joseph was not in the pit, and
their attempt to murder Joseph not too long ago, would lead Reuben to believe that
his brothers had in fact killed Joseph and disposed of the body. There is no
indication that Joseph’s brothers informed Reuben that they had sold Joseph into
slavery but rather he believes that Joseph is dead since if his brothers had informed
Reuben that they sold Joseph into slavery, he would have pursued the caravan to
Egypt in order to buy Joseph back!
Reuben’s brothers would “not” want to inform him that they sold Joseph to the
Midianites since they knew he would pursue the caravan and buy Joseph back
since he previously prevented them from killing Joseph. Therefore, by delivering
Joseph they would risk having their conspiracy to kill him exposed, not to mention
their actions in selling him into slavery!
Judah would have no desire to tell Reuben of his scheme since he also knew
that Reuben would pursue the caravan and buy Joseph back from the Midianites,
which would result in exposing his scheme to sell Joseph into slavery, even though
the scheme was an attempt to save Joseph from death.
In the ancient world, the tearing of one’s garments was a common sign of
mourning, grief and dismay (See Leviticus 10:6; 13:45; 21:10). Reuben’s
emotional reaction not only expressed his dismay at what he thought was the death
of Joseph but also that he would be held responsible by Jacob, now Israel, since he
was the oldest in the family.
His rhetorical question “as for me where do I go” expresses his anguish over
the fact that as the oldest, it would be up to him to convey the bad news to Israel,
which he knew would result in his father blaming him and that he has no idea as to
what he is going to tell his father as to how Joseph was killed. However, his
brothers already have a plan, namely, to tell their father that wild animals had
killed Joseph, which would was the alibi that they had originally come up with
until Reuben stopped the murder of Joseph from taking place (See Genesis 37:20).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
259
The fact that Reuben is very upset because he thinks Joseph is dead speaks well
of him, however his failure to confront his brothers over what he believes is the
murder of Joseph reveals a lack of moral courage on his part. More than, likely he
lived in fear of Simeon and Levi because he saw what they were capable of when
they killed every man in the city of Shechem. In fact, he becomes a co-conspirator
with his brothers in deceiving their father that Joseph was killed by wild animals.
Genesis 37:31 So they took Joseph's tunic, and slaughtered a male goat and
dipped the tunic in the blood; 32 and they sent the varicolored tunic and
brought it to their father and said, “We found this; please examine it to see
whether it is your son's tunic or not.” (NASB95)
The brothers do “not” overtly tell a lie but they do deceive their father into
thinking that Joseph was killed by wild animals. They simply will let their father
make the deduction that Joseph is dead by means of the evidence they present to
him, which was the long sleeved multicolored coat that he gave Joseph.
There is a subtle irony in the use of the blood of a slaughtered male goat in
order to deceive Jacob since Jacob deceived his blind father Isaac with the use of
goat skins and Esau’s clothing (See Genesis 27:9, 16). Now, he is being deceived
by his sons with goat’s blood and his son’s clothing.
The long sleeved multicolored coat would establish for Jacob the identity of its
owner. The Hebrew text of Genesis 37:32 clearly indicates that Jacob’s sons did
“not” personally hand their father Joseph’s bloody coat but rather sent messengers
to perform this task along with a message to him about the bloodied coat.
“They sent” is the verb shalach, which refers to “persons who are sent by other
persons such as the action of sending messengers.”
“Brought” is the verb bo, which is used in the hiphil stem and is semantically
connected with the verb shalach expressing a single process.
Therefore, since the verb shalach refers Jacob’s sons sending a messenger to
their father, the verb bo expresses that this unidentified messenger, probably a
servant brought Joseph’s bloodied coat to Jacob.
The fact that Jacob’s sons do not personally present Joseph’s bloodied coat to
him but rather send a messenger to do this reveals not only that they sought to
avoid any suspicion of involvement in Joseph’s demise but also their cowardice
and dislike for their father because he favored Joseph over them.
The bluntness of the message sent by Jacob’s sons to him “We found this;
please examine it to see whether it is your son's tunic or not” expresses their
resentment towards Jacob for favoring Joseph over them since it does “not”
attempt to soften the blow of Joseph’s death.
The fact that Jacob’s sons do not personally present Joseph’s bloodied coat to
him but rather send a messenger to do this also indicates that at least some of the
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
260
brothers like Reuben and Judah felt guilty and did not want to experience the grief
of their father.
Notice also, that in the message to their father, Jacob’s sons simply state that
they “found” Joseph’s coat and not “where” they found it.
Genesis 37:33 Then he examined it and said, “It is my son's tunic. A wild
beast has devoured him; Joseph has surely been torn to pieces!” (NASB95)
Jacob recognizes the coat and then sees that it is stained with blood, which
gives him a disturbing mental picture of Joseph actually being torn to pieces by a
wild animal. Jacob immediately recognizes the long sleeved multicolored coat that
he gave to Joseph but does “not” question his sons more carefully. He jumps to the
conclusion that a wild beast had devoured him and did “not” take the time to notice
that the coat was “not” torn in pieces but rather simply had blood spattered all over
it. Therefore, instead of analyzing and thinking about what he saw and questioning
his sons as to “where” they found Joseph’s coat, he lets his emotions get the best of
him.
Emotion is the responder to what is in the mentality of the soul and cannot
think. Therefore, Jacob does not think about the evidence presented to him but
instead gets emotional, which blinds him to the fact that since the coat was “not”
torn but rather was still intact would indicate that Joseph was “not” torn to pieces
by a wild animal since if he was, the coat would have been torn too.
Jacob Mourns the Loss of Joseph
In Genesis 37:34-35, we see Jacob mourning over Joseph since he has been
deceived by his sons into thinking that Joseph was killed by a wild animal when in
reality his sons sold him into slavery to the Midianites.
Genesis 37:34 So Jacob tore his clothes, and put sackcloth on his loins and
mourned for his son many days. (NASB95)
Like Reuben, Jacob tears his clothes to express his extreme grief over the
perceived death of Joseph. He also wraps himself in sackcloth, which was a coarse
black cloth made of goat’s hair as a public demonstration of grief over the death of
Joseph.
“Mourned” is the verb `aval, which refers to outward or public expressions of
grief for the death of a loved one including the shedding of tears, wearing
sackcloth, sprinkling with ashes, lying on the ground and shaving of the head or
beard.
These actions were considered appropriate signifying anguish in the ancient
world in the days of the patriarchs. Mourning for the dead began immediately at
death, went on as the body was carried to the tomb, was observed at the tomb and
lasted at least seven days after the burial.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
261
Jacob’s grief is compounded in that there is no body to bury and therefore, no
closure. Jacob is said to have mourned Joseph for “many days,” which expresses
the intensity of his grief.
Genesis 37:35 Then all his sons and all his daughters arose to comfort him,
but he refused to be comforted. And he said, “Surely I will go down to Sheol
in mourning for my son.” So his father wept for him. (NASB95)
Jacob is inconsolable more than likely out of guilt for sending Joseph alone on
such a dangerous mission in the first place. Just a few short years before, Jacob’s
favorite wife Rachel died giving birth to their second child Benjamin and now he
had lost their firstborn, Joseph.
Like God, Jacob had big plans for Joseph since he had intended to give the
birthright to Joseph, which was in agreement with God’s will according to 1
Chronicles 5:1-2.
Jacob’s statement “Surely I will go down to Sheol in mourning for my son”
expresses his determination to grieve publicly for Joseph until the day he died.
The term “sons” does “not” refer to the sons Jacob fathered, which would
include Gad, Asher, Dan, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and
Zebulun but rather it refers to his grandsons.
The term “sons” is the noun ben, which does “not” always refer to a boy that a
man fathers himself but rather it can also refer to a grandson as well.
The context will determine, whether a son or a grandson is in view. In our
particular context, the term ben refers to Jacob’s grandsons. If you recall, when
Joseph’s brothers sold him to the Midianites they were located in Dothan, which
was approximately 15 miles north of Shechem. According to Genesis 37:14, Jacob
was located in Hebron when he sent Joseph to check on the safety of his sons who
were in Shechem. As we noted Sunday in Genesis 37:32, Joseph’s brothers did
“not” personally delivered Joseph’s bloody coat to their father in Hebron but rather
sent the coat via a messenger.
This is clearly indicated since in Genesis 37:32, the phrase “they sent” is the
verb shalach, which refers to “persons who are sent by other persons such as the
action of sending messengers.” So therefore, Simeon, Gad, Asher, Dan, Naphtali,
Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun did “not” comfort their father
when he examined Joseph’s bloodied coat and determined that Joseph had been
torn to pieces by a wild animal.
Genesis 46:8-26 lists the grandchildren of Jacob and many of these children are
the ones who comforted Jacob when he received the bloodied coat from his sons.
The noun bath “daughters” refers to all the females in Jacob’s household,
which would include his only daughter Dinah, his daughters-in-law as well as
granddaughters. The term bath can be used to describe a “granddaughter” or a
“daughter-in-law” and not just a “daughter.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
262
“Sheol” is the noun she’ol, which in the New Testament is called “Hades” and
refers to one of four compartments called in Scripture “Paradise,” which prior to
the resurrection of Jesus Christ contained the departed souls of believers.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
263
Chapter Fifteen: Jacob is Reunited with Joseph
Famine in Canaan
In Genesis 37:36, we will see that the Midianites sold Joseph in Egypt to a man
named Potiphar who was Pharaoh’s officer.
Genesis 42 begins the “third act” of the tenth and final section in the book of
Genesis. This tenth section in the book of Genesis is contained Genesis 37:2-50:26
and gives us the account of Jacob’s descendants. The first act was contained in
Genesis 37:2-38:30, introducing us to the dysfunctional family of Jacob (37:238:30), giving us the account of Joseph being rejected by his brothers and sold into
slavery (37:2-36) as well as containing the story of Judah sinning against Tamar
and having twins with her (38:1-30). The second act was contained in Genesis
39:1-41:57 presenting Joseph’s rise to power over Egypt, giving us the account of
Joseph in Potiphar’s house (39:1-20), being imprisoned and interpreting the dreams
of Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker (39:21-40:23) as well as being promoted by
Pharaoh to prime minister (41:1-57). The third act is contained in Genesis 42:146:27, giving us the account of the dysfunctional family of Jacob being reconciled
in Egypt and contains four scenes.
The first scene recorded in Genesis 42 presents Joseph’s brothers with the
exception of Benjamin making their first journey to Egypt to buy grain. During this
trip Joseph imprisons Simeon, promising his release upon their second journey
with Benjamin with them. However, Joseph plants money in their sacks and then
gives his brothers a choice of either returning the money, guaranteeing Simeon’s
release or of keeping it and thus jeopardizing his freedom.
Genesis 43 contains the second scene where Joseph’s steward returns Simeon to
his brothers as soon as, but only after they return the money to him. At the end of
this scene, Joseph tests his brothers by giving Benjamin preferential treatment and
without envy the brothers joyously drink together.
Genesis 44:1-14 contains the third scene where Joseph put his brothers to their
final test of love for their brother in need by making Benjamin alone appear guilty
of secretly placing his silver cup in his sack and counseling the other brothers to
return home in peace. But then, in Genesis 44:15-34, Judah offers himself as a
slave in Benjamin’s place, which causes Joseph to reveal his identity to his
brothers since they have demonstrated to him that he can trust them completely and
this is recorded in Genesis 45:1-15. People who sell their brother into slavery are
not trustworthy and so therefore Joseph retained power over his brothers until he
could trust them.
In the fourth and final scene that is recorded in Genesis 45:16-24 we see
Jacob’s entire family migrating toward Egypt to live with Joseph.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
264
Beginning in Genesis 42, we see the providence of God at work in bringing
about a reconciliation between Joseph and his brothers as well as relocating
Joseph’s family to Egypt in order to protect it from the Canaanite influence. The
means by which God brought about this reconciliation and relocation of Jacob’s
family to Egypt was the famine that wracked Canaan, Egypt and the entire earth
causing Jacob to send his sons to Egypt to buy grain. Joseph works with this
providence to unite his brothers and demonstrates that he not only is the leader of
Egypt but also of his family, leading his brothers to repentance and reconciliation.
In the third act that is contained in Genesis 42:1-46:27, we see the spiritual
transformation of Joseph’s brothers with Joseph and Judah emerging as heroes. In
this act, we see Joseph’s brothers rallying around Benjamin whereas years before
they had conspired to kill Joseph. Also, in this act, we Joseph’s brothers
demonstrating compassion towards their father whereas years before they
demonstrated none when breaking the news of Joseph. Judah emerges as the family
leader in this act, which is demonstrated in his willingness to become Joseph’s
slave instead of Benjamin.
Lastly, we see Joseph forgiving his brothers for their actions against him in the
past.
This first scene that appears in Genesis 42 consists of three sections: (1) Jacob
sends his sons to Egypt (42:1-5). (2) Joseph’s brothers have two audiences with
him (42:6-26). (3) Joseph’s brothers return to Jacob in Canaan (42:27-38).
Genesis 42:1-5 presents to us the record of Jacob sending his sons to Egypt to
buy grain in order to deal with the problem of the famine in Canaan. Genesis
41:53-57 records that there was not only a famine in Egypt but also in the countries
surrounding Egypt and the entire earth, thus Canaan where Jacob’s family lived
was a victim of famine.
At this point in the narrative Jacob is approximately 130 years of age while
Joseph was 39. This is indicated by the following: Genesis 37:2 records Joseph as
17 years old when he was sold into slavery and Genesis 41:46 records Joseph as 30
years old when he became prime minister of Egypt. Therefore, a comparison of
Genesis 37:2 with 41:46 indicates that Joseph was incarcerated in Egypt for 13
years and 14 if we count his seventeenth year.
Also, at the end of the seven years of prosperity in Egypt, Joseph must have
been 37 years of age since he became prime minister at 30 years of age when he
interpreted Pharaoh’s dream.
In Genesis 45:6, after reuniting with his brothers, Joseph mentions to his
brothers that two years of famine had already transpired and that five more
remained. Right after this conversation that Joseph had with his brothers, Jacob
moved to Egypt and reunited with Joseph according to Genesis 46. Therefore, the
fact that Joseph was 37 after the seven years of prosperity and that he met his
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
265
father after two years of famine indicates that Joseph was 39 years of age (or 40 if
we count his seventeenth year) when he was reunited with his father Jacob and his
brothers during the seven years of famine.
So if Joseph was 39 years of age when he was reunited with his father Jacob
and became prime minister at 30 and was sold into slavery at 17, then Joseph was
in Egypt for 22 years when he was reunited with his father Jacob.
During Joseph’s time as prime minister it appears that he did not attempt to
contact his brothers because he remembered how they hated him for the dreams
and for his long sleeved multicolored tunic as well as the content of his dreams. He
must have wondered to himself how much more jealous they would be if they saw
him in his position as prime minister with a gold chain around his neck and
Pharaoh’s signet ring on his finger. He knew if they were still jealous he could not
have fellowship with them and they might not accept his help. He apparently kept
these things in mind and was ready to deal with them when they arrived in Egypt
to buy grain and then, the time came when they needed his help.
Genesis 42:1 Now Jacob saw that there was grain in Egypt, and Jacob said
to his sons, “Why are you staring at one another?” 2 He said, “Behold, I have
heard that there is grain in Egypt; go down there and buy some for us from
that place, so that we may live and not die.” (NASB95)
Canaan experienced famine quite often since there was one in this land in the
time of Abraham (See Genesis 12:10), there was one in the days of Isaac (See
Genesis 26:1) and now a third in the time of Jacob. In fact, Stephen alludes to this
famine in the days of Jacob in Acts 7:11, stating that there was great affliction, and
the patriarchs found no sustenance. The faith of each one of the patriarchs,
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was tested by famine.
Jacob demonstrates that he is still actively leading his family by his
decisiveness and taking the initiative in dealing with the famine in Canaan and
ordering his sons to go to Egypt to buy grain whereas in marked contrast, his sons
demonstrate their indecisiveness.
The indecisiveness of Jacob’s sons is due to the fact that they all regarded
Egypt with apprehension since they sold Joseph to Ishmaelite/Midianites who were
heading down to Egypt where they sold Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Jacob’s sons
knew that there was grain in Egypt, they heard the reports and saw the caravans
laden with grain but they hesitated because of their collective guilty conscience,
remembering how they sold their brother into slavery in Egypt. The sound of the
word Egypt stirred their collective conscience, reminding them of their
mistreatment of Joseph and so Egypt was the last place that they wanted to go.
Joseph’s ten brothers were living with a guilty secret for over twenty years and
must have thought often of Joseph, wondering what happened to him in Egypt.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
266
As we will see later on this chapter and the ones to follow Jacob never stopped
grieving for Joseph, which in turn reminded his sons of the crime they committed
against Joseph some twenty years before.
Jacob’s decisiveness and initiative is demonstrated in his statement “Behold, I
have heard that there is grain in Egypt; go down there and buy some for us
from that place, so that we may live and not die.’”
After a period of over twenty years, Jacob reemerges once again as a man of
action, exercising his authority over his family and initiative in a crisis.
In Genesis 42:1, Jacob informs his sons that he “saw” (Hebrew verb ra’ah) that
there was grain in Egypt indicating that he observed his neighbors the Canaanites
returning from Egypt laden with grain.
In Genesis 42:2, he says that he “heard” (Hebrew verb shama`) that there was
grain in Egypt indicating that Jacob had listened carefully to reports from caravan
traders like the Ishmaelites or from the Canaanites that there was grain in Egypt.
Genesis 42:3 Then ten brothers of Joseph went down to buy grain from
Egypt. 4 But Jacob did not send Joseph's brother Benjamin with his brothers,
for he said, ‘I am afraid that harm may befall him. (NASB95)
Jacob states to his sons that the reason why he is not sending Benjamin with
them to Egypt is that “I am afraid that harm may befall him,” which
demonstrates a lack of faith in God’s protection for Benjamin.
Benjamin’s mother Rachel died giving birth to him and Jacob was deceived by
his sons into thinking that Joseph had been killed by a wild animal. Therefore,
Jacob was fearful that misfortune would happen to Benjamin as well and so he
kept Benjamin close by and was overly protective of him.
The designation “Joseph’s brother Benjamin” reveals that Jacob’s family is
still plagued by favoritism in that he is partial to Benjamin just as he was to Joseph
since both boys were sons of his favorite wife Rachel.
While the other ten sons were sent to Egypt, Benjamin was kept near, under the
watchful eye of his father. Therefore, Jacob guards Benjamin with a fear that has
grown out of his loss of Joseph, which he has never recovered from. So right at the
beginning of this new act in the drama, the narrator reminds us of the emotional
bonds between Jacob and Benjamin. Benjamin is now the apple of his father’s eye
like Joseph was and as his mother was. So Jacob continues to demonstrate more
affection towards Benjamin, the child of his favorite wife Rachel than the children
of Leah.
Genesis 42:5 So the sons of Israel came to buy grain among those who were
coming, for the famine was in the land of Canaan also. (NASB95)
The designation “the sons of Israel” emphasizes the national identity of
Israel/Jacob’s sons and not their personal identity as Jacob’s sons. This designation
is significant because the trip taken by Jacob’s sons to Egypt had great implications
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
267
for Jacob’s family who were the progenitors of the twelve tribes of the nation that
bore his father’s name. The nation of Israel was in its infancy at this time and this
trip to Egypt would lead to their deliverance from the famine and relocation to
Egypt for over four hundred years. This designation identifies Jacob/Israel’s sons
by their national designation, numbering them among the various ethnic groups
inhabiting the land of Canaan that went to Egypt to buy grain. The brothers will
enter Egypt as a nation in its infancy whereas their descendants will leave four
hundred years later as a powerful nation. Therefore, we see that sons of Israel
arrive in Egypt along with the other Canaanite groups to buy grain and yet as we
will see, they alone attract attention in Egypt since Joseph is now the prime
minister of Egypt responsible for the distribution of grain in Egypt.
Fulfillment of Joseph’s Dreams
Genesis 42:6 records the fulfillment of the first stage of Joseph’s two prophetic
dreams that are recorded in Genesis 37:5-11, which revealed that he would rule
over his entire family.
Genesis 42:6 Now Joseph was the ruler over the land; he was the one who
sold to all the people of the land. And Joseph's brothers came and bowed
down to him with their faces to the ground. (NASB95)
“Ruler” is the noun shallit, which refers to the fact that Pharaoh had delegated
to Joseph absolute power and authority over the nation of Egypt and reflects the
Egyptian title “Chief of the Entire Land,” which is a title synonymous with “prime
minister.”
The statement “he (Joseph) was the one who sold to all the people of the
land” refers to the well-known Egyptian office of “Overseer of the Granaries of
Upper and Lower Egypt.” The duties of this office involved the collection of tax
payments on field produce (See Genesis 47:24) as well as the storage of the grain
of bumper crops for distribution in years of famine. Therefore, we see that Joseph
held two offices since not only was he the prime minister over Egypt but also he
held the office of “Overseer of the Granaries of Upper and Lower Egypt.” Joseph
managed the sale and distribution of all the grain that was held in reserve.
All foreigners had to meet with Joseph personally as the prime minister of the
land of Egypt since he was the only one in Egypt who was delegated authority by
Pharaoh to sell to them.
Joseph’s brothers bow down to him, which was appropriate act of respect for a
sovereign of a nation. Unknowingly, by bowing down to him, Joseph’s brothers
fulfilled the first stage in the fulfillment of his prophetic dreams that he related to
them at seventeen years of age, which are recorded in Genesis 37:5-11.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
268
Now, if you recall, we studied in Genesis 41 that Joseph made extensive trips
throughout Egypt and delegated authority to civil administrators in each city in
Egypt who would be subordinate to him and would help him execute his plan that
he presented to Pharaoh, which is recorded in Genesis 41:33-37. Therefore, Joseph
did “not” personally manage the sale of grain in every detail to each individual
who came to buy. However, undoubtedly, he would give special attention to
foreigners. Especially, Hebrews from Canaan since his family resided there and the
famine was severe there as well.
Therefore, Joseph was anticipating the arrival of his family to buy grain and
would have given orders to his subordinates in each city to bring word to him when
any Hebrew men from Canaan came to buy grain so that he could be present in the
hopes of having a reunion and seeing the fulfillment of his two prophetic dreams.
The fact that Joseph’s brothers bowed down to him was according to Joseph’s
prediction recorded in Genesis 37:5-11 and demonstrated that his two dreams were
inspired by God and were a part of God’s plan and sovereign will from eternity
past. Therefore, these events were a manifestation of the spiritual principle taught
in Jeremiah 1:12, that the Lord watches over His Word to perform it.
It is also a manifestation of the spiritual principle taught in Isaiah 46:8-11 that
the Lord will accomplish in time that which He has spoken and planned from
eternity past.
Joseph’s First Audience with His Brothers
Next, we will note Genesis 42:7-17, which records for us Joseph’s brothers’
first audience with him in Egypt.
Genesis 42:7 When Joseph saw his brothers he recognized them, but he
disguised himself to them and spoke to them harshly. And he said to them,
“Where have you come from?” And they said, “From the land of Canaan, to
buy food.” 8 But Joseph had recognized his brothers, although they did not
recognize him. (NASB95)
Joseph was 39 years of age at this point in the narrative when his brothers
bowed down to him in fulfillment of his prophetic dreams (he was 40 if we count
his seventeenth year) and had spent 22 years in Egypt. He recognized his brothers
but his brothers did not recognize him because he had been Egyptianized as
recorded in Genesis 41.
It would have been easy for Joseph to recognize his brothers since the sons of
Leah would have been full grown men when he last saw them when he was 17.
Egyptians were clean shaven for hygienic reasons while most Asiatics usually
wore beards and so Joseph was clean shaven and his brothers were not. Joseph
would be further disguised in that he went by an Egyptian name. Joseph’s Egyptian
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
269
name was “Zaphenath-paneah,” which means, “God has spoken and he (Pharaoh
and Egypt) shall live.” The new name symbolized Joseph’s new identity and new,
fresh start in life in Egyptian society and validates his new position as prime
minister of Egypt.
Furthermore, Joseph’s brothers did not recognize him because he spoke
Egyptian and not Hebrew when addressing them. Also, he spoke harshly to his
brothers as an Egyptian would do to Hebrew shepherds, which further disguised
him. Therefore, Joseph’s brothers saw an Egyptian ruler with the Egyptian name
who spoke Egyptian who spoke harshly as an Egyptian would do to a Hebrew and
so they did not recognize him.
Joseph chooses to disguise himself since he remembered full well how his
brothers resented him for his long sleeved multicolored coat and how they
attempted to murder him and then sold him into slavery as a result of
communicating his two prophetic dreams to them. People who attempt to murder
their brother and then sell him into slavery cannot be trusted and so Joseph
disguises himself. Joseph could not be sure how they would act now that his
prophetic dreams were fulfilled when they bowed down to him.
Also, he must have wondered to himself how much more jealous they would be
if they saw him in his position as prime minister with a gold chain around his neck
and Pharaoh’s signet ring on his finger. He knew if they were still jealous he could
not have fellowship with them and they might not accept his help and so he kept
these things in mind when he addressed his brothers.
Joseph did not seek revenge upon his brothers and had no anger or resentment
towards his brothers as demonstrated by the names he gave his sons. His desire
was to bring his brothers to repentance in the matter of himself and to reunite with
his family as later events would demonstrate. However, he knew if they were still
jealous and resentful that he could have no fellowship with them. Therefore, he
decided to test them to be sure he could have fellowship with them.
Egyptians were known to be suspicious of foreigners so Joseph proceeded to
talk to his brothers as they expected Egyptians to talk to them since Egyptians
disliked Hebrew shepherds and would not even eat with them. In fact, the ancient
Egyptians considered all who entered at the northeastern boundary of their country
as potential enemies and of course Joseph’s brothers came from Canaan and would
have to proceed through this boundary. Therefore, when Joseph speaks harshly to
his brothers, it is not because he is bitter towards them or is seeking revenge or is
paying them back for what they did to him but rather it is his attempt to determine
if his brothers had changed over the years so that a reunion with them could be
possible.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
270
Joseph disguised himself to his brothers until it could be determined if their
character had changed and had been transformed by God just as his character had
been transformed by God through circumstances.
Joseph’s brothers attempt to disarm suspicion by giving more information than
was asked for in that not only do they state where they came from but also their
purpose as well. Therefore, Joseph’s brothers were in effect saying politely that
they were in Egypt to buy grain just like everyone else because of the famine.
Genesis 42:9 Joseph remembered the dreams which he had about them,
and said to them, “You are spies; you have come to look at the undefended
parts of our land.”
The statement “Joseph remembered the dreams, which he had about them”
refers to his two prophetic dreams he had when he was seventeen years of age that
predicted he would rule over his family and that are recorded in Genesis 37:5-11.
The sight of his brothers prostrating themselves before him suddenly reminds
Joseph that his two prophetic dreams have been fulfilled right before his eyes.
However, it also reminds Joseph of the hatred his brothers as a result of telling
them his dreams and their attempt to murder him and then selling him into slavery.
Joseph had forgotten his adversities with regards to his father’s household in the
sense that the sting of those memories was fading due to being blessed by God in
Egypt but he now remembers his dreams.
Joseph not only realized the fulfillment of his dreams but also the reason for
them. He saw that God had a purpose for placing him in his position of power, and
this purpose was for him to function as the family head, protecting and preserving
his family. He had great power and prestige, but God had given these to him for a
purpose much greater than merely to seek revenge. He saw that leadership
involved power, but that it also brought upon him the weight of responsibility. At
times the greatest need is not to be aware of the power at our disposal, but of the
purpose for which this power has been given.
So at this point in the narrative, Joseph is having conflicting emotions. His
sense of contentment is shaken by the unpleasant memories of his brothers selling
him into slavery. He is desperate for news about his father and only full brother
Benjamin back in Canaan. However, he feels he needs to find out conclusively
whether or not his brothers regret their actions in the past towards him and have
been transformed by God just as he had been.
Also, remember, Benjamin is not with his brothers, which would arouse
suspicion in Joseph as to whether or not they had acted violently towards Benjamin
as they did him. Therefore, he decides to embark upon a series of tests to determine
if his brothers could be trusted.
Joseph assumes the role of a tough professional interrogator in order to
determine if his full brother Benjamin and his father are still alive. Though
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
271
outwardly he speaks harshly with his brothers, inwardly Joseph has great affection
for them, which is demonstrated by his actions later on in Genesis 45 when he
reveals his identity to his brothers.
Syntactically, Genesis 42:9 links Joseph’s accusations with his remembering of
his two prophetic dreams and so he now acts according to the first dream of all
eleven bowing down to him by strategizing to get Benjamin to join them.
Therefore, in order to test his brothers’ character and to worm out of them the
confession that they have a brother and without revealing his true identity, Joseph
accuses his brothers of being spies, which would be a crime worthy of death in
Egypt.
Like God, Joseph knew that in order to properly analyze a person’s character
the most important elements are made visible when the test of adversity is applied
and so Joseph applies the pressure to his brothers to determine their true character.
The accusation of espionage would “not” seem unusual to Joseph’s brothers
(See Exodus 1:9-10; cf. 2 Samuel 3:25; 10:3) since frontier guards at Egypt’s
Asian border routinely checked travelers to discover spies who might indicate an
imminent attack. Armies in need of food often sought out any weaknesses in the
fortifications in order to plunder stockpiled grain, which is signified by the phrase
“the undefended parts of our land.” Therefore, the accusation of espionage
provided Joseph with a convenient pretext under which he could have the brothers
arrested and detained and subjected to more interrogation.
Genesis 42:10 Then they said to him, “No, my lord, but your servants have
come to buy food. 11 We are all sons of one man; we are honest men, your
servants are not spies.” (NASB95)
Joseph’s brothers respond to his accusation of espionage with four short
sentences in apposition, which climax with an emphatic rebuttal of Joseph’s
charge.
The phrase “your servants” is used twice by the brothers and is deferential
language since he is the prime minister of Egypt and is both good Egyptian and
Hebrew etiquette. Their first statement reiterates their statement in Genesis 42:7
that they have come to buy food because of the famine, which is a true statement.
Their second statement “we are all sons of one man” would refute the charge
of espionage since no father would dare jeopardize the lives of all his sons by
having them involved in such a dangerous occupation. They are in effect saying
that it is absolutely improbable that ten brothers would be traveling together as a
group in order to spy on a nation, rather if they were spying, they would have at
least split up.
Their third statement “we are honest men” will be tested further by Joseph but
up to this point in their audience with Joseph, it is a true statement.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
272
The last statement “we are not spies” reiterates and emphasizes their previous
rebuttal of the charge of spying.
Genesis 42:12 Yet he said to them, “No, but you have come to look at the
undefended parts of our land!” (NASB95)
Joseph hammers home the accusation of espionage in order to get information
out of them regarding their father and Benjamin. He repeats the accusation four
times in order to break down their resistance (See Genesis 42:12, 14, 15, 20).
Joseph should not be accused of sin by making these false accusations and lying
since such tactics are a necessary part of counteracting spying. For example, Rahab
was commended for lying in connection with espionage when she hid the Israelite
spies.
Genesis 42:13 But they said, “Your servants are twelve brothers in all, the
sons of one man in the land of Canaan; and behold, the youngest is with our
father today, and one is no longer alive.” (NASB95)
Joseph’s brothers’ initial rebuttal to the charge of espionage “we are all sons of
one man” is so compelling that they repeat it and even provide more details. The
brothers believe that by giving Joseph more details that this would make their
rebuttal more believable and in fact, it gave Joseph exactly the information he was
looking for.
The statement “Your servants are twelve brothers in all” is of course a true
statement and provides the exact number of sons for Joseph.
The statement “sons of one man” implies that not all of them have the same
mother.
The prepositional phrase “in the land of Canaan” again reiterates their
statement to Joseph in Genesis 42:7 of where they live and is necessary since as
Hebrews they would have not worn the attire of the Canaanites.
The statement “the youngest is with our father today” is exactly what Joseph
wanted to hear since it is a reference to his only full brother, Benjamin.
Joseph will use this statement as a pretext for pursuing further the accusation of
espionage since he could say that since their father knew that espionage was a
dangerous endeavor he kept one son behind with him in Canaan in order to
guarantee the family’s future if the brothers were caught and executed.
The statement “one is no longer alive” is a reference of course to Joseph and
expresses his brothers’ belief that he is dead since they actually presumed that
since they have heard nothing about Joseph for over twenty years that he must
have died in slavery. In Genesis 44:20, Judah confirms this belief that the brothers
thought Joseph to have died.
Genesis 42:14 Joseph said to them, “It is as I said to you, you are spies, 15
by this you will be tested: by the life of Pharaoh, you shall not go from this
place unless your youngest brother comes here!” (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
273
In response to his brothers’ statement that “the youngest is with our father
today” Joseph hammers home the espionage accusation in order that he might
verify their statement that they are honest men and that Benjamin is in fact alive
and has not been killed by his brothers.
Based upon the past actions of his brothers in attempting to kill him and selling
him into slavery, Joseph seeks to test the veracity of their statement by demanding
that they produce Benjamin and bring him into his presence. Therefore, in order to
confirm that Benjamin is alive, Joseph’s brothers are presumed guilty of espionage
until they can prove their innocence and so the burden of disproof is on the
brothers.
Genesis 42:16 “Send one of you that he may get your brother, while you
remain confined, that your words may be tested, whether there is truth in you.
But if not, by the life of Pharaoh, surely you are spies.” (NASB95)
The expression “by the life of Pharaoh” gives a statement the character of an
oath that is validated and sanctioned by the power and authority of Pharaoh.
Therefore, the expression “by the life of Pharaoh” gives Joseph’s statements in
Genesis 42:15-16 the character of an oath that is validated and sanctioned by the
power and authority of Pharaoh and is designed to scare Joseph’s brothers and
encourage reflection by them, which leads to repentance and reconciliation. This
expression does “not” mean that Joseph is disloyal to the Lord but rather simply
reflects the fact that he considers himself under the authority of Pharaoh who
himself is under the authority of God (See Romans 13:1-7) and would further
conceal his true identity.
Genesis 42:17 So he put them all together in prison for three days.
(NASB95)
Joseph plainly states to his brothers that they were in fact spies, in which case
their story about a younger brother was a mere fabrication, or they were telling the
truth. The matter could easily be resolved by simply producing their younger
brother. All of the brothers would be detained except one, who could be dispatched
to bring back the proof of their honesty. Joseph placed all of the brothers in
confinement together as opposed to solitary confinement in order to cause them to
reflect upon the meaning of what was taking place in their lives and to cause them
to examine their collective conscience, which they did since in Genesis 42:21 they
acknowledge their cruel treatment of Joseph. This was not punishment, but it was
preparation, just as his confinement had been and it served to intensify the
brothers’ comprehension of the gravity of the situation.
The three-day imprisonment provided Joseph with time to plan his strategy and
it would also impress the brothers with the importance of cooperating with Joseph
and also give them a taste of what Joseph had endured for three years. Joseph may
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
274
have intended that they serve one day's imprisonment for each year he had suffered
incarceration because of their hatred.
The three day imprisonment would invoke any rivalries as a result of their
awareness that only one could return to Canaan and that the fate of all the others
would depend on that one.
Joseph’s Second Audience with His Brothers
In Genesis 42:18-24, we will read of Joseph’s brothers’ having a second
audience with him in Egypt.
Genesis 42:18 Now Joseph said to them on the third day, “Do this and live,
for I fear God: 19 if you are honest men, let one of your brothers be confined
in your prison; but as for the rest of you, go, carry grain for the famine of
your households, 20 and bring your youngest brother to me, so your words
may be verified, and you will not die.” And they did so. (NASB95)
Joseph’s brothers had to endure three days in prison whereas Joseph had to
endure fourteen years of slavery and three years of prison because of his brothers’
decision to sell him into slavery. Those three days must have been miserable and
must have been filled with fear. They would have been asking themselves as to
whether or not they would ever return to their father and would they ever regain
their freedom? Also, they would have been discussing amongst themselves as to
who would be the one who would be released to return to Canaan while the others
remained captive? For them, Joseph’s experience, which took fourteen years, was
condensed to three days.
The three-day imprisonment provided Joseph with time to plan his strategy and
it would also impress the brothers with the importance of cooperating with Joseph
and also give them a taste of what Joseph had endured for three years.
Joseph statement “Do this and live, for I fear God” would reveal to his
brothers that he who they do not recognize but rather saw as an Egyptian ruler, was
a ruler who acknowledged that he was accountable to God and would therefore
give them an opportunity to demonstrate their innocence and would not treat them
unjustly.
“Fear” is the verb yare, which means, “to have reverence and respect” for God
and so we see that Joseph expresses to his brothers that he has “reverence” and
“respect” for God.
Reverence for God is an attitude of deep respect and awe for God and respect
for God is to esteem the excellence of the Person of God as manifested through His
attributes such as love, faithfulness, mercy, compassion, justice, righteousness,
truth, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, immutability, and sovereignty.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
275
Joseph statement “Do this and live, for I fear God” also would reveal to his
brothers that he was a ruler who cared for the needy and the hungry (See Job
29:12-13).
Just as Joseph’s brothers replaced their first plan to kill Joseph with a wiser,
gentler plan by selling him into slavery so Joseph also replaces his first plan to
imprison all his brothers and send one back to get Benjamin with a wiser, gentler
plan by imprisoning only one brother and sending the rest back to Canaan to get
Benjamin.
Once Joseph had heard his brothers confess their guilt in the way that they
treated him and acknowledged the justice in their being imprisoned, he changes his
plan and allows all the brothers to go back to Canaan except for one of them.
Also, Joseph changed his plan because of concern for his father and his brother
Benjamin and the rest of the family and did not want them to continue to suffer
because of a lack of food.
Joseph’s new proposal to his brothers demonstrates to them that he is a fair,
wise, reasonable ruler who respects God. It also demonstrates to the reader that
Joseph’s intentions towards his brothers was not revenge but rather only good in
that he does not want his family in Canaan to suffer any longer from the famine.
This statement “do this and live for I fear God” as well as his demand would
have filled them with hope and thanksgiving to God and gave them encouragement
dispelling any fear of judgment. This statement reveals that Joseph’s intention was
not revenge when he spoke harshly to his brothers and imprisoned them for three
days but rather his desire was for a reconciliation with them and only the best for
his brothers. But certain changes had to take place before he could reunite with
them in that their self-interest and cruelty which had caused them to sell him into
slavery must be dealt with.
Notice that Joseph does “not” use the covenant name of God, which is Yahweh,
“Lord” when addressing his brothers but rather uses Elohim, “God” since he is
attempting to conceal his identity to his brothers.
To his brothers, Joseph was a heathen, Gentile ruler who had no covenant
relationship with God like they did, so Joseph continues to keep up this appearance
in order to determine if they have indeed repented from their ill treatment of him
and that God has transformed their character.
The fact that Joseph decides to release all of his brothers except for one reveals
that his intention for incarcerating them for three days was so that they could
examine their collective conscience in the matter in which they treated him.
Joseph placed all of the brothers in confinement together as opposed to solitary
confinement in order to cause them to reflect upon the meaning of what was taking
place in their lives and to cause them to examine their collective conscience, which
they did since in Genesis 42:21 they acknowledge their cruel treatment of Joseph.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
276
This was not punishment, but it was preparation, just as his confinement had been
and it served to intensify the brothers’ comprehension of the gravity of the
situation.
As we noted before, the three day imprisonment would invoke any rivalries as a
result of their awareness that only one could return to Canaan and that the fate of
all the others would depend on that one.
Joseph’s new proposal to his brothers that he release all of them except for one
is designed to make his brothers relive their actions against him some twenty years
before and his brothers recognize the parallels and consider it retribution from
God. Joseph’s brothers are now faced with two threats to their lives, the famine
and now with Joseph if they do not bring back Benjamin to Egypt. Both threats
contribute to Joseph’s brothers confronting their sin against Joseph leading to
reconciliation and fellowship.
The statement “and they did so” reveals that Joseph’s brothers were in
agreement to accept Joseph’s new conditions.
Genesis 42:21 Then they said to one another, “Truly we are guilty
concerning our brother, because we saw the distress of his soul when he
pleaded with us, yet we would not listen; therefore this distress has come upon
us.” (NASB95)
The purpose for which Joseph imprisoned his brothers for three days was
accomplished in that Joseph’s brothers recognized the justice of their predicament
and confessed their collective guilt in the way they treated Joseph over twenty
years before.
The statement “We are guilty concerning our brother” was a collective
confession of guilt and demonstrates that Joseph’s brothers did “not” blame each
other but rather each takes personal responsibility for their own personal guilt in
the matter of Joseph. The prison experience and Joseph’s verdict brought about the
first indication of conviction of sin in the lives of these men.
We should not forget that Joseph’s brothers were a bunch of criminals since
they were guilty of murder, fornication, incest and had lied to their father and hated
Joseph and had even been cruel to animals at Shechem (See Genesis 34).
Therefore, these were not kind and tenderhearted shepherds but rather they
considered themselves kings, responsible to no one and even though they lived
under God’s heaven and were His covenant people, they did not acknowledge God.
This is the first time we read that there was any expression of guilt in the way
they treated Joseph and soon they will start to recognize that God has something to
do with this. Their discussion amongst themselves is not only a summary of
Genesis 37:12-30 when they sold Joseph into slavery but also gives us graphic
details concerning their treatment of Joseph in that it reveals Joseph’s reaction to
having been thrown into the pit by them and their lack of compassion.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
277
The brothers equate their present distress with Joseph’s some twenty years
before demonstrating their awareness of the providence of God in their lives,
overruling their lives and requiring restitution. They recognize that under God’s
authority they have reaped what they have sowed.
In this moment of great adversity, where their lives are at stake and those of
their families, the tortured consciences of the brothers are manifested by their
confession of guilt in their treatment of Joseph. The brothers saw divine retribution
in what had happened to them and confessed their guilt in dealing with Joseph as
they had done in his hearing. However, Joseph wanted to assure himself that they
had also borne the fruits of genuine repentance meaning that they had taken a
different course of action with Benjamin and Jacob and so he did not reveal
himself to them at this time.
Genesis 42:22 Reuben answered them, saying, “Did I not tell you, ‘Do not
sin against the boy’; and you would not listen? Now comes the reckoning for
his blood.” (NASB95)
Reuben statement to his brothers “Did I not tell you, ‘do not sin against the
boy’ and you would not listen” is a reference to his attempt to talk them out of
murdering Joseph (See Genesis 37:21-22).
This statement along with the statement “Now comes the reckoning for his
(Joseph’s) blood” clearly reveals that Reuben like his father believed that Joseph
was murdered by his brothers indicating that his brothers did “not” tell him that
they sold him into slavery.
The phrase “reckoning for his blood” is a reference to the biblical idiom
“cover up his blood” that is used by Judah in Genesis 37:26. Since the time of
Cain, the blood of a murder victim was said to “cry out” for justice, thus uncovered
blood served as a constant reminder of a crime and as an incitement to revenge.
Therefore, Judah’s use of the idiom and Reuben’s reference to it reveals their
respect for the laws of God, which prohibit murder according to Exodus 20:13 and
according to Genesis 9:6 is to be punished through capital punishment.
In Genesis 37:29-30, the fact that Reuben’s brothers do “not” respond to his
questions as to the whereabouts of Joseph and their lack of surprise that Joseph
was not in the pit, and their attempt to murder Joseph not too long ago, would lead
Reuben to believe that his brothers had killed Joseph and disposed of the body.
There is no indication that Joseph’s brothers informed Reuben that they had
sold Joseph into slavery but rather he believed that Joseph was dead since if his
brothers had informed Reuben that they sold Joseph into slavery, he would have
pursued the caravan to Egypt in order to buy Joseph back!
Reuben’s brothers would “not” want to inform him that they sold Joseph to the
Midianites since they knew he would pursue the caravan and buy Joseph back
since he previously prevented them from killing Joseph. Therefore, by delivering
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
278
Joseph they would have risked having their conspiracy to kill him exposed, not to
mention their actions in selling him into slavery!
Judah would have no desire to tell Reuben of his scheme since he also knew
that Reuben would pursue the caravan and buy Joseph back from the Midianites,
which would result in exposing his scheme to sell Joseph into slavery, even though
the scheme was an attempt to save Joseph from death.
For the first time, Joseph is aware of the fact that Reuben’s intention for
stopping his murder and having him thrown into the pit was to deliver him when
his brothers were not around since Reuben never revealed his motive for
suggesting Joseph be thrown into the pit rather than murdered.
Reuben was apparently seeking to buy some time, intending to rescue Joseph
and return him back home to the safety of their father when the others were not
around. Therefore, Reuben in effect saved Joseph’s life since if he was not there to
stop his brothers, they would have murdered Joseph.
Reuben hid his motives for having Joseph thrown into a pit rather than
murdered because he feared his brothers would not listen to him and would turn on
him. Until now Joseph held Reuben responsible for having him thrown into the pit,
however, he never knew that Reuben’s intention was to rescue him when his
brothers were not around.
Genesis 42:23 They did not know, however, that Joseph understood, for
there was an interpreter between them. (NASB95)
The fact that Joseph used an interpreter to eavesdrop on his brothers’
conversation does “not” mean that he could not understand Hebrew anymore since
he speaks to them in Hebrew without an interpreter when he reveals his identity to
them in Genesis 45. Joseph employs the interpreter since he wants to continue to
conceal his identity and conduct himself as an Egyptian prime minister who is
dealing with foreigners suspected of espionage.
Evidently, Joseph’s brothers did “not” realize that an interpreter was
eavesdropping on their conversation since they speak freely of their guilt in their
attempt to murder Joseph.
Genesis 42:24 He turned away from them and wept. But when he returned
to them and spoke to them, he took Simeon from them and bound him before
their eyes. (NASB95)
Joseph’s weeping was not only an expression of his love and affection for his
brothers but also an expression of gratitude towards the Lord for bringing his
brothers to a confession of their guilt leading to reconciliation with them.
Weeping is an emotion and emotion is the responder to what is in the mentality
of the soul and so we see that Joseph’s weeping is an expression of his emotion,
which is the response to what was in the mentality of his soul, which was love for
his brothers and gratitude towards the Lord.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
279
The Lord Jesus Christ wept at Lazarus’ tomb (John 11:6) and before His
entrance into Jerusalem to present Himself to the nation of Israel as Messiah (See
Luke 19:41) and believers are commanded to weep with those who weep (See
Romans 12:15).
The statement “when he (Joseph) returned to them (his brothers)” indicates
that Joseph left the room and wept in another room where his brothers could not
hear him weep.
The fact that Joseph does “not” detain Reuben who is the oldest but rather
detains Simeon reveals that Joseph was fully aware that Reuben attempted to save
him and that Simeon was the mastermind behind the plot to murder Joseph.
Simeon was the master mind behind the plot to murder Joseph since he and
Levi were the master minds of the massacre at Shechem and had a reputation for
cruelty (See Genesis 34; 49:5-7). Further indicating that Simeon was behind the
plot to murder Joseph is that he had a motive since he was one of the sons of Leah,
who were resentful towards Joseph since Jacob favored Joseph’s mother Rachel
over Leah. Joseph undoubtedly realized that Reuben was trying to save him and
that Simeon wanted him murdered and so he released Reuben although he is the
oldest and detained Simeon, the next oldest of the sons of Leah (See Genesis
42:24).
Joseph has Simeon bound before the eyes of his brothers in order to impress
upon them the seriousness of his intentions and their situation and to test their
solidarity.
Joseph’s Return to Canaan with Food
Genesis 42:25-28 records Joseph’s brothers leaving him and returning to
Canaan with food.
Genesis 42:25 Then Joseph gave orders to fill their bags with grain and to
restore every man's money in his sack, and to give them provisions for the
journey. And thus it was done for them. (NASB95)
Each of the brothers had brought his own silver to buy grain for his own family
as indicated by the statement “Then Joseph gave orders…to restore every man's
money in his sack.”
“Restore” is the verb shuv, which means, “to return,” thus Joseph “returned”
the silver to his brothers that they used to buy grain from him. Therefore, Joseph
not only commanded his servants to fill his brothers’ earthenware containers with
grain but also without his brothers’ knowledge he returned their silver that they
used to pay for the grain, placing it in their personal bags. Furthermore, Joseph
gave his brothers provisions in the form of food for the journey itself so that they
would not have to use up the food that was for the family, which to the brothers
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
280
would appear as a very gracious gesture and put them at ease. These provisions
would not only provide for the needs of the brothers on the journey home but also
ensure that they would not discover the money until it was too late to turn back.
More than likely, smaller, separate sacks were provided with food for the men
and perhaps their animals, so that the grain sacks with the money would not be
opened until they arrived home.
Joseph returned the silver to his brothers without their knowledge since they
find out that he had done this only after they were well on their way back home to
Canaan.
The Scriptures do “not” tell us why Joseph returned the silver but through
inference we can see that there were at least four reasons. First of all, he wanted to
be generous with his brothers but without giving them an explanation, which could
reveal his true identity. Undoubtedly, Joseph, out of his own pocket, paid for the
grain that he gave to his brothers so as to compensate Pharaoh.
Secondly, Joseph returned the silver to his brothers in order to awaken the
conscience of each of them to the extent that they saw God’s hand in dealing with
their cruel treatment of Joseph. While in prison they acknowledged their guilt but
Joseph did not hear them acknowledge God’s hand in their imprisonment.
Therefore, he continues to attempt to arouse the conscience of each of his brothers
so that they acknowledge God’s providential hand and the means in which he does
this was to return the silver to each of them since the silver would remind them that
they sold Joseph for twenty pieces of silver.
This leads us to the third reason, which was to test the brothers as to whether
they valued money more than the life of their brother Simeon since in the case of
Joseph they demonstrated they valued money more than the life of Joseph by
selling him to the Midianites for twenty shekels of silver.
The fact that the brothers did not return immediately to Egypt to return the
silver does not imply that they didn’t value Simeon’s life since it was their father
who prevented them from returning to Egypt since he feared that he would lose
Benjamin if he sent them with the rest of his brothers (See Genesis 42:29-38).
The fourth and final reason was to give the brothers an opportunity to
demonstrate that they were indeed what they claimed to be, honest men.
Genesis 42:26 So they loaded their donkeys with their grain and departed
from there. (NASB95)
“They” refers to Joseph’s servants. The phrase “their grain” refers to the grain
that the brothers purchased with silver from Joseph and indicates to the reader that
the silver later discovered by the brothers in each of their personal sackcloth bags
was not stolen by them.
The journey back home covered a distance of approximately 250-300 miles
since Jacob was living in Hebron and Joseph’s headquarters would have been near
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
281
the city of Memphis, which is about 10 miles south of the present city of Cairo.
Thus, the journey back home would have taken approximately 3 weeks.
Genesis 42:27 As one of them opened his sack to give his donkey fodder at
the lodging place, he saw his money; and behold, it was in the mouth of his
sack. (NASB95)
The expression “one of them” indicates only one of the brothers during the
journey home opened his personal sackcloth bag and found his silver while the rest
learned when they got home that their silver had also been returned according to
Genesis 42:35.
Genesis 43:21 records the brothers informing Joseph’s steward that each of
them found their silver in the personal bags while on the journey home. Whereas
Genesis 42:27 records that only one brother found his silver in his bag during the
journey home and Genesis 42:35 records that the rest of their brothers discovered
the same when they arrived home. Therefore, on the surface it appears that the
brothers lied to Joseph’s steward but this apparent contradiction is reconciled in
that the brothers were not concerned about precision in their accounts when
speaking to Joseph but simply conveying the fact that their silver was returned to
them without their knowledge.
Genesis 42:28 Then he said to his brothers, “My money has been returned,
and behold, it is even in my sack.” And their hearts sank, and they turned
trembling to one another, saying, “What is this that God has done to us?”
(NASB95)
The expression “their hearts sank” means that the brothers all nearly died of
heart failure when they saw the silver in the sack.
The statement “they turned trembling to one another” refers to the trembling
of the body as a result of emotional distress. Therefore, it refers to a sudden panic
attack experienced by each of the brothers due to fear upon learning that the silver
was returned.
The reason for this reaction on the part of the brothers was that they looked like
thieves (See Genesis 42:35-36).
Their response to this misfortune was to acknowledge God’s justice and
providential hand as indicated by the rhetorical question, “What is this that God
has done to us?” This statement is an admission of guilt before God that they were
wrong in their cruel treatment of Joseph. This is the first time that Joseph’s
brothers mentioned God indicating that the conscience of each has been so aroused
that they finally acknowledge God’s providential hand behind the punishment for
their crime against Joseph.
The fact that the brothers were not happy but rather frightened by the sight of
the silver in their bags was a good sign since it indicated that they were no longer
insensitive to God and that they no longer had a seared conscience. Their distress
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
282
was a manifestation that they have reaped what they have sowed in that they were
reaping distress in their own souls because they sowed distress in the soul of
Joseph.
The harm and pain that they brought on Joseph was now being visited on them
and this caused them to consider how Joseph must have felt. The presence of the
silver in their bags reminded them of the distress they caused Joseph over twenty
years earlier and has softened their calloused hearts.
Jacob’s Sons Give Him a Report
We will conclude our study of Genesis 42 by noting verses twenty-nine thru
thirty-eight and read where Jacob’s sons giving him a report on their mission to
Egypt.
Genesis 42:29 When they came to their father Jacob in the land of Canaan,
they told him all that had happened to them, saying, 30 “The man, the lord of
the land, spoke harshly with us, and took us for spies of the country.”
(NASB95)
The statement “they (nine of Joseph’s brothers) told him (Jacob) all that
had happened to them” does “not” mean that the nine told Jacob everything that
happened in Egypt but rather they are speaking in relative terms meaning they told
their father all that they wanted him to know. This is indicated in that they fail to
tell their father that they were imprisoned for three days as well as the shackling
and imprisonment of Simeon.
Also, they did not tell their father of their remorse while sitting in prison for
three days over their cruel treatment of Joseph. Neither, did they tell their father
about Reuben’s opposition to the attempted assassination of Joseph.
The nine brothers report to their father only what is necessary to explain
Simeon’s absence and to emphasize the importance of sending Benjamin next
time.
Joseph’s brothers identify him to their father as “the man, the lord of the
land,” which emphasizes their ignorance of Joseph’s identity. “Lord” is the noun
adhon, which refers to the governing authority over the land of Egypt, which we
know is Joseph.
Genesis 42:31 “But we said to him, ‘We are honest men; we are not spies.
32 We are twelve brothers, sons of our father; one is no longer alive, and the
youngest is with our father today in the land of Canaan.’” (NASB95)
Their first statement to their father, “we are honest men” was being tested by
Joseph in that he will force the brothers to produce Benjamin.
The second statement “we are not spies” rebuts the charge of spying.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
283
The statement “we are twelve brothers” is a true statement and the statement
“sons of our father” is also true, implying that not all of them have the same
mother.
The statement “we are twelve brothers, sons of our father” would refute the
charge of espionage since no father would dare jeopardize the lives of all his sons
by having them involved in such a dangerous occupation. They are in effect saying
that it is absolutely improbable that ten brothers would be traveling together as a
group in order to spy on a nation, rather if they were spying, they would have at
least split up.
The statement “one is no longer alive” is a reference of course to Joseph and
expresses his brothers’ belief that he is dead since they actually presumed that
since they have heard nothing about Joseph for over twenty years that he must
have died in slavery.
The statement “the youngest is with our father today in the land of Canaan”
is a reference to Benjamin, Joseph’s lone full brother. Joseph used this statement as
a pretext for pursuing further the accusation of espionage since he could say that
since their father knew that espionage was a dangerous endeavor he kept one son
behind with him in Canaan in order to guarantee the family’s future if the brothers
were caught and executed.
The prepositional phrase “in the land of Canaan” again reiterates their
statement to Joseph in Genesis 42:7 and 13 of where they live and is necessary
since as Hebrews they would have not worn the attire of the Canaanites.
Genesis 42:33 The man, the lord of the land, said to us, “By this I will know
that you are honest men: leave one of your brothers with me and take grain
for the famine of your households, and go.” (NASB95)
At this point, the nine omit that they were imprisoned for three days by Joseph
and in fact give their father the impression that Simeon was an honored guest and
not a prisoner as indicated by their statement, “Leave one of your brothers with
me.” However, even though this statement misrepresents what really happened in
Egypt it does reveal that the attitude of Jacob’s sons towards him is now sensitive
and no longer calloused. If you recall, Jacob’s sons were very cruel and insensitive
to their father when breaking the news of Joseph in that they sent messengers to
their father, asking him to identify Joseph’s blood spattered multicolored longsleeved coat.
Genesis 42:34 “But bring your youngest brother to me that I may know
that you are not spies, but honest men. I will give your brother to you, and you
may trade in the land.” (NASB95)
A comparison of Genesis 42:18-20 with 42:34 reveals that out of consideration
for their father’s feelings, the nine brothers change Joseph’s threat of life and death
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
284
to a promise that they could do business in the land of Egypt. Also, the brothers
deliberately omit that the money of one of them had been returned.
Genesis 42:35 Now it came about as they were emptying their sacks that
behold, every man's bundle of money was in his sack; and when they and their
father saw their bundles of money, they were dismayed. (NASB95)
For the first time, all nine of the brothers discover that all of them had the silver
returned to them, which they used to purchase grain from Joseph. Up to this point,
Jacob probably believed his sons story, however, the discovery of the silver in the
personal sacks of each one of them makes them look guilty. Jacob knew full well
the character of his boys and that they were not always trustworthy as evidenced
by their treachery at Shechem (See Genesis 34). The brothers were afraid because
they looked guilty of stealing, which in turn they felt would cost them the life of
Simeon.
Genesis 42:36 Their father Jacob said to them, “You have bereaved me of
my children: Joseph is no more, and Simeon is no more, and you would take
Benjamin; all these things are against me.” (NASB95)
The use of the name “Jacob” and not “Israel” in Genesis 42:29-38 is
significant in that the former reflects character produced by the function of the
power of the old Adamic sin nature whereas the latter reflects character produced
by appropriating the power of the Word of God by claiming the promises of God in
prayer.
Jacob’s statement “you have bereaved me of my children” hits closer to the
truth than he realizes when he charges his sons with being the ones who cost him
two children. It also reveals that he is involved in the blame game in that he blames
them for the death of Joseph and now Simeon, which is a manifestation of the old
sin nature. This charge must have pierced the already sensitive conscience of each
of Jacob’s sons since they were guilty of selling Joseph into slavery in Egypt,
which in turn has led to Simeon being imprisoned in Egypt.
Notice, that Jacob does not allow his sons to explain themselves but assumes
their guilt because of the silver in each of their personal sacks. Therefore, we can
see that up to this point in the narrative the brothers are drawing closer together in
this adversity whereas Jacob is withdrawing from his sons.
His statement “Joseph is no more” reveals Jacob’s sons successfully deceived
him into believing that Joseph had died from wild animals when he saw the
bloodied long-sleeved multicolored tunic.
Jacob’s statement “Simeon is no more” expresses Jacob’s belief that Simeon
would be executed when the authorities in Egypt discovered that the silver that his
sons used to purchase grain from them was gone.
The statement “and you would take Benjamin” expresses Jacob’s feeling that
because he has lost Joseph and Simeon that he anticipates losing Benjamin as well.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
285
His statement “everything is against me” is self-pity and a manifestation that
he is not walking by faith but by sight. This is indicated by his self-absorption
where he is concentrating on the adverse circumstances rather than turning to God
in prayer and appropriating the power of God by claiming the promises of God.
Jacob’s accusations against his sons indicate that he somehow sensed that it was
by some fault on the part of his sons that Joseph and Simeon had died and that they
likewise would be responsible for the death of Benjamin.
Bob Deffinbaugh, “In these chapters dealing with the life of Joseph, three
different responses to adversity are seen. For Joseph, his suffering was ultimately
from the hand of a loving heavenly Father, Who was near in his affliction (cf. 39:23, 21-23; 40:8; 41:16,51-52). For his brothers, their adversity was punishment from
an angry God, Who was getting even with them for their sin (42:21-22, 28). For
Jacob, it was no more than the fickle hand of fate or, worse yet, the stupidity of his
sons, that made his life miserable (42:36-38). And yet in every instance affliction
was the gentle and gracious hand of God, drawing His sons closer to Himself”
(The Book of Genesis, page 318; Biblical Studies, 1997).
Genesis 42:37 Then Reuben spoke to his father, saying, “You may put my
two sons to death if I do not bring him back to you; put him in my care, and I
will return him to you.” (NASB95)
Reuben was the oldest son of Jacob and Leah and he proposes to his father that
he will kill his two sons if he does not bring Benjamin back home alive to him.
Even though Reuben’s proposal was well meaning, it was nevertheless irrational
and ridiculous and idiotic since how would Jacob be consoled by the death of two
of his grandsons and would simply add further to Jacob’s grief.
Genesis 42:38 But Jacob said, “My son shall not go down with you; for his
brother is dead, and he alone is left. If harm should befall him on the journey
you are taking, then you will bring my gray hair down to Sheol in sorrow.”
(NASB95)
Jacob refuses Reuben’s ridiculous proposal.
The use of the phrase “my son” rather than “your brother” and “his brother”
rather than “your brother” in effect expresses Jacob’s denial of any fraternal
relationship between the sons of Leah and the sons of Rachel.
The statement “he (Benjamin) alone is left” means that Benjamin is the only
child of Rachel still alive, which we know of course, is not the case.
Jacob’s final statement “you will bring my gray hair down to Sheol in
sorrow” expresses his sentiment that Benjamin, Rachel’s second son, is now as
precious to him as her first son, Joseph and reminds his sons of the grief they
caused him by selling Joseph into slavery. He is saying in effect that if Benjamin
dies, then he will spend the rest of his days in sorrow.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
286
Joseph Reveals His Identity to His Brothers
In Genesis 44:1-13 Joseph tests the integrity of his brothers by “planting” his
silver cup in Benjamin’s sack. By planting his silver cup in Benjamin’s sack,
Joseph is testing his brothers as to whether or not they will remain loyal to
Benjamin even when he looks guilty of theft or will they abandon him in Egypt as
they had done to him.
Joseph has not revealed his identity to his brothers at this point since he is not
convinced that if his brothers were faced with the same set of circumstances as
when they mistreated him that they would act differently. Therefore, Joseph
recreates what took place between him and his brothers twenty years before in
order to test to see whether or not they have truly been changed by God and would
if given the chance again, not repeat the same crime.
Joseph wanted to discover if his brothers would sell their father’s favorite and
Rachel’s son, Benjamin as a slave as they had sold him who also was his father’s
favorite and Rachel’s son. He also wanted to know if they would again treat their
father insensitively as they did when informing him of his demise twenty years
before by letting Benjamin remain in slavery as they did with him.
In Genesis 44:14-34, we saw Judah offering himself to Joseph in place of
Benjamin. But before offering himself to Joseph in place of Benjamin, we saw in
Genesis 44:14-17 that Judah admits on behalf of his brothers that they are guilty of
the selling Joseph into slavery twenty years before.
In Genesis 44:18-29, Judah recounts for Joseph the two previous journeys that
he and his brothers made to Egypt, which is recorded Genesis 44:18-29. In Genesis
44:30-32, Judah emphasizes to Joseph the adverse impact on his father if Benjamin
is enslaved in Egypt. In Genesis 44:32-34, Judah offers himself as a slave in the
place of Benjamin.
Genesis 45:1-4 records Joseph revealing his true identity to his brothers upon
hearing Judah offering himself as a substitute for Benjamin so that his father would
not have to suffer the loss of another child. This passage is the climax of the story
of the account of Joseph and his brothers.
Genesis 45:1 Then Joseph could not control himself before all those who
stood by him, and he cried, “Have everyone go out from me.” So there was no
man with him when Joseph made himself known to his brothers. (NASB95)
Judah’s impassioned speech and willingness to sacrifice himself for the sake of
Benjamin and his father has revealed conclusively that his brothers are no longer
motivated by hate and selfishness but rather by love for one another, possessing
integrity within themselves and with one another and have passed the final test.
Therefore, Joseph could no longer keep himself composed and his pent up
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
287
emotions could now be released, now that his brothers have demonstrated
repeatedly through various tests that God has transformed their character.
When Joseph was seventeen, his brothers were disloyal to him and hated him
and were insensitive to their father’s feelings and attempted to murder him and
eventually sold him into slavery. But they have changed in that they are loyal to
their father’s favorite Benjamin and love him and do not hate him as they did
Joseph and are sensitive to their father’s feelings towards Benjamin.
As evidenced by Judah’s offer to become a slave in the place of Benjamin in
order to spare their father any more grief, the brothers demonstrate that they love
their father and brother to the point of self-sacrifice.
The statement “Joseph could not control himself” means that Joseph could no
longer keep himself composed and control his emotions as a result of listening to
Judah’s impassioned speech and willingness to sacrifice himself for the sake of
Benjamin and his father.
Joseph’s brothers have repeatedly demonstrated conclusively to him by means
of passing the various tests that Joseph put them through that God has indeed
transformed their character and that now he can reveal his true identity and can be
reconciled to his brothers.
Henry M. Morris gives this excellent comment, he writes, “No longer could
there be the least doubt in Joseph’s mind that his brothers were completely
changed men. He had subjected them to the most severe tests, and they had passed
with flying colors. The testing itself had been a means of spiritual growth for them;
they were more conscious than ever of the leading of God and their responsibility
to Him. They were more aware than they had ever been of their own unworthiness
and of God’s mercy. Finally, their troubles had brought them all closer together,
and now they were of one mind, loving one another and their father as they had
never done before. And then, with Judah making such a strong plea that Joseph
allow him to take Benjamin’s punishment, so that Benjamin could go home free,
Joseph could no longer control his emotions. Not only did the brothers not resent
Benjamin, they were even willing to share his sufferings, and, in Judah’s case at
least, to die for him” (The Genesis Record, page 619, Baker Book House).
Not only have Joseph’s brothers confessed their sin to God regarding the crime
they committed against him when he was seventeen years of age but they are also
obedient to God in that they now love one another as demonstrated by their
concern for their father and willingness to sacrifice themselves for Benjamin.
The phrase “all those who stood by him” refers to Joseph’s entourage.
Joseph expels everyone from the room since he was dealing with a family
matter, which had nothing to do with his public responsibilities as a servant of
Pharaoh and the people of Egypt.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
288
Joseph also expelled everyone from the room in order to deal with the matter of
the sin his brothers committed against him years before in strict privacy.
The eleven brothers must have wondered what was going on and what the lord
of Egypt was going to do or say to them when he gave this command to expel
everyone from the room except them.
Genesis 45:2 He wept so loudly that the Egyptians heard it, and the
household of Pharaoh heard of it. (NASB95)
Joseph’s loud crying was a response to Judah’s willingness to sacrifice himself
for the sake of Joseph’s only full brother Benjamin and their father and also
expressed his relief that the character of his brothers has been transformed by God.
Joseph’s loud crying was an expression of his emotion, which responded to
Judah’s willingness to sacrifice himself for the sake of his brother and father. This
is the third of five times that Joseph weeps during this process of reconciliation
with his brothers (See Genesis 42:24; 43:30; 45:1-2; 14-15; 50:17).
Joseph’s weeping was not only a response to Judah’s willingness to sacrifice
himself for Benjamin and his father but also an expression of gratitude towards the
Lord for reuniting him with his brothers.
The eleven brothers must have been shocked to see this high ranking Egyptian
official break into uncontrollable tears in their presence but they are really are
going to be shocked when they hear what he is about to say to them all.
One can only imagine what the brothers must have been thinking when the lord
of Egypt broke into tears. Up to this point in the narrative, we have seen Joseph
treat his brothers graciously and inviting them into his home, sent back to Canaan
with abundant provisions (See Genesis 43:32-44:1). Then they were stopped and
searched, each of them being found with their money in their sack and Benjamin
with Joseph’s cup in his possession (See Genesis 44:6-13). They acknowledged
their guilt and all were willing to remain as Joseph’s slaves, but Joseph refused to
detain any except Benjamin, the alleged “guilty” party (See Genesis 44:14-17).
Judah then made an impassioned appeal for mercy on behalf of his aged father,
offering himself in place of Benjamin (See Genesis 44:18-34). Judah and his
brothers anxiously await a verdict from Joseph, one that will affect the course of
their lives.
Without knowing who Joseph is or what he intended to do, the brothers saw this
powerful leader of Egypt send everyone out of the room. They could perhaps see
the tears flowing down his cheeks and his chest heaving with emotion. However,
they could not detect the source of this great emotion. Was it anger, which would
lead to further trouble? How could it be otherwise?
Genesis 45:3 Then Joseph said to his brothers, “I am Joseph! Is my father
still alive?” But his brothers could not answer him, for they were dismayed at
his presence. 4 Then Joseph said to his brothers, “Please come closer to me.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
289
And they came closer. And he said, “I am your brother Joseph, whom you
sold into Egypt.” (NASB95)
Up to this point to conceal his true identity, Joseph presented himself to his
brothers as the lord of Egypt, second only to Pharaoh in authority and power in
Egypt who spoke through an interpreter to them. However, now, Joseph speaks in
his native Hebrew tongue to his brothers in order to reveal his true identity to them.
The statement “I am Joseph!” was the worst news that the brothers could ever
have hoped to hear and gave them more anxiety since it was bad enough to stand
before a powerful Egyptian ruler who was angered at the theft of his silver cup, but
to realize that he was their brother whom they had sold into slavery was simply too
much!
Before, they at least had a hope that this judge would be impartial and that
mercy might motivate him to accept their appeal. But now they were convinced
that this judge must surely be their enemy, whom they had unjustly and cruelly
condemned.
How could they hope for better treatment from him? No wonder they were
terrified.
Joseph’s first words declared his identity, which was followed quickly by an
expression of concern for his father. He, like Judah and the others, cared greatly for
his elderly father. The thought of Jacob’s grief was unbearable to Joseph as well as
to the rest but he also cared for his brothers. They must have shrunk back from him
in horror, but Joseph asked them to draw near (verse 4).
The brothers are totally shocked and cannot respond with words to this
revelation since they were terrified to be in the presence of Joseph who they
committed an awful crime against over twenty years before.
The statement “they were dismayed” is the verb bahal, which means, “to be
terrified” and refers to paralyzing fear and describes the result of some terrifying
event, something, which impacts the emotional and reasoning capacity of people,
also causing physical manifestation. Therefore, the original Hebrew text of Genesis
45:3 records that Joseph’s brothers were “terrified,” “paralyzed with fear” when
Joseph revealed his true identity and that their physical bodies shook with fear at
this revelation.
The brothers were terrified since they thought Joseph would exact revenge upon
them for the crime against him since Joseph was now the prime minister of Egypt
who now possessed the power to execute them as criminals in Egypt.
Joseph requests that his brothers come closer to him in order to reassure them
and calm their fears that he would not seek revenge upon them.
Joseph’s statement “I am your brother Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt” is
not a rebuke but an attempt to further reveal his identity and to relieve his brothers
of the guilt that they have been carrying in their souls for over twenty years.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
290
The brothers have been carrying the secret of selling Joseph into slavery for
over twenty years and as a result have been burden with guilt but now Joseph
reveals this secret so that they can be freed from suppressed guilt. As long as the
brothers live in fear of Joseph, there can be no intimacy between Joseph and his
brothers until Joseph audibly says he forgives them and demonstrates that
forgiveness by treating his brothers as if the crime against Joseph had never taken
place.
Joseph Sends a Message to Israel
In Genesis 45:5-8, we will see Joseph reassuring his brothers that he will not
exact revenge upon them but rather reveals to them that their cruel treatment of
him fourteen years before was a part of God’s plan to deliver their family from
starvation and the corrupt Canaanite influence. In this passage, we will see the
magnanimity of Joseph towards his brothers. Genesis 45:9-11 records Joseph
sending a message to his father Israel through his brothers to find refuge from the
famine in Egypt.
Genesis 45:9 “Hurry and go up to my father, and say to him, ‘Thus says
your son Joseph, ‘God has made me lord of all Egypt; come down to me, do
not delay. 10 You shall live in the land of Goshen, and you shall be near me,
you and your children and your children's children and your flocks and your
herds and all that you have. 11 There I will also provide for you, for there are
still five years of famine to come, and you and your household and all that you
have would be impoverished.’” (NASB95)
In Genesis 45:9-11, we see Joseph commanding his brothers to communicate to
their father his counsel that their family migrate to Egypt in order to escape the
famine that would continue for another five years.
If Joseph’s family dies of starvation, then the nation of Israel dies in its infancy
and if so, then the Savior cannot come into the world and then there would be no
salvation for man and no fulfillment of the four unconditional covenants to Israel
(Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New) and thus making God unfaithful.
In this passage, Joseph reveals to his brothers one of the reasons why God
permitted them to sell him into slavery in Egypt, namely, to deliver their family
from the famine and preserve their embryonic nation so that the Savior could come
into the world at a later date.
The fact that Joseph is commanding his brothers to communicate his plan to
relocate their entire family to Egypt to their father would reassure his brothers and
set their minds at ease that he had no plans to exact revenge upon them for selling
him into slavery since he is including their father in his plans for all of them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
291
Joseph’s counsel is according to the will of God since God prophesied to
Abraham that his descendants would be in Egypt for four hundred years (See
Genesis 15:12-16) and so Joseph’s counsel is the first step in the fulfillment of this
prophecy.
The statements “Hurry and go up to my father…come down to me, do not
delay” expresses the urgency to Israel that his family migrate to Egypt since it is
according to the will of God that they do so since it would be the first step in the
fulfillment of the prophecy given to Abraham recorded in Genesis 15:12-16.
Notice that Joseph does not procrastinate but rather immediately counsels his
brothers to inform their father that their family must migrate to Egypt. The urgency
in which Joseph seeks to do God’s will is a fulfillment of a spiritual principle noted
in Psalm 119:60.
Joseph’s statement “God has made me lord of all Egypt” emphasizes that his
authority and power over Egypt was given to him by God Himself. This statement
would also emphasize to Joseph’s father God’s providential care of their family
and that it was God’s sovereign will that Joseph became prime minister of Egypt to
deliver their family from famine.
God worked out the circumstances so that Pharaoh would promote Joseph as
prime minister of Egypt. For example, God gave the cupbearer his dreams and
Joseph the ability to interpret those dreams, which led to the cupbearer eventually
informing Pharaoh two years later of Joseph’s supernatural abilities. God also gave
Pharaoh his dreams and Joseph the ability to interpret those dreams and make
recommendations in light of his interpretation of those dreams, which resulted in
Pharaoh promoting Joseph.
“Goshen” was located in the eastern part of the Nile Delta, northeast of the
Egyptian capital, Memphis and approximately 900 hundred square miles, well
suited for grazing and for certain types of agriculture and sparsely occupied
allowing room for Hebrew expansion. This area was also called the “land of
Rameses” in Genesis 47:11 and according to the Exodus narrative, which records
that the Israelites left Goshen under Moses and went from Rameses through the
Wadi Tumilat (a valley connecting the Nile and the Bitter Lakes region, now a part
of the Suez Canal system) to Succoth (Compare Exodus 8:18; 12:37; 13:17f).
Rameses was probably a later name of an urban complex including Avaris and was
built to the north of Avaris, adjoined to it.
The fact that Joseph’s family would reside in Goshen would later on protect
their descendants, the Israelites from the plagues that God placed upon the nation
of Egypt during the Exodus generation (See Exodus 8:22; 9:26).
Joseph’s statement “there are still five years of famine to come” repeats the
point Joseph made to his brothers in Genesis 45:6 and anticipates resistance by his
father to a migration of his entire family from Canaan to Egypt.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
292
Joseph counsels his father to move to Goshen in Egypt to escape the famine in
Canaan in order that they might not become impoverished and lose all they had to
debt. In famines, the poor mortgaged their lands or sold their family and even
themselves into slavery and some of course, died.
Genesis 45:12 “Behold, your eyes see, and the eyes of my brother Benjamin
see, that it is my mouth which is speaking to you.” (NASB95)
The statement “Behold, your eyes see, and the eyes of my brother Benjamin
see, that it is my mouth which is speaking to you” means that there could no
longer be any doubt among Joseph’s brothers as to his identity and his intentions
towards them.
The most obvious proof to Joseph’s brothers that he indeed is speaking to them
is that he is speaking to them without an interpreter in their native Hebrew tongue!
Up to this point to conceal his true identity, Joseph presented himself to his
brothers as the lord of Egypt, second only to Pharaoh in authority and power in
Egypt who spoke through an interpreter to them. However, now, Joseph speaks in
his native Hebrew tongue to his brothers in order to reveal his true identity to them.
The message that Joseph will convey through the sons of Leah, Bilhah, Zilpah
and Benjamin will seem incredible to Israel since he believes that Joseph is dead.
Therefore, Joseph emphasizes to his half-brothers and lone full brother that they
are eyewitnesses to the fact that he is now the lord of all Egypt.
“Behold your eyes see…that it is my mouth, which is speaking to you”
emphasizes the personal eyewitness testimony of Joseph’s half-brothers, the sons
of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah who were Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar,
Zebulun, Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher.
In case, Israel does not believe the testimony of the sons of Leah, Bilhah and
Zilpah because of their past conduct, Joseph also offers Benjamin as an eyewitness
whose testimony would be beyond reproach in the eyes of his father since
Benjamin was his favorite.
Joseph’s statement “the eyes of my brother Benjamin see…that it is my
mouth, which is speaking to you” emphasizes that his lone full brother, Benjamin
is a personal eyewitness to the fact that he is now the lord of all Egypt and will
lend credibility to the eyewitness testimony of the sons of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah.
Genesis 45:13 “Now you must tell my father of all my splendor in Egypt,
and all that you have seen; and you must hurry and bring my father down
here.” (NASB95)
Joseph’s statement “Now you must tell my father of all my splendor in
Egypt, and all that you have seen” emphasizes to his brothers that their
knowledge of his situation is not derived from rumor but from firsthand
knowledge.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
293
“Splendor” is the noun kavodh, which refers to Joseph’s position of authority,
the honor given to him, his reputation and respect paid to him by the people of
Egypt and his prestige in Egypt. Therefore, Joseph stresses with his brothers the
importance that they give testimony to their father as to Joseph’s position,
authority, and prestige in Egypt in order to convince their father to believe
Joseph’s message to relocate to Egypt and that he truly has the means to support
their family in Egypt.
The purpose of communicating this information about Joseph to their father is
not to be self-glorification on Joseph’s part but to convince their father that Joseph
possesses sufficient resources and power to execute that which he has planned for
the family. Joseph wants his brothers to communicate to their father that he has a
position of power and authority, which enables him to provide for his family and to
accomplish his plan.
Bob Deffinbaugh has a great comment on this verse, he writes, “In these verses
there is a noticeable emphasis upon the glory and splendor which Joseph has
attained in Egypt. For some this appears to be out of character for Joseph, who has
previously been marked by modesty and humility. Why would he now flaunt his
position before his brothers? There are several explanations, one or more of which
may satisfy our concerns. First, the glory which Joseph now possesses would serve
to encourage his brothers, who are guilt-ridden for the wicked deed they committed
against him by selling him as a slave. Joseph would thus be reminding them that
his humiliation and suffering were the means to his promotion and exaltation. Look
what their sin had brought about in Joseph’s life! Second, it would comfort Jacob
and assure him of Joseph’s ability to provide for the entire family during the
famine. Finally, it was a glory which Joseph desired to share unselfishly with his
brothers. His motive would thus be Christ-like” (The Book of Genesis, page 349,
Biblical Studies, 1997).
Genesis 45:14 Then he fell on his brother Benjamin's neck and wept, and
Benjamin wept on his neck. 15 He kissed all his brothers and wept on them,
and afterward his brothers talked with him. (NASB95)
For the first time ever, Joseph and his brothers were a united family since all the
barriers were broken down between them.
Notice that Joseph not only hugged and wept on his full brother Benjamin’s
neck but also he did the same with his half-brothers, the sons of Leah, Bilhah and
Zilpah, which would convince his half-brothers of his good intentions and that he
had forgiven them. Joseph forgave each of his brothers, which resulted in breaking
down the wall of fear and shame that had separated the brothers not only from
Joseph but God. Joseph had the capacity to forgive his brothers because he knew
that it was a part of God’s plan from eternity past that he would be sold into
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
294
slavery by his brothers in order that he might be used by God to deliver their
family from famine and the corrupt influence of the Canaanites upon their family.
Unlike Joseph and Benjamin, the sons of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah are not said
to have wept, which is due to the fact that they are still too stunned and too distant
to weep. They never really were close to Joseph and so there were no emotional
bonds between the brothers as Joseph would have with his lone full brother,
Benjamin. Once the brothers were convinced of Joseph’s intentions and that he had
forgiven them, they finally spoke with Joseph.
The statement “the brothers talked with him” emphasizes that the rift between
Joseph and his brothers has been resolved and intimacy achieved, ending twentytwo years of non-communication.
The content of the conversation is inconsequential to the reconciliation since
intimacy is visceral and not cerebral (Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis, A Commentary,
page 564, Zondervan).
Genesis 45:16 Now when the news was heard in Pharaoh's house that
Joseph's brothers had come, it pleased Pharaoh and his servants. (NASB95)
The statement “When the news was heard in Pharaoh’s house” in the
Hebrew text literally reads, “the voice was heard at Pharaoh’s house.” This
statement repeats the introduction to Joseph revealing his identity to his brothers
recorded in Genesis 45:1-2. Therefore, the statement “when the news was heard
in Pharaoh’s house” links Genesis 45:16 back to the statement in Genesis 45:2
that Joseph “wept so loudly that the Egyptians heard it, and the household of
Pharaoh heard of it.”
A comparison of these verses emphasizes the speed of Pharaoh’s response to
hearing the news about Joseph’s brothers meaning that Pharaoh offered an
invitation without hesitation expressing his wholehearted approval of Joseph and
the welcome of his family.
Chronologically, Pharaoh’s invitation to Egypt follows Joseph’s invitation since
the text never indicates that Joseph makes Pharaoh aware of his invitation since no
Egyptian was present when Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers.
In gratitude to Joseph and his service in saving the nation of Egypt, Pharaoh
independently extends an invitation to Joseph’s family to live in Egypt.
Genesis 45:17 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Say to your brothers, ‘Do
this: load your beasts and go to the land of Canaan, 18 and take your father
and your households and come to me, and I will give you the best of the land
of Egypt and you will eat the fat of the land.’” (NASB95)
In Genesis 45:10, Joseph invites his brothers to move their families and father
to be near him in Goshen whereas in Genesis 45:17-18, Pharaoh’s invitation is
more extravagant in that he offers Joseph’s family “the best of the land of Egypt
and you will eat of the fat of the land.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
295
Again, Pharaoh’s offer expresses his gratitude for Joseph in delivering his
nation from famine and also his great respect for Joseph.
Pharaoh’s invitation is communicated through Joseph because he does not
speak Hebrew like Joseph.
Pharaoh’s offer “I will give you the best of the land of Egypt and you will eat
the fat of the land” means that he is offering Joseph’s family the best land for
agriculture (Compare Isaiah 1:19) and this can be inferred by Israel’s later
references to it (See Numbers 20:5; Psalm 78:47) (Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis, A
Commentary, page 571, Zondervan).
Notice that unlike Joseph, Pharaoh does not specify the pasturelands of Goshen,
which indicates that Pharaoh is unaware that Joseph’s family are shepherds in need
specifically of pastureland.
Genesis 45:19 “Now you are ordered, ‘Do this: take wagons from the land
of Egypt for your little ones and for your wives, and bring your father and
come.’” (NASB95)
To emphasize the sincerity of his gracious offer, Pharaoh commands Joseph’s
family to migrate to Egypt in order to enjoy the agriculture and products of Egypt.
Pharaoh orders are an official authorization to take equipment from Egypt to move
Joseph’s family from Canaan, thus assigning a special status to Joseph’s family as
ward of the king of Egypt.
Henry M. Morris commenting on the wagons, writes, “The ‘wagons’ were
essentially carts, usually on two wooden wheels, drawn by oxen or horses. This is
the first mention of wagons in the Bible and suggests that they were essentially
unique to Egypt at that time” (The Genesis Record, page 624, Baker Book House).
Genesis 45:20 “Do not concern yourselves with your goods, for the best of
all the land of Egypt is yours.” (NASB95)
“Goods” is the noun keli, which denotes a wide variety of vessels that can be for
household use or trade or used to store a variety of objects ranging from food to
documents and can include various types of implements and equipment.
The phrase “the best of all the land of Egypt” is connected with the expression
“your goods,” thus Pharaoh is saying do not be afraid to leave behind your
personal possessions that will delay you and make the trip difficult since I will give
you the best material possessions of Egypt such as houses and furnishings.
Pharaoh is saying that the best material possessions of Egypt would be at the
disposal of the Israelites to recompense them for what must be left behind. Again,
Pharaoh is dealing very graciously with Joseph’s family out of gratitude to Joseph
for his service to the nation of Egypt in delivering it from the great famine.
Pharaoh’s gracious invitation to Joseph’s family just as Joseph’s promotion to
prime minister of Egypt illustrates the spiritual principle taught in Proverbs 21:1.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
296
Proverbs 21:1 The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the
LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes. (NASB95)
Unwittingly, Pharaoh’s gracious invitation to Joseph’s family is another step in
fulfilling the prophecy the Lord gave to Abraham that his descendants would be
slaves in Egypt for over four hundred years, which is recorded in Genesis 15.
In Genesis 45:9-11, we see Joseph commanding his brothers to communicate to
their father his counsel that their family migrate to Egypt in order to escape the
famine that would continue for another five years. This was the first step in
fulfilling the prophecy the Lord gave to Abraham, which is recorded in Genesis 15.
Genesis 45:21-24 records Joseph giving provisions, gifts and a warning to his
brothers before they depart Egypt for Canaan.
Genesis 45:21 Then the sons of Israel did so; and Joseph gave them wagons
according to the command of Pharaoh, and gave them provisions for the
journey. (NASB95)
The statement “Then the sons of Israel did so” indicates that Joseph’s family
accepted Pharaoh’s invitation to live in Egypt and that Joseph obeyed Pharaoh’s
command to equip Joseph’s family with wagons for the journey from Canaan to
Egypt. This is also a summary statement and the details are recorded in the rest of
the verse.
The designation “the sons of Israel” emphasizes the national identity of
Israel/Jacob’s sons and not their personal identity as Jacob’s sons. The nation of
Israel was in its infancy at this time and this trip to Egypt would lead to their
deliverance from the famine and relocation to Egypt for over four hundred years.
The brothers will enter Egypt as a nation in its infancy whereas their descendants
will leave four hundred years later as a powerful nation.
The term “provisions” refers to food that was provided for Joseph’s family for
their journey to and from Egypt.
Genesis 45:22 To each of them he gave changes of garments, but to
Benjamin he gave three hundred pieces of silver and five changes of garments.
(NASB95)
Joseph continues to test his brothers to be sure there was no trace of jealousy
left in their hearts by giving each of his half-brothers changes of garments but to
Benjamin he gave 300 pieces of silver and five changes of garments.
Joseph’s brothers have learned the lesson of God’s sovereign grace and no
longer get jealous over preferential treatment given to Rachel’s sons as
demonstrated in that even after Joseph gave Benjamin five times as much food
(See Genesis 43:34), they were still willing to be enslaved for him (See Genesis
44:13).
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on Joseph’s gift of clothing to his brothers,
writes, “Clothing is an important symbol in the Joseph story (cf. 37:3, 31-33;
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
297
38:14, 19; 39:12-18; 41:14, 42). Here it functions as a fitting token of Joseph’s
affection and esteem for his brothers (cf. 2 Kings 5:5, 22), for it stands in striking
contrast to their stripping his robe off him (see 37:23)…The change also
symbolizes their new situation (cf. 38:14; 41:14, 42): delivered from guilt,
hostility, and famine, with the prospect of abundant provisions in the best of
Egypt” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 572, Zondervan).
Nahum M. Sarna writes, “Since an article of apparel had featured prominently
in the tale of hostility between Joseph and his brothers, it is only fitting that their
reconciliation should be marked by a gift of apparel” (The JPS Torah Commentary,
page 311, The Jewish Publication Society).
The term “silver” is reiterated twenty times in the account of Joseph and his
brothers in Egypt that appears in Genesis 42-45 since Joseph’s brothers sold him
into slavery for twenty pieces of silver. Joseph’s gift of silver to Benjamin is
significant since Joseph was sold by his brothers to the Midianites for twenty
pieces of silver whereas now Joseph uses the silver to bless his brother and not sell
him.
Genesis 45:23 To his father he sent as follows: ten donkeys loaded with the
best things of Egypt, and ten female donkeys loaded with grain and bread and
sustenance for his father on the journey. (NASB95)
“The best things of Egypt” denotes a wide variety of vessels that can be for
household use or trade or used to store a variety of objects ranging from food to
documents and can include various types of implements and equipment. With this
gift, Joseph is honoring his father and expressing his deep personal love and
affection for his father.
Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be
prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you.” (NASB95)
Genesis 45:24 So he sent his brothers away, and as they departed, he said
to them, “Do not quarrel on the journey.” (NASB95)
The prohibition “do not quarrel on the journey” reveals that Joseph
understood the principle that all men have a sin nature.
Jacob’s Sons Tell Him That Joseph’s Alive
Genesis 45:25 Then they went up from Egypt, and came to the land of
Canaan to their father Jacob. (NASB95)
The fact that nothing significant was recorded on the journey home implies that
Joseph’s brothers obeyed his prohibition to not quarrel with each other on the way
home. The journey back home covered a distance of approximately 250-300 miles
since Jacob was living in Hebron and Joseph’s headquarters would have been near
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
298
the city of Memphis, which is about 10 miles south of the present city of Cairo,
thus, the journey back home would have taken approximately 3 weeks.
Genesis 45:26 They told him, saying, “Joseph is still alive, and indeed he is
ruler over all the land of Egypt.” But he was stunned, for he did not believe
them.” (NASB95)
“They told” is the verb naghadh, which is in the hiphil form and means, “to
inform” and refers to revealing previously unknown information to someone, thus
Jacob’s sons provided him information regarding Joseph that was of course
unknown to him since he presumed Joseph dead.
The expression “he is ruler over all the land of Egypt” is a reference to
Pharaoh’s statement “See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt” in Genesis
41:40, which means that Pharaoh conferred upon Joseph total authority in the task
of administrating the nation of Egypt and would only be under Pharaoh’s authority.
In obedience to Joseph’s request, his brothers present their eyewitness
testimony concerning the fact that Joseph is ruler over all the land of Egypt. Joseph
knew that the message that his brothers will convey to their father will seem
incredible to their father since he believes that Joseph is dead. Therefore, in
Genesis 45:12, we read where Joseph emphasized to his half-brothers and lone full
brother that they are eyewitnesses to the fact that he is now the lord of all Egypt.
In Genesis 45:12, the statement “Behold your eyes see…that it is my mouth,
which is speaking to you” emphasizes the personal eyewitness testimony of
Joseph’s half-brothers, the sons of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah who were Reuben,
Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher.
In case, Israel does not believe the testimony of the sons of Leah, Bilhah and
Zilpah because of their past conduct, Joseph also offers Benjamin as an eyewitness
whose testimony would be beyond reproach in the eyes of his father since
Benjamin was his favorite.
Joseph’s statement “the eyes of my brother Benjamin see…that it is my
mouth, which is speaking to you” emphasizes that his lone full brother, Benjamin
is a personal eyewitness to the fact that he is now the lord of all Egypt and will
lend credibility to the eyewitness testimony of the sons of Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah.
The expression “he is ruler over all the land of Egypt” is in obedience to
Joseph’s request that he made of his brothers in Genesis 45:13, “Now you must
tell my father of all my splendor in Egypt, and all that you have seen” which
emphasizes to his brothers that their knowledge of his situation is not derived from
rumor but from firsthand knowledge.
The purpose of communicating this information about Joseph to their father is
not to be self-glorification on Joseph’s part but to convince their father that Joseph
possesses sufficient resources and power to execute that which he has planned for
the family. Joseph wanted his brothers to communicate to their father that he has a
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
299
position of power and authority, which enables him to provide for his family and to
accomplish his plan. Therefore, we see Joseph’s brothers obeying his request to
communicate to their father his glory in Egypt.
“He was stunned” is composed of the verb pugh, which means, “to become
weak, numb” and the noun lev, “heart” and the third person masculine singular
pronominal suffix, which means, “his.”
The verb pugh denotes the state of physical responses to emotional exhaustion.
Therefore, this expression in the Hebrew text literally means that Jacob’s heart
became numb upon hearing the news that Joseph was still alive and was in fact the
prime minister of Egypt and the very man that they had feared. After twenty-two
years of mourning over the death of Joseph it was hard to believe that he was still
alive.
Genesis 45:27 When they told him all the words of Joseph that he had
spoken to them, and when he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent to carry
him, the spirit of their father Jacob revived. (NASB95)
The statement “when they told him (Jacob) all the words of Joseph that he
had spoken to them (Joseph’s brothers)” is a reference to Joseph’s conversation
with his brothers where he requested that his brothers convey to their father their
personal eyewitness testimony to the fact that he is the lord over all of Egypt.
The appearance of the wagons, which were unique to Egypt at that time
convinced Jacob that his sons were telling him the truth that Joseph was indeed
still alive and ruler over the entire land of Egypt.
Henry M. Morris commenting on the wagons, writes, “The ‘wagons’ were
essentially carts, usually on two wooden wheels, drawn by oxen or horses. This is
the first mention of wagons in the Bible and suggests that they were essentially
unique to Egypt at that time” (The Genesis Record, page 624, Baker Book House).
“Spirit” is the noun ruach, which refers to the human spirit of Jacob/Israel,
which is received along with eternal life at the moment of salvation through faith
alone in Christ alone.
Eternal life and a human spirit are received at the moment of salvation through
faith alone in Christ alone. Eternal life resides in the human spirit and is the very
life of God, having no beginning and no end so therefore unbelievers do not have a
human spirit since they do not possess eternal life due to their rejection of Christ as
Savior (See John 3:1-18; 1 Corinthians 2:1-16).
The believer receives a human spirit at the moment of salvation through
regeneration, thus making him “trichotomous” in the sense that he has a body, soul
and human spirit. Jacob’s human spirit was revived in the sense that he began to
once again live in the eternal life that God had given him, which is indicated in
Genesis 45:28 by the narrator’s use of the name “Israel” rather than “Jacob.”
Jacob’s short prayer recorded in Genesis 43:13-14 has been answered.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
300
Genesis 45:28 Then Israel said, “It is enough; my son Joseph is still alive. I
will go and see him before I die.” (NASB95)
Victor Hamilton commenting on Genesis 45:25-28, makes the following
insightful comment, he writes, “Only one item is recorded in vv. 25-28 about the
brothers’ return to Jacob: Joseph is still living! Once he hears that, Jacob has little
concern about the new clothes, Benjamin’s purse, or even the grain carried by the
animals. In chapter 37 Jacob did believe his sons when they were lying to him. In
chapter 45 Jacob disbelieves his sons when they are being truthful with him. Bad
news he accepts; good news he rejects. Jacob’s response on hearing that Joseph is
alive is parallel to the response of the disciples when they were told that Jesus was
alive-shock, unbelief, which eventually turns to uncontrollable joy. The sons’
lengthy conversation with Jacob about Joseph (v. 27a) and the sighting of the
wagons (v. 27b) provide prima facie evidence for Jacob that Joseph was indeed
alive. No longer did he need to pinch himself to see if he was dreaming (v. 27c).
The sons might have been making up the story about Joseph, but the wagons
supply irrefutable confirmation of the authenticity of their story, more so than the
clothing or the three hundred shekels. Now convinced that Joseph is alive, Jacob
resolves to go down to Egypt immediately” (The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50,
ed. R. K. Harrison, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Erdmann’s Publishing Co.,
1995, page 587).
When Israel/Jacob agrees to migrate to Egypt, he was fulfilling yet another step
toward the fulfillment of the prophecy the Lord gave Abraham in a dream that his
descendants would be enslaved in Egypt for over four hundred years, and which
prophecy is recorded in Genesis 15:12-16.
Henry M. Morris commenting on the story of Joseph and his brothers, makes
the following excellent comment, he writes, “There is no greater example in the
Bible of God’s gracious watch and care over His own. A multiplicity of seemingly
accidental and unrelated events-events which seemed to be ugly and difficult at the
time-is gradually woven together by an unseen divine hand into a glorious tapestry
in which every portion is ideally situated in its proper and unique place. To
believers going through sufferings and reverses, undeserved and unexplained, the
story of Joseph has always given assurance of ultimate understanding with the
believer discovering a greater good and God receiving a greater glory that could
ever have been possible without them” (The Genesis Record, page 626, Baker
Book House).
All the events that took place in the story of Joseph and his brothers, which are
recorded in Genesis 37-45, were figured by God into the divine decree so as to
fulfill His sovereign will and thus to bring glory to Himself. The divine decree is
the eternal plan by which God has rendered certain all the events of the universe,
including both angelic and human history-past, present and future and so therefore,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
301
God rendered certain to take place all the events in the lives of Joseph and his
brothers that are recorded in Genesis 37-45.
The divine decree took place in eternity past before anything was ever created
and is God’s eternal and immutable will. Therefore, all the events in the lives of
Joseph and his brothers, which are recorded in Genesis 37-45 were a part of God’s
plan from eternity past.
The “providence” of God is the divine outworking of the divine decree, the
object being the final manifestation of God’s glory and expresses the fact that the
world and our lives are not ruled by chance or fate but by God. Therefore, all the
events that took place in the lives of Joseph and his brothers, which are recorded in
Genesis 37-45 did not happen by chance or fate but because God ordained for them
to take place in order to fulfill His plan for Jacob’s family and to bring glory to
Himself.
Jacob Worships the Lord
Genesis 46 is divided into five sections: (1) Israel/Jacob worships God at
Beersheba and seeks His guidance (46:1). (2) Israel/Jacob receives a theophany,
divine reassurance and promises (46:2-4). (3) Israel’s family migrates to Egypt
(46:5-7). (4) Genealogy of the Israelites who migrated to Egypt (46:8-27). (5)
Joseph reunites with his father and prepares his family to meet Pharaoh (46:28-34).
Genesis 46:1 So Israel set out with all that he had, and came to Beersheba,
and offered sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac. 2 God spoke to Israel in
visions of the night and said, “Jacob, Jacob.” And he said, “Here I am.” 3 He
said, “I am God, the God of your father; do not be afraid to go down to Egypt,
for I will make you a great nation there. 4 I will go down with you to Egypt,
and I will also surely bring you up again; and Joseph will close your eyes.”
(NASB95)
Notice that in Genesis 45:25 and 27, the name “Jacob” is used by the narrator
but in Genesis 45:28 and 46:1-2, the name “Israel” is employed, which is
significant.
The name “Jacob” means, “heel catcher” implying someone who is a
“deceiver” and a “supplanter,” which is a person who takes the place of another by
force, scheming or strategy.
“Israel” is the proper noun yisra’el, which means, “one who fights and
overcomes with the power of God” and memorializes the historical event of Jacob
wrestling the preincarnate Christ, and which wrestling match symbolized Jacob’s
struggles in life with men, which in reality were with God.
Just as the name “Jacob” reflects character produced by the function of the
power of the old sin nature so the name “Israel” reflects character produced by
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
302
appropriating the power of the Word of God by claiming the promises of God in
prayer. However, in Genesis 46, the name “Jacob” does “not” signify that the
patriarch is living in his old Adamic sin nature since he sought God’s guidance on
the move to Egypt but rather the name signifies the patriarch’s weakness and
dependence upon God’s power and provision and protection. It indicates that the
patriarch is living according to the spiritual principle taught by the apostle Paul in
2 Corinthians 12:1-11 that God’s power is manifested in human weakness or
impotence.
Genesis 35:27 and 37:14 reveal that Israel and his family departed Hebron,
which is 20 miles northeast of Beersheba.
The name “Beersheba” means, “well of seven” or “well of oath” and bears
witness to the treaty between Abraham and Abimelech and Abraham’s right to the
well (See Genesis 26:26-33).
“Beersheba” was located in the flat southern part of the Negev, which extends
roughly from a line drawn from Gaza through the modern political boundary of the
southern West Bank, extending south to the mountain ranges of the Sinai and
through the Arabah to the Red Sea.
“Beersheba” is the end of the Promised Land and was the place that Jacob
departed when fleeing from Esau (See Genesis 28:10).
Genesis 26:23-25 records that Isaac built an altar at “Beersheba” in order to
worship the Lord in prayer. Therefore, we see Israel offering sacrifices to God at
this altar at “Beersheba” in order to worship the Lord in prayer and seek out
confirmation that it is according to the will of God that his family migrate to Egypt
and if so, ask for protection during the journey to Egypt while residing there.
“Offered” is the verb zavach, which means, “to sacrifice, slaughter,” which
portrayed the crucifixion and death of the Lamb of God, the Lord Jesus Christ on
the Cross.
“Sacrifices” is the noun zevach, which refers to the animals that were
slaughtered or sacrificed, which portrayed the impeccable human nature of the
Lamb of God, the Lord Jesus Christ.
In Genesis 46:1, Israel is worshipping God the Father in prayer in response to
the revelation that his beloved Joseph is not dead but alive in Egypt and is in fact,
the ruler over all the land of Egypt.
The revelation that Joseph was in fact alive and not dead brought awe to the
heart of Israel and overwhelmed him with an emotion that was a mixture of
gratitude, adoration, reverence, fear and love for the God of his grandfather
Abraham and his father Isaac.
Israel wasn’t looking for explanations since he was lost in the wonder of God.
Therefore, Israel offered sacrifices to God in order to approach God in prayer to
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
303
worship Him in the sense that he was manifesting an attitude of deep reverence,
respect and awe of God for the fact that Joseph was not dead but alive.
Therefore, when Israel offered sacrifices to God, he was worshipping God and
expressing his thanks to God for the fact that he was going to see Joseph once
again.
Worship is adoring contemplation of God as He has been revealed by the Holy
Spirit in the Person of Christ and in the Scriptures and is also the loving ascription
of praise to God for what He is, both in Himself and in His ways and is the bowing
of the soul and spirit in deep humility and reverence before Him.
Warren Wiersbe defines worship, “Worship is the believer’s response of all that
they are –mind, emotions, will and body-to what God is and says and does. This
response has its mystical side in subjective experience and its practical side in
objective obedience to God’s revealed will. Worship is a loving response that’s
balanced by the fear of the Lord, and it is a deepening response as the believer
comes to know God better” (Real Worship, 26).
If we paraphrase Wiersbe’s definition, we could say the following: Israel is
worshipping the Lord in that he is responding in his mind, emotions, and body to
what God is and did in keeping Joseph alive and allowing him to see his beloved
Joseph once again.
Israel’s actions in offering sacrifices to God implies that he was seeking
confirmation from God that the move to Egypt was in accordance with His will
and if so, that He would protect him and his family during the journey to Egypt and
while residing there by means of His omnipotence. Therefore, not only was Israel
worshipping God in prayer, giving thanks for the fact that Joseph was alive and
that he would see him again but also, Israel was seeking guidance as to whether or
not it was according to the will of God to leave the Promised Land, the land of
Canaan and migrate to Egypt.
The divine reassurance and promises to make Israel’s descendants a great
nation while residing in Egypt, which are recorded in Genesis 46:2-4 confirms that
Israel was seeking guidance from God on this move to Egypt.
The phrase “the God of his father Isaac” demonstrates that Israel worships the
same God as his father Isaac by worshipping at the same altar his father built at
Beersheba.
In Genesis 46:3, God is assuring Israel that everything is ok that he will be
protected from the Egyptians and reassures him that God will make his
descendants into a great nation while in Egypt in accordance with the promises
God made to his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac.
The assurance that God gave Israel that He would make Israel’s descendants
into a great nation while in Egypt is a positive declaration or guarantee from God
intended to give Israel confidence and courage.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
304
The promise “I will also surely bring you up again” is “national” promise in
that it is a guarantee that the Israelites will return to the land of Canaan. It is a
“personal” promise in that it is a guarantee that Israel himself would return to the
land of Canaan not only in a coffin (See Genesis 49:29-32) but more importantly
that he and all of born again Israel will live in the Promised Land in resurrection
bodies during the millennial reign of Christ.
In the original Hebrew text, the divine promise “Joseph will close your eyes”
literally says, “Joseph, he will place his hand upon your eyes.”
Nahum Sarna commenting on this expression, writes that it is “a reference to
the custom that the eldest son or nearest relative would gently close the eyes of the
deceased. Such has remained time-honored Jewish practice to the present day. The
promise, then, is that Joseph will outlive Jacob and will be present at the moment
of his death. The promise was indeed fulfilled, as told in 49:33 and 50:1” (The JPS
Torah Commentary, page 313, The Jewish Publication Society).
Genesis 46:5 Then Jacob arose from Beersheba; and the sons of Israel
carried their father Jacob and their little ones and their wives in the wagons
which Pharaoh had sent to carry him. (NASB95)
The name “Jacob” does “not” signify that the patriarch is living in his old
Adamic sin nature since he sought God’s guidance on the move to Egypt but rather
the name signifies the patriarch’s weakness and dependence upon God’s power and
provision and protection. It indicates that the patriarch is living according to the
spiritual principle taught by the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:1-11 that God’s
power is manifested in human weakness or impotence.
The name “Jacob” signifies the lack of confidence the patriarch has in his own
strength and that he acknowledges that God is all powerful and all sufficient and
that he is helpless and hopeless and totally and completely dependent upon God. It
signifies that the patriarch has acknowledged his own human weakness or
impotence so as to experience the power of God in life and his right to appropriate
that power by prayer and claiming the divine promises given to him.
The designation “the sons of Israel” emphasizes the national identity of
Israel/Jacob’s sons and not their personal identity as his sons. This designation is
significant because the move from Canaan to Egypt taken by Jacob and his family
had great implications for the family who were the progenitors of the twelve tribes
of the nation that bore his father’s name.
The nation of Israel was in its infancy at this time and this trip to Egypt would
lead to their deliverance from the famine and relocation to Egypt for over four
hundred years. The brothers will enter Egypt as a nation in its infancy whereas
their descendants will leave four hundred years later as a powerful nation.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
305
The “wagons” used to transport Jacob, his grandchildren and the women were
carts, usually on two wooden wheels, drawn by oxen or horses and were unique to
Egypt at that time.
Genesis 46:6 They took their livestock and their property, which they had
acquired in the land of Canaan, and came to Egypt, Jacob and all his
descendants with him: 7 his sons and his grandsons with him, his daughters
and his granddaughters, and all his descendants he brought with him to
Egypt. (NASB95)
The expression “his descendants” that is mentioned twice in Genesis 46:6-7
refers to Jacob’s direct descendants who left Canaan with him, which would
include his children and grandchildren for a total of sixty-six people. This
expression would exclude daughters-in-law, servants and wives of his sons, which
is confirmed by the expression “his (Jacob’s) direct descendants” that appears in
the statement recorded in Genesis 46:26.
Also, the expression “his descendants” would “not” include all the daughters
and granddaughters of Jacob. The reason for this is that the female children of a
family were often not recorded since Jewish genealogies followed the male line of
descent, unless, the woman played a significant part in the plan of God such as
Dinah (See Genesis 34).
The expression “his descendants” is also a reference to the promise that the
Lord gave Jacob at Bethel before departing for Paddan Aram, which is recorded in
Genesis 28:14 that Jacob’s descendants “will also be like the dust of the earth.”
“His sons” refers to Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad,
Asher, Dan, Naphtali and Benjamin for a total of eleven since Joseph was in Egypt.
The expression “his grandsons” refers to not only Jacob’s grandsons but also
his great-grandsons since four great grandsons of Jacob were included in the list
that appears in Genesis 46:6-27 of Jacob’s direct descendants who left Canaan.
The term for “grandsons” in the original Hebrew text literally reads, “sons of
his sons,” which can be used for “great grandsons.”
“Daughters” is the noun bath and depending upon the context in which the
word is used it can refer to not only a “daughter” but also a “granddaughter,” a
“daughter-in-law” and even to a “sister” as in Genesis 34:17.
Since the term “his descendants” refers to Jacob’s offspring, his children and
grandchildren, the term “daughters” would exclude Jacob’s “daughters-in-law”
since they were not his direct descendants.
The term “daughters” would “not” refer to Jacob’s “granddaughters” since
they are mentioned immediately after this word demonstrating the writer was
making a distinction between the daughters of Jacob and his granddaughters.
Therefore, it appears that the term “daughters” in Genesis 46:6-7 indicates that
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
306
Jacob had other daughters other than Dinah whose births and names are not
mentioned.
In Genesis 46:8-27, the only daughter mentioned is Dinah and the only
granddaughter is Serah and yet in Genesis 46:6-7, we have the plural nouns
“daughters” and “granddaughters.”
Again, as we noted earlier, the reason for this is that the female children of a
family were often not recorded since Jewish genealogies followed the male line of
descent. There are exceptions to this rule as we noted earlier in that a woman
would be mentioned in the genealogy if she played a significant part in the plan of
God or Israel’s history such as with Dinah (See Genesis 34). The mention of
Dinah, the daughter of Jacob and Leah, is an exception to this rule and does not
imply that Jacob did not have other daughters by either of his wives or their
handmaids. Dinah is mentioned because of her rape, which led to her brothers
killing all the men of Shechem (See Genesis 34).
Acts 7:14 records that seventy-five people went to Egypt since Stephen omits
Jacob, Joseph and Joseph’s two sons but includes the nine wives of Jacob’s twelve
sons, Judah and Simeon’s wives had died and Joseph’s wife was in Egypt (See
Genesis 38; 46:10). This is confirmed by the expression “his (Jacob’s) direct
descendants” that appears in the statement recorded in Genesis 46:26.
Jacob and Joseph Reunite
Genesis 46:28-30 presents to us the record of Joseph finally reuniting with his
father. The genealogy contained in Genesis 46:8-27 is parenthetical and thus
Genesis 46:28 resumes the record of Israel’s migration from Canaan to Egypt. This
move to Egypt would not only deliver Joseph’s family from the famine but also
from the corrupt Canaanite influence, which had already begun to trouble his
family (See Genesis 34 and 38). The embryonic nation could develop into a great
nation while in Egypt since the Egyptians unlike the Canaanites, would not seek to
intermarry with Israel’s family since they despised Hebrews because of their
occupation as shepherds.
Genesis 46:28 Now he sent Judah before him to Joseph, to point out the
way before him to Goshen; and they came into the land of Goshen. (NASB95)
Jacob sends Judah to Joseph since Judah has gained his father’s confidence by
delivering on his promise to bring Benjamin back to him from Egypt. The fact that
Judah is chosen to inform Joseph that his father is arriving in Egypt indicates that
Jacob considered Judah his heir apparent to lead the family when he has died.
Judah has demonstrated his leadership skill by taking personal responsibility for
Benjamin and by his willingness to become a slave in Egypt in place of his brother
Benjamin so as to not bring more sorrow upon his aged father. It is also fitting that
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
307
Judah takes the lead in reuniting Joseph with his father since it was Judah who
came up with the idea to sell Joseph into slavery in the first place. That Judah is
instrumental in reuniting Joseph with his father is a manifestation of the
providence of God meaning that it was no accident that Judah is given the lead in
reuniting Joseph with his father since it was ordained by God from eternity past.
This reunion recalls Jacob's former meeting with Esau (32:3) and in both
situations after a long period of separation Jacob sent a party ahead to meet the
relative. The difference between the two reunions was that Jacob knew that his
encounter with Joseph would be joyous whereas he did not know what would take
place between himself and Esau.
“Sent” is the verb shalach, which refers to “persons who are sent by other
persons such as the action of sending messengers” and so this verb indicates that
Jacob sent Judah as a messenger to Joseph.
“To point out the way” is the verb yarah, which is in the hiphil (causative)
stem indicating that Jacob sent Judah ahead to Joseph to inform Joseph (hiphil:
cause Joseph to be informed) of his impending arrival in Egypt before arriving in
Goshen.
Genesis 46:29 Joseph prepared his chariot and went up to Goshen to meet
his father Israel; as soon as he appeared before him, he fell on his neck and
wept on his neck a long time. (NASB95)
In our passage, we see Joseph’s chariot used in a ceremonial context since he is
welcoming his father to Egypt. According to Egyptian artwork, the principle
distinction between ceremonial chariots and those used in warfare was that in the
former the party drove himself whereas in war, the chariot usually contained a
second person to drive it. Therefore, Joseph would be riding in his chariot alone.
Joseph’s action in hitching up his chariot and setting out to meet his father
indicates that he was anxious to see his father and could not wait any longer.
Despite his position as the prime minister of Egypt, Joseph does not wait for his
father to come to him.
The fact that this menial task is mentioned in the passage indicates the
importance of this journey and its significance.
The statement “Joseph…went up to Goshen” expresses a geographical
movement from the Nile Valley to the Goshen plateau.
“Appeared” is the verb ra’ah, which is in the causative-reflexive niphal form
meaning that Joseph “caused himself to appear” before his father. This form of the
verb with a personal subject is always used in Genesis of a theophany (See Genesis
12:7; 17:1; 18:1; 22:14; 26:3, 24; 35:6, 9; 48:3). Its use here indicates that when
Joseph appeared before Jacob, to Jacob it was like the Lord appearing to him.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
308
The fact that Joseph appeared before Jacob was in fact a manifestation of the
providence of God or in other words, it was having the hand of the Lord
manifested in his life.
Joseph falls on his father’s neck and wept on his neck a long time and
understandably so since the last time they saw each other was when Joseph was
seventeen, thus they hadn’t seen each in twenty years.
This indicated by the following. Genesis 37:2 records Joseph as 17 years old
when he was sold into slavery and Genesis 41:46 records Joseph as 30 years old
when he became prime minister of Egypt. Also, at the end of the seven years of
prosperity in Egypt, Joseph must have been 37 years of age since he became prime
minister at 30 years of age when he interpreted Pharaoh’s dream.
In Genesis 45:6, after reuniting with his brothers, Joseph mentions to his
brothers that two years of famine had already transpired and that five more
remained. Right after this conversation that Joseph had with his brothers, Jacob
moved to Egypt and reunited with Joseph according to Genesis 46. Therefore, the
fact that Joseph was 37 after the seven years of prosperity and that he met his
father after two years of famine indicates that Joseph was 39 years of age (or 40 if
we count his seventeenth year) when he was reunited with his father Jacob and his
brothers during the seven years of famine.
So if Joseph was 39 years of age when he was reunited with his father Jacob
and became prime minister at 30 and was sold into slavery at 17, then Joseph was
in Egypt for 22 years, (23 if 40 years of age) when he was reunited with his father
Jacob.
This is the fifth time that we have seen Joseph weep in Genesis 42-46 (See
Genesis 42:24; 43:30; 45:1-2; 14-15; 46:29).
Joseph’s weeping was not only an expression of his love and affection for his
father but also an expression of gratitude towards the Lord for reuniting him with
his father.
Notice that the Scripture does not record that Joseph said anything to his father
but simply cried for a long time since no words could express how Joseph felt at
this point. Even though Joseph was the most powerful man on planet earth at this
time, second only to Pharaoh, here he was once again a little boy in his father’s
arms. Israel was once again holding the son he had given up for dead.
Genesis 46:30 Then Israel said to Joseph, “Now let me die, since I have
seen your face, that you are still alive.” (NASB95)
Jacob’s statement “Now let me die, since I have seen your (Joseph’s) face
that you are still alive” indicates that in Israel’s opinion this experience of being
reuniting with Joseph could never be surpassed on earth.
Anything else that would happen after this would pale in the light of this
embrace since Israel feels that in receiving his son back from the dead he has
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
309
reached the fulfillment of his life and it is this taste of resurrection from the dead
that makes him long for death.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
310
Chapter Sixteen: Jacob Settles in Egypt
Genesis 47 records Jacob settling in Egypt and is divided into five sections: (1)
Joseph’s brothers meet Pharaoh (47:1-6). (2) Jacob meets Pharaoh (47:7-10). (3)
Joseph settles family in Goshen (47:11-12). (4) Joseph enslaves the Egyptians to
Pharaoh (47:13-26). (5) Joseph swears to bury Jacob in Canaan (47:27-31).
Genesis 47:1 Then Joseph went in and told Pharaoh, and said, “My father
and my brothers and their flocks and their herds and all that they have, have
come out of the land of Canaan; and behold, they are in the land of Goshen.”
(NASB95)
“My father” refers of course to Israel/Jacob and “my brothers” refers to
Joseph’s eleven brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad,
Asher, Benjamin, Dan, and Naphtali.
As we noted in Genesis 46:31-34, not only did Joseph’s father and brothers
migrate to Egypt but also their wives and children and grandchildren of
Israel/Jacob’s sons, not to mention the women and children of Shechem who were
absorbed into Jacob’s family according to Genesis 34:29 as well servants.
Therefore, there could have been as many as 300 people belonging to
Israel/Jacob’s household.
The purpose of the genealogy of Genesis 46:8-27 was not to record the name of
every person who migrated from Canaan to Egypt but to name those who will
become tribe and family heads.
As we noted in Genesis 45:10, Joseph sent an invitation to his father through his
brothers to settle in the land of Goshen. Then, we saw in Genesis 45:16-20,
Pharaoh extended an invitation to Israel and his family to settle in Egypt.
Notice that unlike Joseph, Pharaoh does not specify the pasturelands of Goshen,
which indicates that Pharaoh is unaware that Joseph’s family are shepherds in need
specifically of pastureland and so we see that Joseph needs to obtain authorization
from Pharaoh to settle his father and his family in Goshen. Therefore, Joseph
needed to be very diplomatic with Pharaoh and so we saw in Genesis 46:31-34,
that Joseph wisely prepared his brothers for an audience with Pharaoh and coached
them as to what to say to him on that occasion in order to receive the desired result
of living in Goshen. So Joseph informs his brothers in advance that he intends to
request the land of Goshen for them and then in Genesis 47:1, we see him doing
just as promised.
“Goshen” is the proper noun Goshen, which was located in the eastern part of
the Nile Delta, northeast of the Egyptian capital, Memphis and approximately 900
hundred square miles, well suited for grazing and for certain types of agriculture
and sparsely occupied allowing room for Hebrew expansion.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
311
This area was also called the “land of Rameses” in Genesis 47:11 and
according to the Exodus narrative, which records that the Israelites left Goshen
under Moses and went from Rameses through the Wadi Tumilat (a valley
connecting the Nile and the Bitter Lakes region, now a part of the Suez Canal
system) to Succoth (Compare Exodus 8:18; 12:37; 13:17f).
This situation is very delicate since the Egyptians considered shepherds an
abomination and Joseph’s family were just that. Therefore, Joseph did not want to
offend his family by making them feel that he had adopted the Egyptian attitude in
order to please the Egyptians and was treating them as socially inferior.
He needed to be perfectly honest in the matter and secure for his family a
position of comparative isolation geographically, which would segregate them
from the Egyptians who held their occupation with such contempt. On the other
hand, this situation was also difficult for Pharaoh since he was the king of Egypt
who was bound by Egyptian customs and prejudices. However, he did not want to
offend Joseph and his family either and so Pharaoh needed to have a solution,
which would not offend his countrymen or Joseph’s family. Therefore, Joseph’s
proposal to Pharaoh to settle his family in Goshen would solve the problem since it
would segregate Joseph’s family from the bulk of the Egyptian population,
isolating them from the majority of the population.
H. C. Leupold gives the following excellent comment, he writes, “Joseph knew
the exact situation in reference to all things Egyptian and had coached his brethren
how to meet this particular occasion. Yet much would depend on his own approach
to Pharaoh. Pharaoh’s attitude had been very generous (45:17ff). But royalty has
been known to speak generously and afterward to forget what it had promised.
Besides, though Joseph was overlord over the whole land, he would have laid
himself open to criticism had he provided for his own family in so liberal a manner
as Pharaoh had suggested. It was the part of wisdom to have Pharaoh confirm
publicly what he had originally suggested, and so to let it appear that the settlement
of Israel was Pharaoh’s work.” (Exposition of Genesis, volume 2, page 1124;
Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan).
Even though shepherds were detestable to the Egyptians, we saw in Genesis
46:31-34 Joseph instructed his brothers that they are to be honest with Pharaoh and
tell him that they have been shepherds from their youth as were their ancestors so
that he will give them the land of Goshen. This in turn would segregate their
family from the rest of the Egyptian population and would meet their needs as
shepherds.
The racial bigotry of the Egyptians towards Hebrew shepherds would serve to
maintain the Israelites as a separate people. Even though the Israelites exile in
Egypt was in many respects a bitter experience for them, it was a gracious act on
the part of God since it protected them from the corrupt Canaanite influence.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
312
Therefore, the divine rationale for the Lord permitting Joseph to be sold into
slavery in Egypt was to relocate his family so as to protect them from the
corrupting Canaanite influence.
Unlike the Canaanites, the Egyptians would be unwilling to integrate with the
Israelites and absorb them into their culture since they considered their worship of
God repulsive as well as the profession of shepherding. The segregated culture of
the Egyptians guaranteed that the embryonic nation of Israel could develop into a
great nation within the Egyptian borders.
Therefore, the phrase “with their flocks and herds” emphasizes that Joseph’s
family are shepherds, which in turn would assure Pharaoh that they did not have
any social or political ambitions and would also preserve his family from the
Egyptian way of life and intermarriage with the Egyptians.
Also, Joseph’s statement to Pharaoh, “behold, they are in the land of Goshen”
is designed to plant in Pharaoh’s mind the idea of settling his family in Goshen.
Genesis 47:2 He took five men from among his brothers and presented
them to Pharaoh. (NASB95)
Although, the Scriptures do not record the names of the five brothers that
Joseph selected to meet Pharaoh we can infer from Joseph’s wise and discerning
actions in the past that he selected five brothers who would be most presentable at
the Egyptian court to present their request to settle in the land of Goshen.
Genesis 47:3 Then Pharaoh said to his brothers, “What is your
occupation?” So they said to Pharaoh, “Your servants are shepherds, both we
and our fathers.” (NASB95)
Sesostris III (1878-1853 B.C) would have been the Pharaoh that invited Jacob
and his family to settle in the land of Goshen according to the chronology accepted
by the Cambridge Ancient History and cited by Eugene H. Merrill (Kingdom of
Priests, page 50, Baker Book House).
Pharaoh asks Joseph’s brothers their occupation since Joseph informed Pharaoh
before he met his brothers that they were shepherds (See Genesis 46:31-34) while
on the other hand, Joseph’s brothers follow his instructions, telling Pharaoh that
they are shepherds even though shepherds were despised by the Egyptians.
Genesis 47:4 They said to Pharaoh, “We have come to sojourn in the land,
for there is no pasture for your servants' flocks, for the famine is severe in the
land of Canaan. Now, therefore, please let your servants live in the land of
Goshen.” (NASB95)
The word “sojourned” is the Hebrew verb gur, which refers to a specific legal
status of a person who lives as a resident alien and is in a dependent legal status
and is not a native. The verb gur signifies Jacob and his family’s status as “resident
aliens” meaning that although they would live in Egypt they would possess neither
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
313
land nor clan ties with the Egyptians and would be without legal support and
protection and would be vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by the Egyptians.
Such a people, like Jacob and his family, would have been dependent upon a
native to recognize and protect him while they were in Egypt, which of course,
Joseph did while he was alive.
Furthermore, in Genesis 46:3-4, although after Joseph’s death the Egyptians
exploited the Israelites, God gave Israel assurance that He would bless his
descendants while they resided in Egypt and would make them a great nation there.
Therefore, the use of the verb gur in this statement would clearly suggest to
Pharaoh that Joseph’s family was requesting to live temporarily in his country as
immigrants in order to find relief from the famine in Canaan.
The use of this verb gur, “sojourned” would also connect the Israelites
migration to Egypt with the divine prophecy to Abraham recorded in Genesis
15:12-16.
The explanatory clause “the famine is severe in the land of Canaan,” was
proper for Joseph’s brothers to communicate to Pharaoh even though Joseph did
not tell them to say this to Pharaoh. Therefore, they were saying in effect to
Pharaoh that they had left their native land as a matter of necessity and survival.
Joseph’s brothers’ request of Pharaoh “please let your servants live in the
land of Goshen” was not wrong on their part or in disobedience to Joseph’s
instructions but was according to Joseph’s plan and in agreement with what he told
Pharaoh. This is confirmed in that Joseph informed his brothers that before they
speak to Pharaoh he would let him know that they were already in Goshen as
indicated by the statement in Genesis 47:1, “behold they are in the land of
Goshen,” which was designed to plant in Pharaoh’s mind the idea of settling his
family in Goshen.
Furthermore, the brothers’ request was also in line with Pharaoh’s offer in
Genesis 45:18 “I will give you the best of the land of Egypt” which Goshen
would be for Joseph’s family.
Genesis 47:5 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Your father and your brothers
have come to you.” (NASB95)
Pharaoh’s statement “your father and your brothers have come to you” is
official acknowledgement and legitimization of their presence” (Bruce K. Waltke,
Genesis, pages 586, Zondervan). In this statement, Pharaoh is in effect saying “so I
see your father and your brothers have arrived.”
Pharaoh’s acknowledgement of the arrival of Joseph’s father and brothers
reminds him of what he promised Joseph before their arrival, namely, “I will give
you the best of the land of Egypt and you will eat the fat of the land” (Genesis
45:18).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
314
Genesis 47:6 “The land of Egypt is at your disposal; settle your father and
your brothers in the best of the land, let them live in the land of Goshen; and
if you know any capable men among them, then put them in charge of my
livestock.” (NASB95)
Pharaoh agrees with Joseph’s suggestion to settle his family in the land of
Goshen since it would not offend Joseph and his family or his Egyptian
countrymen who disliked shepherds. After Joseph’s brothers have their audience
with Pharaoh, Pharaoh turns to Joseph and speaks to him granting his request as a
special favor to Joseph for his delivering the nation of Egypt from famine.
By addressing himself to Joseph, Pharaoh implicitly authorizes him to be
responsible for implementing his royal decree, which he did according to Genesis
47:11. The manner in which this authorization is given expresses Pharaoh’s
absolute authority, even over Joseph. However, in Genesis 47:7-10, Israel blesses
Pharaoh expressing his spiritual superiority over Pharaoh since God elected Jacob
to inherit the promises, privileges, blessings, and responsibilities of the Abrahamic
covenant.
Pharaoh’s offer “if you know any capable men among them, then put them
in charge of my livestock” would further express his good will towards Joseph’s
family. This offer was not without precedence since Egyptian inscriptions
frequently mention that foreigners were put in charge Pharaoh’s cattle. It would
provide Joseph’s family an opportunity to advance themselves in Pharaoh’s
administration and enjoy privileges and protection not often extended to resident
aliens as themselves.
Jacob Meets Pharaoh
Genesis 47:7-10 presents to us the record of Jacob meeting Pharaoh.
Genesis 47:7 Then Joseph brought his father Jacob and presented him to
Pharaoh; and Jacob blessed Pharaoh. (NASB95)
“Bless” is the verb barakh, which means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.” Therefore, the verb barakh indicates Jacob’s
desire for Pharaoh that he would be endued with power by the Lord for success,
prosperity, fecundity (offspring in great numbers) and longevity.
This desire to bless Pharaoh in the sense of enduing him with power for
success, prosperity, fecundity and longevity was according to the will of God since
Pharaoh blessed Joseph and his family who were descendants of Abraham.
In Genesis 47:7, the verb barakh does “not” refer to a “greeting” since if it was
we would expect Joseph’s brothers to do the same, which they do not.
The fact that Pharaoh blessed Joseph and his family was another manifestation
of the fulfillment of the promise contained in the covenant that the Lord gave to
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
315
Abraham that He would “bless those who bless you and the one who curses you
I will curse.” This promise is contained in the “Abrahamic” covenant and was
originally established with Abraham when he left Haran and is recorded in Genesis
12:1-3.
Pharaoh blessed Joseph who was a descendant of Abraham by promoting him
to prime minister of Egypt and he blessed Joseph’s family by settling them in the
land of Goshen. Therefore, God the Holy Spirit through Jacob would bless Pharaoh
by prospering him and this is reflected later on in Genesis 47 where Joseph obtains
for Pharaoh almost all of Egypt’s wealth, including the people themselves
(47:13-26).
The fact that Jacob is recorded as to have blessed Pharaoh fulfills the spiritual
principle taught in Hebrews 7:7 that “the lesser is blessed by the greater.” Jacob
was superior to Pharaoh in that he was the recipient of the promises, privileges,
responsibilities and blessings of the Abrahamic covenant whereas Pharaoh was
superior to Jacob in the temporal realm in that he was the king of the most
powerful nation on the earth in that day, Egypt.
The promise that appears in Genesis 12:3 “in you all the families of the earth
will be blessed” was fulfilled through Joseph’s wise administration during the
seven years of prosperity and famine, which delivered the nation of Egypt from
destruction. It was also fulfilled in that God prospered Egypt economically in that
all the nations of the earth had to go to Egypt to buy food. So we can see that Jacob
is functioning as the instrument used by God to bring blessing to this Gentile,
heathen king and his nation.
Genesis 47:7 Then Joseph brought his father Jacob and presented him to
Pharaoh; and Jacob blessed Pharaoh. 8 Pharaoh said to Jacob, “How many
years have you lived?” (NASB95)
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on Pharaoh questioning Jacob with regards to his
age, writes, “The question is perhaps prompted by a blessing of longevity from
Jacob or possibly marks the honor of Jacob’s long life and many children.
Egyptians were preoccupied with death, and the pharaohs, who professed to be
eternal, sought to immortalize their bodies. Jacob at 130-and he will live another
seventeen years (47:28)-already exceeds the ideal Egyptian life span of 110 years
(see 50:22). His age must impress Pharaoh.” (Genesis, page 587, Zondervan).
Genesis 47:9 So Jacob said to Pharaoh, “The years of my sojourning are
one hundred and thirty; few and unpleasant have been the years of my life,
nor have they attained the years that my fathers lived during the days of their
sojourning.” (NASB95)
“My sojourning” is a reference to Jacob’s life long status as a resident alien in
the land of Canaan. He lived in Beersheba with his father and mother until the age
of forty and then had to flee to Paddan Aram because Esau was threatening to kill
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
316
him and on the way to Paddan Aram, he stopped at Bethel where the Lord met
him.
Upon returning from Paddan Aram, he stopped at Penuel where the Lord met
him again and then he stayed temporarily at Succoth and Shechem before returning
to Bethel to fulfill his vow to the Lord and finally, he returned to his father in
Hebron. Therefore, we can see that Jacob was an excellent type of the spiritual
truth that the believer’s life on planet earth is a pilgrimage to the eternal home in
heaven (cf. Hebrews 11:1-16).
The statement “few and unpleasant have been the years of my life” appears
to be a poor testimony before Pharaoh who was an unbeliever but this is not the
case since it is a true statement. This statement reflects that Jacob has spent many
years of self-induced misery and divine discipline as a result of his poor decisions
as well as many years of experiencing undeserved suffering.
For example, He experienced undeserved suffering as a child as a result of
living in a home where his father Isaac favored his twin brother Esau while his
mother favored him. Jacob experienced self-induced misery by getting Esau to
exchange his birthright for a bowl of red lintel soup, which resulted in Esau hating
him.
There was more self-induced misery when Jacob attempted to gain the blessing
of the birthright from his father by deception and then had to flee to his uncle
Laban in Paddan Aram because Esau threatened to kill him. This was followed by
a twenty year exile in Paddan Aram with his uncle Laban who cheated him out of
his wages.
Jacob sought Rachel to be his wife and ended up with four, and the outcome of
this was continual competition and problems in his home. He finally fled from his
uncle and eventually had to make a non-aggression pact with him to prevent a war.
Then, Jacob’s daughter Dinah was raped at Shechem, which would have never
happened had he not procrastinated and went directly to Bethel to fulfill his vow to
the Lord. This poor decision also resulted in his sons Simeon and Levi exacting
revenge for the rape of their sister Dinah by killing all the men of Shechem, which
in turn led to the cities surrounding Shechem seeking to destroy Jacob’s family,
which would have taken place had the Lord not intervened and protected him.
Then, this was followed by Rachel, his favorite wife, dying while giving birth
to Benjamin along the way to Bethlehem, which was of course undeserved
suffering.
Next, his oldest son Reuben had sex with his concubine who was Rachel’s
maid, which was a reaction to his father not loving his mother Leah as much as
Rachel. Then, of course, his sons sold his beloved son Joseph into slavery and
deceived him into thinking that Joseph was dead, which again took place because
the sons of Leah and the concubines resented Jacob favoring Joseph over them.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
317
Finally, there was the famine which threatened the existence of his family, and
the prime minister of Egypt appearing to want to take the lone surviving child of
his favorite wife, namely Benjamin.
Therefore, Jacob’s statement to Pharaoh “few and unpleasant have been the
years of my life” was a true statement and evaluation of his life and therefore not a
poor testimony since he also knew that God had blessed him throughout all his
adversities whether self-induced or undeserved.
Also, in Genesis 47:9, we read where Jacob says to Pharaoh that he has not
lived as long as his fathers lived during the days of their sojourning, which is a
reference of course to his father Isaac who lived to be a 180 years of age (See
Genesis 35:28) and his grandfather Abraham who died at the age of 175 (See
Genesis 25:7).
Unlike his sons, Jacob does not use deferential language and call himself
Pharaoh’s servant since he views himself as the servant of God, which expresses
his spiritual superiority over Pharaoh.
Genesis 47:10 And Jacob blessed Pharaoh, and went out from his presence.
(NASB95)
Once again, the statement “Jacob blessed Pharaoh” expresses Jacob’s Spirit
inspired desire that God would endue Pharaoh with power for success, prosperity,
fecundity (offspring in great numbers) and longevity since Pharaoh had blessed his
family who were descendants of Abraham.
In Genesis 47:10, the verb barakh does “not” refer to a “farewell” since if it
was we would expect Joseph’s brothers to have done the same, which they did not.
Up to this point when Jacob met Joseph, Jacob did not see the hand of God in
his adversity as his son Joseph did. The more Jacob experienced adversity through
his own bad decisions, the more fearful and protective he became while on the
other hand, the more undeserved suffering that Joseph experienced the more
forgiving he became and eager to serve others, even at his own expense.
In his adversity Joseph grew closer to God, while Jacob drifted farther and
farther away from his relationship with God.
In this interview with Pharaoh all of these bitter experiences may have begun to
come into focus for Jacob in that he realized that he was wrong for concluding to
his sons that “all these things are against me” (42:36) since his fears did not
conform to the facts. Therefore, this audience with Pharaoh was a turning point in
Jacob’s life in that just as his sons were brought through the providence of God to
the place where they acknowledged their sins and obeyed God so Jacob seems to
have done the same here.
At this point in his life, I believe Jacob recognized that most of his suffering
and sorrow was the result of his own bad decisions, and has now begun to see God
and the way that He deals with His people in an entirely different perspective.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
318
The people that Jacob tried to withhold and protect, namely Rachel, Joseph,
Benjamin were the very people that were taken from him. It was only by giving up
Benjamin that he gained him and by giving up Benjamin he preserved not only
Benjamin’s life, but that of his entire family.
Up to this point in Jacob’s life, we have seen that all the blessings that he and
his family received were the result of God’s grace policy and were entirely
unmerited because of his bad decisions. Grace is all that God is free to do in giving
us eternal salvation and imparting unmerited blessings to us based upon the merits
of Christ and His death on the Cross-and our eternal union with Him.
Grace is God treating us in a manner that we don’t deserve and excludes any
human works in order to acquire eternal salvation or blessing from God. Grace
means that God saved us and blessed us despite ourselves and not according to
anything that we do and gives the Creator all the credit and the creature none.
Therefore, the unmerited blessings that Jacob received manifested that the
fulfillment of the promises of the Abrahamic covenant were unconditional
meaning that its fulfillment depended upon the faithfulness of God exclusively. It
is at this point in his life where Jacob was advanced in age and helpless and
hopeless that he realized the true meaning of grace.
Bob Deffinbaugh gives an excellent comment regarding Jacob at this point in
his life, he writes, “I find it noteworthy to observe that while the book of Genesis
covers a period of thousands of years, almost half of the book is devoted to the life
and times of Jacob. Abraham, the great man of faith, spans chapters 11-24; Isaac,
chapters 21-35; Joseph, chapters 30-50; but Jacob outspans them all, from chapter
25 through chapter 50. Why is it that Joseph was such a great and godly man, and
yet he had no tribe named after him? Why did he not have a son whose heir would
be the priestly line? Why did Messiah not come forth from Joseph rather than
Judah? I do not know, other than the fact that God chooses to accomplish His
purposes through men like Jacob and Judah, and you and me. If Joseph is a type of
Christ, then surely Jacob is a type of most Christians. One reason why so much
time and space is allotted to Jacob (in my opinion) is that it took this long for him
to grasp the matters of salvation and sanctification.” (The Book of Genesis, page
363; Biblical Studies, 1997).
Joseph Settles Jacob in Goshen
Genesis 47:11-12 records Joseph settling his family in Goshen.
Genesis 47:11 So Joseph settled his father and his brothers and gave them
a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of
Rameses, as Pharaoh had ordered. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
319
A comparison of Pharaoh’s statement recorded in Genesis 47:6 with the
statement in Genesis 47:11 indicates that “the land of Goshen” and “the land of
Rameses” refer to the same location in Egypt.
The fact that Joseph’s family would reside in Goshen would later on protect
their descendants, the Israelites from the plagues that God placed upon the nation
of Egypt during the Exodus generation (See Exodus 8:22; 9:26).
As we have noted in the past, the racial bigotry of the Egyptians towards
Hebrew shepherds would serve to maintain the Israelites as a separate people.
Even though the Israelites exile in Egypt was in many respects a bitter experience
for them, it was a gracious act on the part of God since it protected them from the
corrupt Canaanite influence. Therefore, the divine rationale for the Lord for
moving Jacob and his family to Egypt was to protect them from the corrupting
Canaanite influence.
Unlike the Canaanites, the Egyptians would be unwilling to integrate with the
Israelites and absorb them into their culture since they considered their worship of
God repulsive as well as the profession of shepherding. The segregated culture of
the Egyptians guaranteed that the embryonic nation of Israel could develop into a
great nation within the Egyptian borders.
“Settled” is the verb yashav, which means, “to live in a place for a period of
time” and does “not” mean to live in a place permanently.
In the hiphil (causative) stem, the verb indicates that Joseph “caused” his father
and his brothers to live in the land of Rameses, which is Goshen for an unspecified
period of time, which according to the prophecy given to Abraham in Genesis
15:12-16 was four hundred years. Although this would be a long term migration
from the human perspective, from the divine perspective it would not be
permanent.
“Possession” is the noun `achuzzah, which refers to an inalienable possession
received from one with the authority to give it (cf. 17:8; 23:4, 9, 20) (Bruce K.
Waltke, Genesis, page 587, Zondervan).
The prepositional phrase “in the best part of the land” describes Goshen as the
best land for agriculture (Compare Isaiah 1:19) and this can be inferred by Israel’s
later references to it (See Numbers 20:5; Psalm 78:47) (Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis,
A Commentary, page 571, Zondervan).
The statement “as Pharaoh ordered” refers to Joseph executing Pharaoh’s
command, which is recorded in Genesis 47:6, “settle your father and your
brothers in the best of the land, let them live in the land of Goshen; and if you
know any capable men among them, then put them in charge of my livestock.”
Genesis 47:12 Joseph provided his father and his brothers and all his
father's household with food, according to their little ones. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
320
Genesis 47:12 is a “janus” verse, which is a term named after the Roman god of
doorways with one head and two faces looking in opposite directions and is a term
applied to a literary unit that looks back and forth to unite the units before and
after. Therefore, Genesis 47:12 contrasts the abundant food provisions of the
Israelites with the hunger of the Egyptians in Genesis 47:13, which highlights the
miraculous provisions and protections that God bestowed on Joseph’s family.
The phrase “according to their little ones” means that each family’s allocation
of food was in direct proportion to the number of children in the family.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
321
Chapter Seventeen: Jacob’s Final Prophetic Words
In this chapter, we see Jacob’s final prophetic words, which were addressed to
his children with regards to their future offspring. In Genesis 47:27-31, we will see
Joseph swearing to his father that he will bury him in Canaan.
Genesis 47:27 Now Israel lived in the land of Egypt, in Goshen, and they
acquired property in it and were fruitful and became very numerous.
(NASB95)
Genesis 47:27 contrasts the prosperity of the Israelites with that of the poverty
of the Egyptians, which is noted in Genesis 47:13-26. Of course, the Israelites
prospered at Egypt’s expense in the sense that they acquired land at a cheap price
from Egyptian farmers who knew they would lose their land anyway due to the
famine.
The Israelites would have purchased cattle from Egyptian farmers, which would
have died from starvation. However, this prosperity that Israel experienced led
eventually to the Egyptians resenting them and persecuting them.
The noun “Israel” and the verb yashav, “lived” are in the singular whereas the
verbs `achaz, “they acquired property” and parah, “were fruitful” and ravah,
“became numerous” are all in the plural demonstrating the unity as a corporate
unit between the patriarch and the nation that descended from him. Therefore, the
name “Israel” emphasizes that the patriarch has become a nation, which is a
fulfillment of the Lord’s promise to make out of his descendants, a nation, which is
recorded in Genesis 35:11.
Genesis 47:28 Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years; so the
length of Jacob's life was one hundred and forty-seven years. (NASB95)
The name “Jacob” is often is used in Scripture to signify that the patriarch is
living in his old Adamic sin nature. However, the name at times such as in Genesis
46:2-8, is also used to signify the patriarch’s weakness in his advance age and his
lack of confidence in his own strength.
The use of the name “Jacob” in Genesis 47:28 implies that the patriarch was
living according to the spiritual principle taught by the apostle Paul in 2
Corinthians 12:9.
The name “Jacob” in Genesis 47:28 signifies that the patriarch has
acknowledged his own human weakness or impotence so as to experience the
power of God in life and his right to appropriate that power by prayer and claiming
the divine promises given to him.
It is interesting that Jacob spent the last seventeen years of his life under the
care of his son Joseph whereas Joseph spent the first seventeen years of his life
under the care of his father Jacob. This reflects the providence of God in the lives
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
322
of both men in the sense that their lives were not ruled by chance or fate but by
God.
It is also interesting that only four verses were devoted to the death of Abraham
(See Genesis 25:7-10) and two were devoted to the death of Isaac (See Genesis
35:28). However, the death of Jacob is recorded in great detail since the account of
his death is recorded in Genesis 47:28-50:14. The reason for this is due to the
special circumstances surrounding Jacob’s death in that of all the patriarchs, he
was the only one who did “not” die in the Promised Land. Therefore, Jacob’s
demand to be buried in Canaan and the arrangements for his burial there are
recorded in great detail.
Nahum Sarna gives a fascinating quote regarding the age of Jacob, he writes,
“The lifespans of the three patriarchs lend themselves to factorization according to
the following pattern: Abraham 175=5 X 5 X 7; Isaac 180=6 X 6 X 5; Jacob 147=7
X 7 X 3. In this series, the squared number increases by one each time while the
coefficient decreases by two. Furthermore, in each case the sum of the factors is
17. Through their factorial patterns, the patriarchal chronologies constitute a
rhetorical device expressing the profound biblical conviction that Israel’s formative
age was not a concatenation of haphazard incidents but a series of events ordered
according to God’s grand design” (JPS Torah Commentary, page 324, Jewish
Publication Society).
Genesis 47:29 When the time for Israel to die drew near, he called his son
Joseph and said to him, “Please, if I have found favor in your sight, place now
your hand under my thigh and deal with me in kindness and faithfulness.
Please do not bury me in Egypt, 30 but when I lie down with my fathers, you
shall carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burial place.” And he said,
“I will do as you have said.” (NASB95)
As we have noted, the name “Israel” means, “one who fights (both God and
men) and overcomes with the power of God.” The name memorializes the
historical event of Jacob wrestling the preincarnate Christ, and which wrestling
match symbolized Jacob’s struggles in life with men, which in reality were with
God. The name “Israel” reflects strength and character produced by appropriating
the power of the Word of God by claiming the promises of God in prayer.
Therefore, the use of this name signifies that Jacob is not walking in his flesh at
this point in the narrative but is walking by faith (See 1 Corinthians 5:7).
By requesting that his son Joseph bury him in the land that the Lord promised
him, Israel was demonstrating his faith in the Lord’s promise to give to him and his
descendants the land of Canaan.
The expression “Please, if I have found favor in your sight” is deferential
language, which is normally used by an inferior when speaking to a superior. It is
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
323
used by Israel since Joseph possesses power and authority as the prime minister of
Egypt and it expresses Israel’s dependence upon Joseph.
The command “place your hand under my thigh” is a euphemism for
genitalia (Compare Genesis 24:2-3; Exodus 1:5; Judges 8:30) and was a
symbolical gesture for securing one’s last will by an oath at the source of life.
Therefore, by putting his hands under Joseph’s thigh and touching his genitals,
Joseph was giving an oath that was special and solemn.
Israel’s request “deal with me in kindness and faithfulness” means that Israel
who is dying is dependent upon Joseph who is in the prime of life. It also means
that Israel is requesting that Joseph guarantee that he will bury him according to
the covenant promises regarding the land of Canaan.
The statement “when I lie down with my fathers” is a reference to Israel’s
physical death.
“My fathers” is a reference to Abraham and Isaac as indicated by the phrase
“their burial place,” which is a reference to the cave of Machpelah where
Abraham and Isaac were buried.
Genesis 23 records that for four hundred shekels of silver, Abraham purchased
from Ephron the Hittite “the cave of Machpelah” as a burial plot for Sarah,
himself and his descendants.
“Machpelah” is located west of modern Hebron on the outskirts and the city is
situated on the eastern slope of a narrow valley, which runs north and south and is
surrounded by rocky hills. The cave itself was located at the end of a field and
Josephus mentioned a “monument of the patriarchs,” which stood in Hebron in the
days of Jesus.
Abraham bought this gravesite in the land of Canaan in the confident
expectation of God fulfilling His promise to give the land of Canaan to himself and
his descendants as a permanent possession. Not only was Sarah buried at this site
but so also were Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob and Leah were buried there as
well (See Genesis 25:9; 35:27, 29, 49:31; 50:13).
All of these demonstrated their faith in God’s promises to give them the land of
Canaan by being buried with Sarah. The presence of the grave site among their
descendants in later years would be mute but eloquent testimony to them all that
the patriarchs were sure that God would fulfill His promises to give them the land
of Canaan.
Israel’s request “Please do not bury me in Egypt, but when I lie down with
my fathers, you shall carry me out of Egypt and bury me in their burial place”
is a reference to the Lord’s promise to him, which is recorded in Genesis 35:12.
Joseph agrees to his father’s request and fulfilled it as recorded in Genesis 50.
Genesis 47:31 He said, “Swear to me.” So he swore to him. Then Israel
bowed in worship at the head of the bed. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
324
Bruce K. Waltke makes the following comment regarding Israel’s request
recorded in Genesis 47:31, he writes, “Jacob demands an oath to make it official
(cf. 25:29-33) and to make Joseph directly accountable to God. Also, Jacob needs
assurance because he knows the difficulty of the assignment in light of Pharaoh’s
power. Pharaoh refers to the oath in granting permission (cf. 50:6).” (Genesis, page
592, Zondervan)
When Joseph agrees to his father’s request, Israel leaned on top of his staff in
an inaudible prayer of thanksgiving and praise to the Lord that his final request
will be fulfilled.
The statement “Then Israel bowed in worship at the head of the bed” is
incorrectly translated and should be translated “then Israel in worship leaned on
top of his staff.”
Now, the original Hebrew text does “not” contain vowels since a certain group
of Jewish scholars who lived from A.D. 500- 950 and were called the “Massoretes”
added vowels to the Hebrew text for pronunciation purposes. Therefore, in Genesis
47:31, “bed” is the noun mtth but this word became mittah when the Massoretes
added vowels to the text. However, the writer of Hebrews took the letters to stand
for matteh, “staff” rather than the noun mittah, “bed.”
Therefore, Israel did not bow in worship at the head of his bed but rather he
leaned on top of his staff and this interpretation is confirmed by Hebrews 11:21,
which states, “By faith Jacob, as he was dying, blessed each of the sons of
Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff.” The leaning on the top
of his staff by Israel was a symbolic gesture of prostration since he was too old and
feeble to bow to the ground.
Jacob Adopts Joseph’s Sons
Genesis chapter 48 records Jacob adopting Joseph’s sons and is divided into
four sections: (1) The introduction to Jacob blessing Joseph (48:1-2). (2) Jacob
adopts Joseph’s sons in order to elevate them to the status of founding fathers
(48:3-12). (3) Jacob confers blessing on Joseph who is represented by his sons with
Ephraim receiving the greater blessing (48:13-20). (4) Jacob gives Joseph the
portion of the land he took from the Amorites (48:21-22).
Although Jacob adopts Joseph’s two sons, giving them founding father status,
which would make the total number of tribes in Israel as thirteen, the number of
tribes in Israel still remained at twelve by eliminating the tribe of Levi’s territorial
share (See Joshua 14:1-4).
Genesis 48-50 brings to a conclusion the story of Jacob, which began in
Genesis 35 and the story of Joseph, which began in Genesis 37.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
325
There are two significant themes recorded in Genesis 48: (1) Jacob adopts
Joseph’s sons and elevates them to the status of Israelite tribes. (2) Ephraim
receives a greater status over the first-born Manasseh.
Genesis 48:1-4 records Joseph visiting his father after being informed that he
has become sick and his father in turn recalls the promises that God gave him
before entering into the ceremony of adopting Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and
Manasseh.
Genesis 48:1 Now it came about after these things that Joseph was told,
“Behold, your father is sick.” So he took his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim
with him. (NASB95)
“After these things” refers to the oath ceremony where Joseph agreed to his
father’s request to have him buried in the land of Canaan, which is recorded in
Genesis 47:27-31 and marks the final stage of Jacob’s life.
The expression “Joseph was told” indicates that Joseph did not live with his
father in Goshen but rather resided in Memphis due to his responsibilities as prime
minister of Egypt, which would keep him distant from his family.
The statement “Behold, your father is sick” is the first reference in the Bible to
sickness and refers to the fact that Jacob is terminally ill.
Joseph’s firstborn was “Manasseh” whose name means, “He who causes to
forget” as indicated by Joseph’s statement “For God has made me forget all my
trouble and all my father’s household.”
Manasseh’s birth is recorded in Genesis 41:51 Joseph named the firstborn
Manasseh, “For,” he said, “God has made me forget all my trouble and all my
father's household.” (NASB95)
The name “Manasseh” is derived from the verb nashah, which means, “to
forget” and appears also in Genesis 41:51 and is translated “forget.”
The verb nashah, “forget” does “not” mean the loss of memory of his
adversities related to his brothers selling him into slavery but rather it means the
hurt or the sting has gone out of the memory since God has blessed him greatly in
Egypt. In fact, the mere mention of his father’s household reveals that Joseph has
not forgotten his father or brothers.
The phrase “all my trouble and all my father's household” is a “hendiadys”
meaning that even though there are two different expressions one idea is intended,
thus it can be translated “all my trouble associated with my father’s household.”
The name of Joseph’s firstborn praises God for delivering him from all the
adversities and heartbreak inflicted upon him by his brothers for selling him into
slavery in Egypt.
The name “Manasseh” signifies that God had healed Joseph of the bitter
memories of being sold into slavery by his brothers by blessing Joseph while in
Egypt.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
326
The second son that Asenath bore to Joseph was named “Ephraim” whose
name means, “He has made me fruitful,” as indicated by Joseph’s statement “For
God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”
Ephraim’s birth is recorded in Genesis 41:52 He named the second Ephraim,
“For,” he said, “God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”
(NASB95)
The name “Ephraim” is derived from the verb parah, which means, “to be
fruitful” and appears also in Genesis 41:52 and is translated “has made me
fruitful.”
The verb parah refers to abundant posterity (See Genesis 17:6, 20; 28:3; 48:4;
Psalm 105:23-24), which is unusual that it should be used by Joseph after the birth
of only his second child. Therefore, we can see that the verb parah along with the
proper noun `ephrayim, “Ephraim” forms a prophecy related to the tribe that
would descend from Joseph’s second son Ephraim. In fact, Moses in his farewell
address recorded in Deuteronomy 33:13-17 bestows a fertility blessing upon
Joseph and explicitly refers to the “ten thousands of Ephraim” and the
“thousands of Manasseh.”
Joseph’s two sons were twenty years of age since Genesis 41:50 records that
Joseph’s two sons were born a year before the famine and Genesis 47:28 records
that Jacob lived in Egypt for seventeen years and Genesis 45:11 records that Jacob
and his sons arrived in Egypt when there were five more years of famine to come.
Therefore, if Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years and arrived in Egypt with five
years remaining in the famine and Joseph’s sons were born a year before the
famine, then Joseph’s sons would be twenty years of age.
Genesis 48:1 lists Manasseh first since he was the first-born and Ephraim
second and this is important since this represents Joseph’s viewpoint that by
primogeniture rights the older will be greater than the younger, however, Jacob
will reverse it.
If you recall, in Genesis 25, we saw Esau was the firstborn son of Isaac and
Rebekah, however, the Lord chose Jacob to inherit the blessings, privileges,
promises and responsibilities of the Abrahamic covenant since he was a believer
and Esau was not.
Also, in Genesis 38, we saw that even though Tamar’s midwife used the scarlet
thread to identify Zerah as Judah’s firstborn, God considered Perez the firstborn as
demonstrated in that he always appears before Zerah in the genealogical lists (See
Genesis 46:12; Numbers 26:20-21; Matthew 1:3). The reason for this is that the
ancestral lines of King David is traced back through Perez according to Ruth 4:1822 as well as the human nature of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ according to
Matthew 1:3 and Luke 3:33.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
327
Genesis 48:2 When it was told to Jacob, “Behold, your son Joseph has
come to you,” Israel collected his strength and sat up in the bed. (NASB95)
Notice the switch in names from “Jacob” to “Israel,” which is significant.
Although, the name “Jacob” means, “heel catcher” implying someone who is a
“deceiver” and a “supplanter,” which is a person who takes the place of another by
force, scheming or strategy, the name is used here to signify the patriarch’s
weakness in his advance age and his lack of confidence in his own strength. The
use of the name “Jacob” implies that the patriarch was living according to the
spiritual principle taught by the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:9.
The statement “Israel collected his strength and sat up in the bed” along with
the change of name from “Jacob” to “Israel” indicates that the patriarch
summoned the strength to sit up in bed by appropriating the power of God by
claiming the promises of God or in other words, the promises God gave to him
revived him.
Jacob sat up in bed also out of respect for Joseph and his office as prime
minister of Egypt. Jacob is told that Joseph has arrived since Genesis 48:10 records
that he was going blind and Joseph is announced to his father since Joseph is a
great man in Egypt.
Genesis 48:3 Then Jacob said to Joseph, “God Almighty appeared to me at
Luz in the land of Canaan and blessed me, 4 and He said to me, ‘Behold, I will
make you fruitful and numerous, and I will make you a company of peoples,
and will give this land to your descendants after you for an everlasting
possession.’” (NASB95)
The expression “God Almighty” (Hebrew: El Shaddai) was first used by God
of Himself when speaking to Abraham as recorded in Genesis 17:1. It was used by
Isaac when blessing Jacob as recorded in Genesis 28:3 and was used by God once
again when speaking to Jacob after he fulfilled his vow at Bethel as recorded in
Genesis 35:11.
The title El Shaddai, “God Almighty” emphasizes the omnipotence of God and
describes the Lord as being able to bring to pass that which He has promised to
Jacob (See Romans 4:20-21).
Israel’s statement “God Almighty appeared to me at Luz in the land of
Canaan” is a reference to the theophany that he received at Luz when he was
returning to Canaan from Paddan Aram, which is recorded in Genesis 35:10-12.
A “theophany” is a theological term used to refer to either a visible or auditory
manifestation of the Son of God before His incarnation in Bethlehem (Gen. 32:2930; Ex. 3:2; 19:18-20; Josh. 5:13-15; Dan. 3:26).
Genesis 28:10-15 and Genesis 35:9-15 record that the patriarch received both a
visible and auditory manifestation of the Son of God.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
328
“Luz” was later named by Jacob “Bethel” after he received the theophany on
the way out of the land of Canaan according to Genesis 28:19.
“Bethel” means, “house of God” and is approximately ten miles north of
Jerusalem.
The fact that this is a reference to the theophany Israel received upon returning
to Canaan is indicated by the three promises he mentions to Joseph, which were
not given to him when he left Canaan for Paddan Aram. However, we must
understand that the promises that Jacob received when leaving Canaan for Paddan
Aram that are recorded in Genesis 28:10-19 are nearly identical in substance to the
promises that he received when returning to Canaan, which are recorded in Genesis
35:10-12. Therefore, the promises that Jacob received in his two encounters with
the Lord were probably one and the same in the mind of the patriarch.
Israel received six promises when he returned to Canaan, which are recorded in
Genesis 35:10-12; however, in Genesis 48:4, he only mentions three of them to
Joseph.
The first promise “I will make you fruitful and numerous” is a reference to
the promise “be fruitful and multiply” and means that the Lord would give Jacob
and his descendants the capacity to be prolific in producing posterity.
The second promise “and I will make you a company of peoples” is a
reference to the promise “a company of nations…shall come from you” which
refers to the twelve tribes of Israel.
“Peoples” is the noun `am, which is used of people in terms of their being
kinsmen, relatives or members of a tribe and so therefore, this word in Genesis
48:4 refers to the individuals belonging to the various twelve tribes of Israel.
“Nations” is the noun goy, which refers to a specific group of people that form
a political entity and so therefore, this word refers to the twelve tribes of Israel,
each of which formed an independent political entity, as well as forming a nation
when joined together.
The third promise “and will give this land to your descendants after you for
an everlasting possession” is a reference to the promise “The land which I gave
to Abraham and Isaac, I will give it to you, and I will give the land to your
descendants after you” which is a reference to the land of Canaan.
The promise of “land” is a reference to the “Palestinian Covenant,” which was
a confirmation and enlargement of the original “Abrahamic” covenant and
amplified the land features of the “Abrahamic” covenant (Gen. 13:14-15; 15:18).
The “Palestinian” Covenant stipulated that the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob who exercise faith alone in Christ alone would not only come into permanent
possession of the land of Canaan but also most of the land in Turkey, East Africa,
Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and Red Sea, Syria, Iraq, Jordan. The boundaries of
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
329
this land grant are on the Mediterranean, Aegean Sea, Euphrates River and the Nile
River (See Genesis 15:18).
The Lord promises that this land would be given to Abraham’s descendants and
this promise was fulfilled to a certain extent by Israel under Joshua (Josh. 21:4345; cf. 13:1-7) and David and Solomon (1 Kgs. 4:20-25; Neh. 9:8). The
“Palestinian” covenant will have its literal and ultimate fulfillment during the
millennial reign of Christ (Isa. 11:11-12; Jer. 31-37; Ezek. 34:11-16; Hos. 1:10-11;
Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Micah 4:6-7; Zeph. 3:14-20; Zech. 8:4-8).
“Your descendants” refers to Jacob’s “biological” descendants, which would
be the nation of Israel and it refers to his “spiritual” descendants, which refers to
“born-again” Israel.
In a “near” sense “Your descendants” refers to the nation of Israel (saved and
unsaved) and in a “far” sense it refers to saved Israel during the millennial reign of
Christ.
“Blessed” is the verb barakh means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.”
Jacob would be “blessed” or in other words, “endued with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity and longevity” by means of the Word of God since the Word
of God is “alive and powerful” according to Hebrews 4:12.
By means of His Word, the Lord would fulfill His promise to Israel that he
would “be fruitful and multiply” by enduing him with power for offspring in
great numbers and to become “a company of peoples” and to possess the land of
Canaan forever. Therefore, the statement “God Almighty…blessed me” means
that Israel and his descendants would be the recipients and beneficiaries of the
omnipotence of God, which would be manifested in time by the Lord fulfilling the
three promises through Jacob and his descendants.
Genesis 48:5-12 records Jacob adopting Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and
Manasseh.
Genesis 48:5 “Now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of
Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall
be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.” (NASB95)
Israel adopts Joseph’s two sons as his own and gives them equal standing with
Joseph’s brothers as indicated by the statement “Ephraim and Manasseh shall be
mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.” He was bestowing on Joseph the double
portion of the birthright and was also in effect elevating Joseph to the level of
himself.
The adoption of Joseph’s two sons by Israel put them on a par with Reuben and
Simeon and as a result each of them would receive one portion, but in so doing
Joseph received a double portion.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
330
Joseph received the rights of the firstborn and a double portion of his father’s
inheritance, which goes along with it and not Reuben who was Jacob’s firstborn
since Reuben was stripped of his birthright as the firstborn because he had sex with
his father’s concubine Bilhah (See Genesis 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chronicles 5:1).
1 Chronicles 5:1-2 speaks of the birthright being given to Joseph rather than
Reuben because Reuben slept with his father’s concubine.
The firstborn had a privileged status (See Genesis 43:33; 49:3) and the right of
succession (2 Chronicles 21:3) and received a double portion of his father’s
inheritance (Deut. 21:17).
The father’s inheritance was divided among his sons and the firstborn always
has right to two of these portions. Therefore, if there are ten sons, the firstborn
receives two portions and the other nine split eight portions or if there are only two
sons then the firstborn inherits everything.
As we noted in our study of Esau and Jacob, in the days of the patriarchs it was
the custom of the day that the oldest son receive a double portion of the
inheritance. However, the father could change this if in his opinion it warranted it
and so Jacob was perfectly within his rights to transfer the birthright from Reuben
to Joseph since the latter demonstrated that he was better suited for the
responsibility than the former.
The Scriptures record that the birthright was transferable where the youngest
can displace the eldest as in the cases of Joseph and Judah, Reuben, and Ephraim
and Manasseh, Moses and Aaron, David and his six older brothers, Solomon and
Adonijah.
Israel decided to bestow the double inheritance of the firstborn directly to
Joseph’s sons rather than to Joseph himself and by adopting Joseph’s sons, Israel
was making them of equal rank to Simeon and Levi.
Both Ephraim and Manasseh would be counted as Israel’s two sons, which was
important to understand when it came time to divide the land of Canaan since they
would each receive a portion of land. Therefore, Joseph did not become a tribe in
Israel but his two sons did.
Usually, the next oldest would receive the rights of the firstborn and the double
portion of the father’s inheritance but in the case of Simeon and Levi who were the
next oldest, they too lost out on the firstborn status and inheritance because they
were guilty of the massacre of all the men of Shechem (See Genesis 34; 49:5-6).
Therefore, we see that Joseph received this privileged status in an unusual way.
Genesis 48:1 lists Manasseh first since he was the first-born and Ephraim
second and this is important since this represents Joseph’s viewpoint that by
primogeniture rights the older will be greater than the younger. However, in
Genesis 48:5 the names flip flop expressing Israel’s Spirit guided intention to put
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
331
Ephraim first in the blessing (See Genesis 49:19-20) and anticipating the
leadership role he would have.
In the adoption ceremony, Israel would have placed the two boys by his knees,
which would symbolize his giving them birth in place of Asenath, the daughter of
Potiphera, priest of On.
The fact that Israel adopted his grandchildren was not unusual in the days of the
patriarchs and is well attested in the Bible (See Ruth 4:16-17; Esther 2:7). Records
of grandfathers adopting their grandchildren are also well attested in ancient Near
Eastern documents.
Genesis 48:6 “But your offspring that have been born after them shall be
yours; they shall be called by the names of their brothers in their
inheritance.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “but your offspring that have been born after them
(Ephraim and Manasseh) shall be yours” means that while Ephraim and Manasseh
were now considered as his sons (See Numbers 26:28-37; 1 Chronicles 7:14-29),
any other children Joseph might have in the future were to be considered his.
The statement “they shall be called by the names of their brothers” means
that although any children born to Joseph in the future would be considered his,
they would perpetuate the names of Ephraim and Manasseh and be incorporated
into the tribes that bear their names (See Genesis 38:6; Deuteronomy 25:5-6).
“Inheritance” is the noun nachalah, which denotes some type of property,
which was inalienable and within the context of Genesis 48:6 refers to the land of
Canaan, which God promised to Israel. Therefore, the prepositional phrase “in
their inheritance” refers to the distribution of land among the twelve tribes of
Israel.
The prepositional phrase “in their inheritance” means that Joseph’s territory in
the land of Canaan would be divided into two tribes because Levi did not receive
land (See Joshua 14:4), thus there was still a total of twelve tribes in Israel and not
thirteen. It means that any other children born to Joseph would not constitute
separate tribal entities but rather would be incorporated into the tribes of Ephraim
and Manasseh and would partake of the inheritance of these two.
Genesis 48:7 “Now as for me, when I came from Paddan, Rachel died, to
my sorrow, in the land of Canaan on the journey, when there was still some
distance to go to Ephrath; and I buried her there on the way to Ephrath (that
is, Bethlehem).” (NASB95)
In Genesis 48:7, Israel gives the “reason” why he is adopting Ephraim and
Manasseh.
Rachel was not only Israel’s favorite wife but she was also chosen by him
whereas Leah he did not choose and neither did he choose Bilhah and Zilpah, the
concubines. Israel wanted Joseph to know that as the oldest son of Rachel, who
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
332
was the one he intended to marry and not Leah, that Joseph should have the
birthright with its double portion of the inheritance. However, since the custom of
the time would not ordinarily permit this, Israel found a way of blessing Joseph’s
two sons.
The fact that Joseph’s two sons received the double portion of the inheritance
was fully justified since Joseph delivered the entire family from starvation and was
thus his by merit.
Genesis 48:8 When Israel saw Joseph's sons, he said, “Who are these?”
(NASB95)
Although Israel’s eyesight was poor, his question “who are these?” does not
mean he didn’t recognize Ephraim and Manasseh because he was blind since he
had proposed already to adopt them by name according to Genesis 48:5.
Furthermore, it is very unlikely that Israel had never met Ephraim and Manasseh
during his seventeen years in Egypt. In fact, Israel’s question “who are these?”
was the second stage of the legal adoptive process, namely, the establishment of
the true identity of the candidates for adoption by formal interrogation of the
natural father (Nahum Sarna, JPS Torah Commentary, Jewish Publication Society,
page 327).
Israel’s question calls to mind the question at a wedding where the pastor asks
the question “who gives this woman to this man?” which is not said in ignorance
but as part of the ceremony.
Genesis 48:9 Joseph said to his father, “They are my sons, whom God has
given me here.” So he said, “Bring them to me, please, that I may bless them.”
(NASB95)
Notice that Joseph does “not” name his sons indicating that Israel knows their
names.
Joseph’s statement “They are my sons, whom God has given me here
(Egypt)” demonstrates that he considered Ephraim and Manasseh as gifts from the
Lord. This statement expresses Joseph’s faith in God’s promise of numerous
descendants for the patriarchs.
Israel’s statement “Bring them to me, please, that I may bless them”
expresses his intention to bless Ephraim and Manasseh. There is a touch of irony
here in that in the past, we have seen that Jacob had secured his father’s blessing
for himself by means of deceit whereas Joseph secures blessing for his sons by
means of honesty.
“Bless” is expressing Israel’s intention to “bless” Ephraim and Manasseh in the
sense that he desires that God would “endue” them “with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity (offspring in large numbers) and longevity.”
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
333
Genesis 48:10 Now the eyes of Israel were so dim from age that he could
not see. Then Joseph brought them close to him, and he kissed them and
embraced them. (NASB95)
“Were so dim” is the verb kavedh, which is used in a figurative sense for the
eyesight of Israel being poor implying that he could see but not well. This is
indicated by Israel’s statement in Genesis 48:11 that God had let him see Joseph’s
two sons, thus indicating he could see.
Therefore, a comparison of the verb kavedh, which means, “were poor” and the
statement in Genesis 48:11 “God has let me see your children as well” indicates
that the statement in Genesis 48:10 “he (Israel “could not see” means that Israel
“could not see well.” Like his father Isaac, Jacob’s eyesight failed him in his old
age (See Genesis 27:1).
In Genesis 48:10, Joseph’s sons are brought closer to Israel for the adoption
whereas in Genesis 48:13 they are brought close to him for the blessing. Israel
kissed and embraced his two grandsons, Ephraim and Manasseh while they were
between his knees according to the statement in Genesis 48:12 that Joseph took the
boys from Israel’s knees after the adoption ceremony.
The fact that Israel kissed and embraced Ephraim and Manasseh was not only
an expression of genuine affection for his grandchildren but it also these gestures
held ritualistic significance and were a part of the adoptive process and was
equivalent to saying that they were his children (See Waltke, Genesis, page 598,
Zondervan).
Genesis 48:11 Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face, and
behold, God has let me see your children as well.” (NASB95)
Israel’s two statements are an acknowledgement on his part of God’s
providential care for him and his family as well as God’s grace who remained
faithful to him even when he was unfaithful to God.
Israel’s statement “I have never expected to see your (Joseph’s) face”
expresses his belief for many years that Joseph was dead, killed by wild animals.
Bruce K. Waltke gives an insightful comment, he writes, “The adoption
ceremony begins with Joseph crediting God for his sons and ends with Jacob
praising God. God blesses both father and grandfather through these boys. To
Joseph they are an incredible gift after years of affliction; to Jacob they are an
incredible vision after he had lost all hope of ever seeing Joseph. Joseph’s and
Jacob’s reflections of God’s present blessings set the spiritual milieu for the
blessings that follow.” (Genesis, page 598, Zondervan)
Genesis 48:12 Then Joseph took them from his knees, and bowed with his
face to the ground. (NASB95)
The statement “Joseph took them from his knees” indicates that the adoption
ceremony has ended. The expression “from his knees” does not imply that
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
334
Joseph’s twenty year old sons were sitting on the knees of Israel who was an
elderly bed ridden man but rather it means that the boys had stood by their
grandfather’s knees or leaned over them.
Out of great love and respect for his father and to honor him, Joseph is recorded
as bowing down after removing his two sons from his father’s side. Even though
Joseph was equal to Pharaoh, he still found it appropriate to honor his father by
bowing down to him. Therefore, we see Joseph once again honoring his father with
this act of respect.
Jacob Blesses Ephraim and Manasseh
Genesis 48:13-20 records Jacob blessing Ephraim and Manasseh. In Genesis
48:5-12 we have the account of the adoption ritual whereas in Genesis 48:13-20,
we have the record of the blessing ritual.
Genesis 48:13 Joseph took them both, Ephraim with his right hand toward
Israel's left, and Manasseh with his left hand toward Israel's right, and
brought them close to him. (NASB95)
Genesis 48:1 lists Manasseh first since he was the first-born and Ephraim
second and this is important since this represents Joseph’s viewpoint that by
primogeniture rights the older will be greater than the younger, however, Jacob
will reverse it. Therefore, Joseph positions his two sons in such a way as to ensure
that his father’s right hand, the symbol of action and power and blessing will rest
on Manasseh, his firstborn since the eldest son would receive the greater blessing.
Throughout the Scriptures, the right hand side is regarded as the place of honor,
strength, power, glory and blessing (See Exodus 15:6; Deuteronomy 11:29; Psalm
89:13; 110:1; Proverbs 3:16; Ecclesiastes 10:2; Matthew 25:33; Acts 2:33;
Hebrews 1:3).
Genesis 48:14 But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the
head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh's head,
crossing his hands, although Manasseh was the firstborn. (NASB95)
The Holy Spirit guides Israel to put his right hand on the head of the younger of
Joseph’s two boys, Ephraim and not Manasseh, the older of the two since it is the
will of God that Ephraim and not Manasseh receive the greater blessing.
Israel put his right hand on the head of the younger son, Ephraim rather than the
firstborn, Manasseh since the Holy Spirit gave him revelation that Ephraim would
be greater than Manasseh as indicated by his explanation to Joseph as to why he
gave Ephraim the greater blessing, which is recorded in Genesis 48:19. Therefore,
the blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh was prophetic since it was inspired by God
the Holy Spirit and spoke of their future descendants.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
335
Genesis 48:19 records that Israel gave both boys the same blessing, thus
indicating that the only reason why Israel blessed Ephraim with his right hand and
not Manasseh was that God gave him revelation that Ephraim’s descendants would
become a multitude of nations. Further indicating that both boys receive the same
blessing is that Israel blessed their father as recorded in Genesis 48:16.
Dr. Thomas L. Constable commenting on Israel laying his hands on Joseph’s
boys, writes, “This is the first of many scriptural instances of the laying on of
hands (v. 14). By this symbolic act, a person transferred a spiritual power or gift to
another. This rite was part of the ceremony of dedicating a person or group to an
office (Num. 27:18, 23; Deut. 34:9; Matt. 19:13; Acts 6:6; 8:17; etc.), offering
sacrifices, and the healings Jesus Christ and the apostles performed. In this case
Jacob symbolically transferred a blessing from himself to Joseph's sons. Once
uttered, blessings were irreversible (cf. Num. 23:20; Rom. 11:29).” (Notes on
Genesis, 2005 Edition, page 266)
Genesis 48:15 He blessed Joseph, and said, “The God before whom my
fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all
my life to this day, 16 the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the
lads and may my name live on in them, and the names of my fathers Abraham
and Isaac and may they grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.”
(NASB95)
The statement “He (Israel) blessed Joseph” means that Israel is blessing Joseph
through his two sons and this is indicated in that Joseph received the double
portion of the family inheritance according to 1Chronicles 5:1-2 and both Ephraim
and Manasseh were equally blessed according to Genesis 48:19.
Next, Israel identifies the Source of the blessing who is the one and only God
and gives a three-fold description of Him referring to each member of the Trinity.
“The God” is composed of the definite article ha, “the” and the noun Elohim,
“God” and together they mean “the one and only God,” or “the one true God” in
contrast to the multi-god culture of the heathen world.
The statement “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac
walked” refers God the Father and to the fact that Israel’s grandfather Abraham
and his father Isaac lived in the presence of the one and only God or in other
words, they experienced intimate fellowship with the one and only God.
Fellowship with the Lord constitutes living in the presence of God and involves
confessing sin to the Father in order to be restored to fellowship followed by
obedience to the Word of the Lord in order to maintain that fellowship (1 John 1:52:6) and to experience the covenant blessings.
Obedience to the Word of the Lord constitutes walking by means of faith
meaning taking the Lord at His Word to deliver on His promises.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
336
Therefore, the statement “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and
Isaac walked” implies that like Abraham and Isaac, Ephraim and Manasseh must
live in the presence of God and experience intimate fellowship with Him in order
to experience the covenant blessings.
“Angel” is the noun mal’akh, which means, “messenger” is used in the Old
Testament with reference to “elect” angels (Gen. 19:1; Ps. 91:11) and men (Deut.
2:26; Josh. 6:17) and of the “preincarnate” Christ (Gen. 22:11; Zech. 3:1). In
Genesis 48:16, “the angel” is a reference to the “preincarnate” Christ since Israel
in context Israel is speaking of His relationship to God.
The preincarnate Christ manifested Himself to Israel both visibly and audibly
seven times in his life (first time: Genesis 28:10-22; second time: 31:3; third time:
31:10-13; 4th time: 32:24-32; 5th time: 35:1; 6th time: 35:9; 7th time: 46:2).
The statement “the angel who has redeemed me from all evil” is therefore a
reference to God the Son and means that Israel acknowledges that the preincarnate
Christ had delivered him throughout his life from evil in the sense of harm.
“Redeem” is the verb ga’al, which means, “to deliver.”
“Evil” is the adjective ra`, which is often used to denote “independence from
God, which is manifested by disobedience and rebellion,” however, Israel is
speaking of “physical harm.”
The Lord had delivered Israel from physical harm many times in his life such as
delivering him from Esau when fleeing Canaan (See Genesis 28:10-19), and when
arriving back in Canaan (See Genesis 32), and He delivered him from Laban (See
Genesis 32-33) and from the Canaanites and Perizzites (See Genesis 34).
Next, Israel makes four requests of God for the sons of Joseph. The first request
“bless the lads (Ephraim and Manasseh)” expresses Israel’s Spirit inspired desire
that God would endue Ephraim and Manasseh with power for success, prosperity,
fecundity (offspring in large numbers) and longevity.
The second request “may my name live on in them” expresses Israel’s Spirit
inspired desire that God would reckon that both Ephraim and Manasseh would be
among the twelve tribes of Israel and perpetuate the family line.
The third request “(may) the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac (live
on in them)” expresses Israel’s Spirit inspired desire that God would reckon
Ephraim and Manasseh as part of the family that is heir to the blessings, privileges,
responsibilities and promises of the Abrahamic covenant.
Israel’s fourth and final request “may they grow into a multitude in the midst
of the earth” expresses Israel’s Spirit inspired desire that the descendants of
Ephraim and Manasseh would become a multitude. This request was fulfilled
according to a comparison of two censuses taken during the course of Israel’s
wandering in the desert under Moses prior to entering Canaan under Joshua.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
337
The combined number of males in Ephraim and Manasseh increased from
72,700 (See Numbers 1:32-35) in the second year after the Exodus to 85,200 forty
years later (See Numbers 26:28-37). In contrast, the combined populations of
Reuben and Simeon during the same period decreases from 105,800 to 65,930. In
his farewell address, Moses in Deuteronomy 33:17 refers to the “myriads of
Ephraim” and the “thousands of Manasseh.”
Genesis 48:17 When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on
Ephraim's head, it displeased him; and he grasped his father's hand to
remove it from Ephraim's head to Manasseh's head. 18 Joseph said to his
father, “Not so, my father, for this one is the firstborn. Place your right hand
on his head.” (NASB95)
It displeased Joseph that his father had put his right hand on the head of his
youngest son Ephraim rather than the older of the two, Manasseh since he
considered it a disregard of primogeniture rights meaning that the oldest son was to
receive a greater blessing than the younger. Joseph attempted to remove his
father’s hand from Ephraim’s head since he undoubtedly thought that his father
made an error due to his poor eyesight.
Just as Esau attempted to have his father Isaac reverse the blessing he gave to
Jacob (See Genesis 27:34-36) so Joseph attempts to reverse the blessing given to
Ephraim and have his father bestow it on Manasseh, the firstborn. However, once
the blessing has been given it is irrevocable (See Numbers 23:20; Romans 11:29),
which is especially true when the blessing is inspired by the Holy Spirit as was the
case with both Jacob and Ephraim.
Joseph did not realize that God the Holy Spirit directed his father to place his
right hand upon the head of Ephraim and pronounce a blessing on him that was
prophetic.
Genesis 48:19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know; he
also will become a people and he also will be great. However, his younger
brother shall be greater than he, and his descendants shall become a
multitude of nations.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “I know, my son, I know” means that he understood which
of the two young men were the firstborn, understanding fully primogeniture rights
and indicates that it was intentional that he gave the blessing of the firstborn to
Ephraim rather than Manasseh.
His statement “He also will become a people and he also will be great”
means that Manasseh’s descendants would become one of the tribes of Israel and
would have an impact on the nation.
“People” is the noun `am, which is used of people in terms of their being
kinsmen, relatives or members of a tribe.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
338
The statement “However, his younger brother shall be greater than he, and
his descendants shall become a multitude of nations” means Ephraim’s
descendants would have numerical superiority over his brother’s descendants and
would have a greater impact upon the nation of Israel.
“Multitude” is the noun melo, “fullness” and “nations” is the noun goy, which
refers to a specific group of people that form a political entity, thus the text literally
reads, “the fullness of nations.”
Notice that Israel prophesied that Manasseh would become a “people” in the
sense of a tribe while on the other hand Ephraim’s descendants will become “the
fullness of nations” indicating the numerical superiority that Ephraim’s
descendants will have over those of Manasseh.
Bruce K. Waltke, “In the census taken in the second year after the Exodus, the
male population of Ephraim is 20 percent more than that of Manasseh (See
Numbers 1:33, 35). In the second census a generation later, however, the male
population of Manasseh exceeds that of Ephraim (Numbers 26:34, 37) by 40
percent (cf. 1 Chronicles 7:20-23). Eventually, however, Ephraim gains the
numerical superiority (cf. Deuteronomy 33:17).” (Genesis, page 600, Zondervan).
This blessing/prophecy was fulfilled during the Judges period when Ephraim
had grown very large and influential and when the tribe of Ephraim took the lead
among the ten northern tribes and flourished to the extent that the Jews used the
name Ephraim equally with the name Israel.
Genesis 48:20 He blessed them that day, saying, “By you Israel will
pronounce blessing, saying, ‘May God make you like Ephraim and
Manasseh!’” Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh. (NASB95)
The prepositional phrase “by you” is in the singular referring to Joseph who is
blessed through his two sons.
The noun Elohim, “God” is used rather than the covenant name of God, which
is Yahweh, “Lord” since Israel is emphasizing the omnipotence of God and that
God is able to bring to pass that which He has purposed for Ephraim and
Manasseh.
The statement “May God make you like Ephraim and Manasseh” is a
prophecy that the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh will be so blessed that future
generations in Israel will invoke their names as a pattern for divine blessing and
that they shall in the course of time become proverbial for blessing in Israel.
Jacob Reassures Joseph
As we draw nearer to Jacob’s death, we see him reassuring Joseph of God’s
presence and promise of the land of Canaan to the Israelites as well as giving
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
339
Joseph’s descendants the tract of land he purchased outside of the city of
Shechem.
Genesis 48:21 Then Israel said to Joseph, “Behold, I am about to die, but
God will be with you, and bring you back to the land of your fathers.”
(NASB95)
Israel’s statement “Behold, I am about to die” is a reference to his imminent
physical death. He reassures Joseph that even though he is about to die, God would
be with him and his entire family.
“You” is in the plural meaning “all of you” referring of course to Israel’s entire
family, his sons, their wives, his grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
The noun Elohim, “God” is used rather than the covenant name of God, which
is Yahweh, “Lord” since Israel is emphasizing the omnipotence of God, which will
protect the entire family of Jacob when he has died.
Israel reassures Joseph that “God will be with (all of) you” echoes God’s
recent promise to him “I will go down with you to Egypt,” which is recorded in
Genesis 46:4. It also echoes the Lord’s promise to him “I am with you” which was
given to him when he left Canaan and is recorded in Genesis 28:15 and also it
echoes the promise made to his father Isaac “I will be with you” in Genesis 26:3.
This promise is a guarantee to Joseph of the Lord’s presence in the lives of the
entire family and that the family would be protected in Egypt. Therefore, we can
see that by giving Joseph this reassurance of the Lord’s presence in the life of the
family, Israel is expressing his faith in the Lord’s promise to him just prior to
leaving for Egypt.
The promise “God will…bring you back to the land of your fathers” is a
reference to the “Palestinian” covenant, which was a confirmation and enlargement
of the original “Abrahamic” covenant and amplified the land features of the
“Abrahamic” covenant (Gen. 13:14-15; 15:18).
This promise is a “personal” promise in that it is a guarantee that Joseph would
return to the land of Canaan not only in a coffin (See Genesis 49:29-32) but more
importantly that he and all of born again Israel will live in the Promised Land in
resurrection bodies during the millennial reign of Christ. It is not only a “personal”
promise but also a “national” promise in that it is a guarantee that the Israelites will
return to the land of Canaan.
“You” is in the plural meaning “all of you” referring of course to Israel’s entire
family, his sons, their wives, his grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
The promise “God will…bring you back to the land of your fathers” is also
a reference to the fulfillment of the prophecy recorded in Genesis 15:12-16 that
Abraham’s descendants would be enslaved in a nation for four hundred years and
that God would judge that nation and his descendants would return to Canaan.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
340
Genesis 48:22 “I give you one portion more than your brothers, which I
took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword and my bow.” (NASB95)
Israel’s promise to Joseph “I give you one portion more than your brothers”
is composed of the adjective `echadh, which is used as an indefinite article
meaning “a portion of a larger amount, and the noun shekhem, which refers to the
city of Shechem.
The adjective `echadh usually refers to the number one but at times it can be
used as an indefinite article meaning “a portion of a larger amount” and thus it
denotes a “portion” of the city of Shechem. Therefore, the Hebrew text literally
reads, “a portion of Shekhem.”
Further evidence that the expression shekhem `achadh in Genesis 48:22 is a
reference to the plot of land that Jacob bought from Hamor just outside the city of
Shechem is that Jacob sent Joseph to Shechem to determine if his brothers were
safe (See Genesis 37:12-14).
Also, Joseph himself was buried in the city of Shechem according to Joshua
24:32 and Acts 7:16. Moreover, Shechem lay within the future territory of Ephraim
and Manasseh near the border between the two tribes according to Joshua 17:7 and
became the most important city in the kingdom of northern Israel according to 1
Kings 12:1, 25.
The term “Amorite” is a figure of speech called “synecdoche of the part” where
a part is put for the whole meaning that the term “the Amorite” is put for the preIsraelite inhabitants of the land of Canaan, many of which are listed in Genesis
15:19-21, of which “the Amorite” was a part of (Gen. 48:22; Nm. 13:29; 21:21).
Hamor and Shechem were identified as “Hivites” a Canaanite people according
to Genesis 34:2 and so therefore, the term “the Amorite” is put for the
Shechemites who were “Hivites,” a Canaanite people.
The statement “I took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword and my
bow” is a reference to Simeon and Levi’s massacre of the city of Shechem in
retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah (See Genesis 34).
Israel’s use of the personal pronoun “I” indicates that he is not placing
responsibility for the massacre of Shechem on Simeon and Levi but rather is taking
responsibility for it himself as the patriarch of the family. The reason why he is
taking responsibility for their actions is that the massacre could have been avoided
if he functioned in his role as the patriarch of the family and had taken control
from the beginning.
Jacob’s Bestows Prophetic Blessings and Antiblessings upon His Twelve Sons
Genesis 49 gives us the record of Jacob/Israel bestowing prophetic blessings
and antiblessings upon his twelve sons as well as giving instructions for his burial
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
341
and this chapter records his death. Jacob employs a poem in order to communicate
to his sons the future of their descendants, which is the first long poem in the
Bible.
Just as Jacob’s father Isaac had prophetically outlined the future of his two
sons’ families in Genesis 27 so Jacob prophetically outlined the future of his
twelve sons. These prophecies cover the entire history of the nation of Israel from
the conquest of Canaan to the millennial reign of Christ.
Interestingly, these “blessings” as in the case of Reuben, Simeon and Levi are
in actuality “antiblessings,” much like ones that Isaac bestowed upon Esau (See
Genesis 27:30-40). If you recall, since Isaac gave everything to Jacob, all he had to
give Esau was an “antiblessing,” which is a parody on Jacob’s blessing and were
also prophecies concerning the future of Esau’s descendants who were the
Edomites. In the same way, the “antiblessings” given to Reuben, Simeon and Levi
are a parody of the blessings bestowed upon Jacob’s other nine sons and were also
prophecies as well.
If you recall, Reuben was disqualified for leadership of the family because he
had sex with his father’s concubine according to a comparison of Genesis 25:21-22
and 1 Chronicles 5:1-2. Simeon and Levi were disqualified as a result of killing all
the men of the city of Shechem in retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah
according to Genesis 34. However, in relation to the nation of Israel’s destiny,
these “antiblessings” are a blessing in the sense that Reuben did not have the
capacity for leadership because of his moral instability and immoral degeneracy.
Therefore, Israel does the nation a favor and blesses the nation by promoting Judah
rather than Reuben with his poor leadership abilities and in the same way, Israel
protects the nation from the cruelty and violence of Simeon and Levi.
Another feature of this remarkable poem is that the name “Jacob” appears five
times expressing the “weakness” of the patriarch and the name “Israel” appears
the same number of times expressing the “strength” of the patriarch in the future of
his sons.
Finally, it is fascinating that Jacob’s life was prophesied before it began
(Genesis 25:22-23) and in this chapter we see that it will end prophetically as well.
Genesis 49:1-4 records Israel pronouncing an antiblessing on Reuben, his firstborn
because Reuben committed adultery and incest with his concubine Bilhah.
Genesis 49:1 Then Jacob summoned his sons and said, “Assemble
yourselves that I may tell you what will befall you in the days to come. 2
Gather together and hear, O sons of Jacob and listen to Israel your father.”
(NASB95)
The expression “assemble yourselves” demonstrates that unlike his father Isaac
who blessed him in secret, Jacob publicly blesses his twelve sons.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
342
Israel’s statement “That I may tell you what will befall you in the days to
come” in the Hebrew literally reads, “I will tell to all of you what will happen to
all of you in the last days.”
The prepositional phrase “in the days to come” or “in the last days” indicates
to Jacob’s sons that the blessings he is about to give to them are also “prophetic” in
nature demonstrating that like his grandfather Abraham and his father Isaac, he is a
prophet.
Israel is speaking to the individual tribes personified as his sons, thus this
expression refers to both the near and distant future and covers the entire history of
the nation of Israel from the conquest of Canaan to the millennial reign of Christ.
By calling together his sons and commanding them to listen to what he is about
to say to them, which concerns not only them but their future descendants, Israel is
expressing his patriarchal authority as a father, a prophet of God and wise teacher
who is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Reuben
Genesis 49:3 “Reuben, you are my firstborn; My might and the beginning
of my strength, preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power.” (NASB95)
“Reuben” was the first son that Leah bore to Jacob while in Paddan Aram
according to Genesis 29:32 and his name means, “the Lord has seen my affliction.”
The “firstborn” had a privileged status (See Genesis 43:33; 49:3) and the right
of succession (2 Chronicles 21:3) and received a double portion of his father’s
inheritance (Deut. 21:17).
As we noted in our study of Esau and Jacob, in the days of the patriarchs it was
the custom of the day that the oldest son receive a double portion of the
inheritance. However, the father could change this if in his opinion it warranted it
and so Jacob was perfectly within his rights to transfer the birthright from Reuben
to Joseph since the latter demonstrated that he was better suited for the
responsibility than the former.
Israel decided to bestow the double inheritance of the firstborn directly to
Joseph’s sons rather than to Joseph himself and by adopting Joseph’s sons, Israel
was making them of equal rank to Simeon and Levi.
In the book of Genesis, we have seen Cain lose his position because he
murdered his brother Abel, Ishmael was the son of a concubine and not the son of
the divine promise, Esau exchanged with Jacob his birthright for a bowl of red
lintel soup expressing his negative attitude towards the promises of God.
“My might” means that the birth of Reuben demonstrated Israel’s virility or
manly character and “the beginning of my strength” means that Reuben was the
first demonstration of Israel’s generative power or ability to produce children.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
343
“Preeminent in dignity” means that as the first-born, Reuben would have been
first in rank and destined to inherit the patriarchal authority and “preeminent in
power” means that he could have expected to possess power or authority
associated with being the patriarch of the family.
Genesis 49:4 “Uncontrolled as water, you shall not have preeminence,
because you went up to your father's bed; Then you defiled it -- he went up to
my couch.” (NASB95)
“Uncontrolled as water” means that just as water in unstable so Reuben was
unstable in the sense that he was arrogant, reckless, impetuous and undisciplined as
demonstrated by his committing adultery and incest with his father’s concubine out
of love for his mother and rejection for his father’s authority. This incident
between Reuben and Jacob’s concubine, Bilhah was motivated by Reuben’s love
for his mother Leah rather than sexual lust since by defiling Bilhah, he made
certain that with Rachel’s death her maid could not supplant Leah as chief wife
(Compare 2 Samuel 15:16; 16:22; 20:3).
Israel’s statement “you shall not have preeminence, because you went up to
your father's bed” means that Reuben lost his status and position and privileges as
the firstborn in the family by committing incest and adultery with his father’s
concubine.
Deuteronomy 27:20 “Cursed is the man who sleeps with his father's wife,
for he dishonors his father's bed.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “Then you defiled it” implies that the marriage bed is holy
(See Hebrews 13:4) and that Reuben made it unholy by having sex with his
concubine.
“You” indicates that Israel looked right at Reuben revealing to him for the first
time that although he did not say anything to him at the time about his crime, he
was not ignorant of it.
“He went up to my couch” indicates that Israel turned from addressing Reuben
to his other sons expressing is disgust with Reuben’s actions and that he was well
aware of it even though he never said anything at the time.
Not only did Reuben commit adultery but also incest, which the Mosaic Law
prohibited because it dishonors the father and required the death penalty for both
the man and the woman (See Leviticus 18:8; 20:11; Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20).
The fact that Reuben had sex with his father’s wife was not only the sin of
dishonoring his father but also an act of rebellion against his father’s authority.
It is interesting that according to secular ancient Near Eastern culture, by having
sex with his father’s concubine Reuben is attempting to usurp Jacob’s authority in
his household (Compare 2 Samuel 3:7-8; 12:7-8; 16:21-22; 1 Kings 2:13-25).
Even though as the first-born, Reuben could have expected to possess the
leadership of the tribes and the priesthood within the family and the double portion
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
344
of the birthright, he forfeited these blessings by committing both incest and
adultery with his father’s concubine. Consequently, the leadership of the tribes was
given to Judah and the priesthood to Levi eventually (See Exodus 32:25-29;
Numbers 3:12-13), and the double portion to Joseph.
Henry M. Morris writes, “In the history of Israel, the tribe of Reuben never
furnished a leader of any kind for the nation as a whole. In the later journeys to the
promised land, the Reubenites were the first tribe to ask for a place to settle, not
waiting to cross the Jordan with the others (Numbers 32). They participated in the
erection of an unauthorized place of worship (Joshua 22:10-34). During the later
wars with the Canaanites, in the days of Deborah and Barak, the tribe of Reuben
failed to answer the call to arms (Judges 5:15-16). Jacob’s prophecy concerning
Reuben has continued to be fulfilled ever since. Never has Reuben excelled in
anything. (The Genesis Record, page 652, Baker Book House)
Jacob Bestows Antiblessings Upon Simeon and Levi
Genesis 49:5-7 records Israel’s prophetic anti-blessings that he bestowed upon
Simeon and Levi for the massacre of the city of Shechem.
Genesis 49:5 “Simeon and Levi are brothers; Their swords are implements
of violence.” (NASB95)
“Simeon” was the second child that Leah bore to Jacob and his name means,
“the Lord has heard” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 29:33.
“Levi” was the third child that Leah bore to Jacob and his name means, “My
husband will be attached to me” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 29:34.
Israel’s statement “Simeon and Levi are brothers,” which in context does
“not” emphasize their biological relationship of having the same father and mother
but rather emphasizes that they were “confederates, allies, co-conspirators” or
“partners in crime” in the massacre of the Shechemites.
The statement “Their swords are implements of violence” is a reference to the
massacre of the Shechemites in retaliation for the rape of Dinah (See Genesis 34).
Genesis 49:6 “Let my soul not enter into their council; Let not my glory be
united with their assembly; Because in their anger they slew men, and in their
self-will they lamed oxen.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “Let my soul not enter into their council” means that he
denies conspiring with Simeon and Levi in their secret plot to massacre the
Shechemites.
His statement “Let not my glory be united with their assembly” means that
he denies agreeing with their conspiracy to massacre the Shechemites.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
345
The causal clause “Because in their anger they slew men” indicates that
Simeon and Levi killed all the men of the city of Shechem because they were
motivated by the emotion of anger rather than obedience to God.
The statement “in their self-will they lamed oxen” means that Simeon and
Levi crippled oxen by severing the tendons of their hind legs without their father’s
and God’s consent and independently of their father and God. Genesis 34 does not
reveal that Simeon and Levi were cruel to animals.
Genesis 49:7 “Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce; And their wrath, for it
is cruel. I will disperse them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “cursed be their anger for it is fierce” is a declaration of
punishment upon Simeon and Levi since their actions against the Shechemites in
response to the rape of Dinah was motivated by uncontrolled rage rather than
obedience to God.
His statement “cursed be…their wrath for it is cruel” is a declaration of
punishment upon Simeon and Levi since their anger in response to the rape of their
sister Dinah expressed itself in violence as manifested in the murder of all the men
of Shechem and it was cruel in that they hamstrung the oxen of the city.
The content of the curse is expressed in the prophecy “I will disperse them in
Jacob and scatter them,” which signifies that the tribes of Simeon and Levi
would lose power because they would be divided up and absorbed into the other
ten tribes of Israel. This prophecy was fulfilled when Simeon’s descendants were
absorbed into the territory of Judah according to Joshua 19:1, 9.
Some of the descendants of Simeon were captured and dwelled in some of the
territory of the Edomites and Amalekites, outside of Canaan according to 1
Chronicles 4:39-43. During the period when the nation of Israel’s was a divided
kingdom, many of the Simeonites left Israel to join up with the tribe of Judah
according to 2 Chronicles 15:9. In his farewell address to Israel recorded in
Deuteronomy 33, Moses passed over the Simeonites in his blessing of the
Israelites. This prophecy in Genesis 49:7 was fulfilled when Levi’s descendants
never received an inheritance of their own land and were apportioned forty-eight
towns and pasturelands among the twelve tribes, including Ephraim and Manasseh
according to Numbers 35:1-5 and Joshua 21:1-41.
Interestingly, the tribe of Levi redeemed itself and was chosen the priestly tribe
in Israel by taking their stand with Moses against the idolatry of the Israelites at
Sinai according to Exodus 32:26. The Levites manifested the violent nature of their
progenitor by killing three thousand idolatrous, uncontrollable mob of Israelites,
which was justified since it was sanctioned by God and was in obedience to
Moses’ command who was himself a member of the tribe of Levi.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
346
Jacob Bestows Prophetic Blessings Upon Judah, Zebulun and Issachar
Genesis 49:8-15 records Israel’s prophetic blessings that he bestowed upon
Judah, Zebulun and Issachar.
Genesis 49:8 “Judah, your brothers shall praise you; Your hand shall be
on the neck of your enemies; Your father's sons shall bow down to you.”
(NASB95)
“Judah” was the fourth child that Leah bore to Jacob and his name means, “I
will praise the Lord” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 29:35.
Both King David and the Lord Jesus Christ descended from the tribe of Judah.
Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah.
(NASB95)
In Genesis 37 we saw that in an attempt to save Joseph’s life, Judah proposed to
his brothers that they sell Joseph to the Midianites.
The fact that Judah proposed to his brothers the sale of Joseph to the Midianites
rather than killing him along with the phrase “Judah departed from his
brothers,” which is recorded in Genesis 38:1 is a clear indication that Judah did
“not” agree with his brother’s desire to kill Joseph and so he separates from them.
If you recall, in Genesis 37 we read that Reuben intervened and prevented his
brothers from killing Joseph and proposed as an alternative to killing him with
their bare hands that they throw him into an empty cistern, letting him die of
natural causes. This alternative was proposed by Reuben with the intention of
saving Joseph when his brothers were not around. However, while Reuben left his
brothers to check on their flocks and they ate a meal, during the meal the talk
turned back to Joseph again and the idea of killing him resurfaced as implied by
Judah’s proposal to sell Joseph into slavery.
Genesis 37:25-28 records Judah proposing to his brothers the sale of Joseph to
the Midianites in order to prevent the murder of Joseph by his brothers.
Judah’s statement in Genesis 37:27, “Come and let us sell him to the
Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him, for he is our brother, our own
flesh” reveals that he has a conscience in that he acknowledges and reminds his
brothers that Joseph is their brother.
Judah, like Reuben, disguised his desire to prevent the murder of Joseph
because he feared for his own life since Simeon and Levi had recently killed all the
men of the city of Shechem in retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah.
Even though Judah’s proposal only substituted one evil for another since like
murder, kidnapping was a capital offense (See Exodus 21:16; Deuteronomy 24:7),
his rationale was that Joseph was better off alive than dead, even if it meant he
would spend the rest of his life a slave. Like his brother Reuben, Judah was guilty
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
347
of a lack of moral courage and self-sacrifice in that he was not willing to stand up
to his brothers and sacrifice himself if need be, to prevent the murder of Joseph.
Then, in Genesis 38, we saw his great failure with Tamar where he left his
brothers at Dothan, and spent time with a heathen named Hirah and married an
unbelieving Canaanite and had three children with her, two of which were killed
by the Lord for their involvement with evil. Judah failed to provide their widow
Tamar his third son Shelah to carry on the line of the two deceased brothers
because of his fear that he would die as well. This resulted in Tamar disguising
herself as a temple prostitute and deceiving Judah to solicit her unknowingly,
which resulted in her getting pregnant through him and she bore him twins, Zerah
and Perez, the latter was in the line of Christ.
In Genesis 44:18-34, we read where Judah appealed to Joseph to release
Benjamin, offering himself in place of Benjamin so as to not break his father’s
heart. Judah’s offer to be a substitute for Benjamin typifies the Lord Jesus who is
our Substitute.
Genesis 49:8 “Judah, your brothers shall praise you; Your hand shall be
on the neck of your enemies; Your father's sons shall bow down to you.”
(NASB95)
The prediction “Judah, your brothers shall praise you” contains a play on
words and is a paronomasia.
In the Hebrew text, there is a play on the proper noun yehudhah, which means,
“I will praise the Lord” and is translated “Judah” since “shall praise” is the verb
yadhah and “hand” is the noun yadh.
A “paronomasia” is designed to get the readers attention and to emphasize the
two or three words that are placed alongside of each other that are similar in sound
and appearance. Here in Genesis 49:8, the nouns noun yehudhah, “Judah” and the
verb yadhah, “shall praise” and the noun yadh, “hand” are similar and sound and
appearance and are placed alongside of each other in order to emphasize the
preeminence of Judah.
Israel’s prediction “Judah, your brothers shall praise you” was fulfilled in
Judah’s lifetime by becoming the leader by virtue of his conduct during the process
leading up to Joseph revealing his identity where he offered to sacrifice himself for
the sake of Benjamin and their father.
1 Chronicles 5:1-2 speaks not only of the birthright being given to Joseph rather
than Reuben because Reuben slept with his father’s concubine but also that the
rulership over the family went to Judah.
This statement “Judah, your brothers shall praise you” is also prophetic
meaning that in the future, the descendants of Judah’s brothers would recognize his
descendants as the leader of their nation since God will achieve great victories
through the descendants of Judah such as King David and the Lord Jesus Christ.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
348
This prophecy was fulfilled in a “near” sense with David when the leaders of Israel
anointed him king over the nation according to 2 Samuel 5:1-3 and will be fulfilled
in a “far” sense during the millennial reign of Christ according to Ezekiel 37:22,
Hosea 3:5 and Zechariah 12 and 14:1-17.
The prophecy “Your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies” means that
Judah’s descendants would triumph over their enemies since seizing the fleeing
enemy by the nape of the neck is a symbol of conquest (See 1 Samuel 18:7). This
prophecy was fulfilled in a “near” sense under the reign of David as fully
documented in 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings and it will also be fulfilled in a
“far” sense when the Lord Jesus Christ will defeat antichrist and the Tribulational
armies according to Isaiah 42:13, Zechariah 12 and 14, Revelation 19:11-21.
Israel’s prediction “Your father's sons shall bow down to you” means that all
the tribes of Israel will be under the authority of a member of the tribe of Judah,
which was also fulfilled in a near sense with David and in a far sense with the Lord
Jesus Christ during His millennial reign.
Genesis 49:9 “Judah is a lion's whelp; From the prey, my son, you have
gone up. He couches, he lies down as a lion, and as a lion, who dares rouse him
up?” (NASB95)
“Lion’s whelp” is composed of the noun gur, “young lion” and the noun
`aryeh, “mature lion” and so therefore, this expression literally reads, “a young lion
of a mature lion.” This expression does “not” refer to a young cub but rather a
young lion that has finally mature and is able to capture prey for itself.
In the ancient world, the lion was a proverbial symbol of courage, strength and
kingship because of its majestic appearance with its mane and swift, powerful
movements and prowess as a fearless predator. The lion was used as a figure in
Israel for the Messiah and was applied by the Holy Spirit to the Lord Jesus Christ
who is called “the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah” in Revelation 5:5.
Therefore, in Genesis 49:9, the phrase “Judah is a lion’s whelp” is a prediction
meaning that the tribe of Judah would have a lion-like nature, which refers to its
military prowess. This was fulfilled in a near sense when the tribe of Judah became
the leader of the other tribes militarily (See Numbers 2:1-3; Judges 1:1-2; 3:9;
20:18) and it was fulfilled through the military successes of King David. In a far
sense it will be fulfilled through the lion of Judah, the Lord Jesus Christ at His
Second Advent when He will destroy Israel’s enemies including antichrist and the
Tribulational armies (See Revelation 19:11-21; Zechariah 12 and 14).
Israel’s statement “From the prey, my son, you have gone up. He couches, he
lies down as a lion, and as a lion, who dares rouse him up?” means that just like
a lion inspires fear and respect because of her prowess in devouring prey so the
tribe of Judah would inspire fear and respect because she conquers her enemies
(See Numbers 24:9; cf. 23:24; Deuteronomy 33:20, 22; Nahum 2:11-12).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
349
Genesis 49:10 “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's
staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the
obedience of the peoples.” (NASB95)
The “scepter” in the ancient world was a symbol of authority, sovereignty and
kingship (See Numbers 24:17) and “the ruler’s staff” refers to the one who
establishes laws and decrees.
The expression “from between his feet” is a reference to kings who were
seated on their throne with a ruler staff between their feet.
“Until” is the preposition `adh, which does “not” mean that the kingship in
Israel will change from the tribe of Judah “until” the Messiah has arrived but rather
indicates that kings would arise from the tribe of Judah right “up to” the arrival of
the Messiah.
“Shiloh comes” is composed of the conjunction ki, “when” and this is followed
by the third person masculine singular qal imperfect form of the verb bo, “He
comes” and then we have the relative particle `asher, “which belongs” and this is
followed by the preposition le, “to” and then we have the third person masculine
singular pronominal suffix, “him.”
With the exception of the RSV and NIV, most English translations incorrectly
translate the Hebrew expression šî·lō(h) as “Shiloh” since the expression is almost
identical to the spelling of the proper noun Shiloh, which is šî·lô.
The proper noun Shiloh refers to a Canaanite city captured by the Israelites but
in Genesis 49:10, the reference is to a person since the context is speaking of the
rulership or kingship in Israel coming from the tribe of Judah.
“Peoples” is the noun `am, which is used to denote all the inhabitants of the
earth.
The conjunction ki is used in a temporal sense meaning “when” referring to the
moment the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ assumes the Davidic throne at His
Second Advent to establish His millennial reign. Therefore, the preposition `adh
when coupled with the conjunction ki means, “up to the moment when.”
The relative particle `asher means “which belongs” referring to possession of
the scepter and ruler’s staff mentioned in the previous clause, which must be
inserted into the translation in order for it to make sense in the English.
Genesis 49:10 “The scepter shall not depart from Judah nor the ruler's
staff from between his feet up to the moment when He (the Messiah) comes,
which to him belongs the scepter and ruler’s staff and to him the obedience of
all the inhabitants of the earth.” (Author’s translation)
In Genesis 49:10, Israel is prophesying that the kingship in Israel shall come out
of the tribe of Judah and this will continue up to the time that the Messiah arrives.
This prophecy has been fulfilled once the tribe of Judah under David assumed the
leadership over the nation, the kingship in Israel has never departed from Judah up
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
350
to time of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ’s First Advent who will establish His
millennial reign at His Second Advent.
The inhabitants of all the earth will be subjugated to the Lord Jesus Christ
during His millennial reign since God the Father bestowed upon Him the rulership
of the entire earth because He obeyed the Father’s will in going to the Cross and
dying for the sins of the entire world (See Philippians 2:5-11; Ephesians 1:20-23;
Colossians 1:18; Psalm 89:27; Zechariah 14:9).
Israel’s prophecy in Genesis 49:10 is a reference to the “Davidic” covenant,
which was an unconditional covenant and deals with the dynasty that will rule the
nation of Israel as indicated in 2 Samuel 7:16 where God promised David that a
descendant of his would sit on his throne forever.
The “Davidic” covenant is reconfirmed throughout the Old Testament (Psalm
89:24-27; Isaiah 9:6-7; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 30:8-9; 33:14-17, 20-21; Ezekiel 37:2425; Daniel 7:13-14; Hosea 3:4-5; Amos 9:11; Zechariah 14:4, 9) and the Lord
Jesus Christ will literally fulfill this covenant during His millennial reign.
Genesis 49:11 “He ties his foal to the vine, and his donkey's colt to the
choice vine; He washes his garments in wine, and his robes in the blood of
grapes.” (NASB95)
“Foal” is the noun `ayir, which refers to a young, vigorous male donkey.
In the Hebrew text, “donkey’s colt” literally reads, “the offspring of a female
donkey” since it is composed of the noun ben, which means, “offspring” and the
noun `athon, which refers to a female donkey.
The statement “He ties his foal to the vine and his donkey’s colt to the choice
vine” is also prophetic in that it is reference to the Messiah during His millennial
reign who will have power over creation and every creature as evidence in that
when He ties his donkey to a vine, the donkey will not eat it since the animal will
obey Him.
The vine is a common biblical figure of divine favor and prosperity and in
Genesis 49:11, the “vine” is used prophetically illustrating the extraordinary
prosperity that will take place during the millennial reign of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Israel’s statement “He washes his garments in wine and his robes in the
blood of grapes” refers to the extraordinary prosperity that the nation of Israel will
experience during the millennial reign of Christ and signifies wine will be in such
abundance at that time that it will be common as water used to wash clothes!
Genesis 49:12 “His eyes are dull from wine, and his teeth white from milk.”
(NASB95)
The statement “His eyes are dull from wine” should be translated “His eyes
are sparkling from wine” since “dull” is the adjective chakhlil, which means,
“sparkling” and is a figure for wealth and prosperity.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
351
In a literal sense, the statement “His eyes are sparkling from wine and his
teeth white from milk” means that the Lord Jesus will have sparkling eyes and
white teeth or in a figurative sense, He will be the ideal of beauty and health.
Genesis 49:13 “Zebulun will dwell at the seashore; And he shall be a haven
for ships, and his flank shall be toward Sidon.” (NASB95)
“Zebulun” was the sixth child that Leah bore Jacob and his name means,
“honor” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 30:19-20.
In the Hebrew text, the statement “Zebulun will dwell at the seashore”
literally reads, “Zebulun will dwell towards the shore of seas” since the Hebrew
text contains the preposition le, “towards” and the noun choph, “coast, shore” and
then we have the masculine plural noun yam, “seas.”
Notice that the Hebrew text says that the tribe of Zebulun will dwell “towards
the shore of seas” which refers to the Mediterranean Sea and not “at the seashore.”
Therefore, we can see from the Hebrew text that the territory of the tribe of
Zebulun would not border the Mediterranean Sea but would face “towards” the
Mediterranean Sea.
The statement “His flank shall be toward Sidon” teaches that the northern
border of Zebulun’s territory will be towards Sidon. The tribe of Zebulun occupied
inland territory and was blocked from the Mediterranean Sea by the tribe of Asher
according to Joshua 19:10-16. However, her border was still only approximately
10 miles from the Mediterranean permitting her to enjoy access to the seafaring
trade according to Deuteronomy 33:18-19.
The prophecy “he shall be a haven for ships” has never been fulfilled and will
be during the millennial reign of Christ. The prophecy of Zechariah 14:8-10
reveals that the entire topography of Israel will be changed because of the great
earthquake caused by the Lord Jesus Christ landing on the Mount of Olives at His
Second Advent. This great earthquake will elevate Jerusalem whereas at the
present time she is imbedded in the midst of mountainous rough terrain. Jerusalem,
who throughout her history has been an inland city, will become a seagoing city, or
port town at the Second Advent of Christ according to the prophecy that appears in
Zechariah 14:8. Therefore, the prophecy “he shall be a haven for ships” will be
fulfilled at that time.
Genesis 49:14 “Issachar is a strong donkey, lying down between the
sheepfolds.” (NASB95)
“Issachar” was the fifth child that Leah bore Jacob and his name means,
“reward” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 30:16-18.
“Sheepfolds” is the noun mishpethayim, which does “not” refer to sheepfolds
but rather denotes two saddle-baskets of a pack mule.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
352
Israel’s prophecy “Issachar is a strong donkey, lying down between the
saddlebags” means that although the tribe of Issachar was strong, they were lazy
and docile, stubbornly refusing work and preferring comfort.
Genesis 49:15 “When he saw that a resting place was good and that the
land was pleasant, he bowed his shoulder to bear burdens, and became a slave
at forced labor.” (NASB95)
The statement “When he saw that a resting place was good and that the land
was pleasant” was fulfilled since the territory of Issachar was in the fertile plateau
of lower Galilee, which was the best farming land in Israel (See Joshua 19:17-24).
The prophecy “he bowed his shoulder to bear burdens, and became a slave
at forced labor” was fulfilled when the tribe of Issachar submitted to the
Canaanites rather than exterminate them as they were commanded by God to do or
subjugate them as the rest of the tribes did.
Zebulun is mentioned before Issachar even though Issachar was the fifth child
of Jacob and Leah and Zebulun the sixth since the tribe of Issachar would be lazy
and submissive to the enemy.
Jacob Pronounces Prophetic Blessings Upon the Sons of Zilpah and Bilhah
Genesis 49:16-21 records the patriarch pronouncing prophetic blessings upon
the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah as well as praying to God for deliverance. In Genesis
49:3-15, Israel bestowed prophetic blessings and antiblessings upon the sons of
Leah but now in Genesis 49:16-21, we see him bestowing prophetic blessings upon
the sons of his concubines, Bilhah and Zilpah.
“Concubine” is the noun pileghesh, which refers to the fact that Bilhah and
Zilpah were second-class wives, acquired without payment of bride-money and
possessing fewer legal rights (see Genesis 30:4; Judges 19:1-4).
The people in Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s culture regarded a concubine as a
secondary wife with some, but not all, of the rights and privileges of the primary
wife. In the Old Testament period, a concubine was a legal wife but one of
secondary rank and she could be divorced with a small gift. Therefore, the children
of a concubine did not have the same legal rights as the wife and so the inheritance
would go to the child of the wife rather than the concubine.
Having a concubine was often a sign of wealth and was recognized as a status
symbol. The following men had concubines: (1) Nahor (Gen. 22:24) (2) Abraham
(Gen. 25:6) (3) Jacob (Gen. 35:22) (4) Eliphaz (Gen. 36:12) (5) Saul (2 Sam. 3:7)
(6) David (2 Sam. 5:13; 15:16; 16:21) Solomon (1 Kings 11:3).
As we saw in our study of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar in Genesis 16, men and
their wives sought concubines when the wife could not bear children. In these
situations, wives presented their maidservants to their own husbands.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
353
As Genesis 22:24 records, children of a concubine were not viewed as
illegitimate but were considered part of the family.
Genesis 49:16 “Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel.”
(NASB95)
“Dan” was the first child that Bilhah bore Jacob and his name means, “God has
vindicated me” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 30:5-6.
Rachel named Bilhah’s first child with Jacob “Dan” since she did not consider
the birth of Dan merely as a blessing from the Lord but rather as the justice due her
as a hopeless victim, which was in response to the fact that Rachel was barren and
Leah was not. Therefore, by naming Bilhah’s child as “Dan” Rachel was saying
that God was vindicating her in the sense that He was defending her cause against
Leah, which of course, was not the case.
The blessing of Dan consists of a play on his name since his name is derived
from the verb din, which means, “to vindicate.” Therefore, Israel is predicting that
Dan, whose name means, “vindicate,” is going to vindicate his people as one of the
tribes of Israel.
The statement “Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel”
means that even though Dan was a child of a concubine, his descendants like the
descendants of Jacob’s primary wives, Rachel and Leah would vindicate the nation
of Israel or in other words defend the nation’s cause. Therefore, this statement
reveals that the tribe of Dan will be on equal footing with the tribes, which descend
from the sons of Jacob’s primary wives, Rachel and Leah.
The fact that the tribe of Dan will be on equal footing with the tribes, which
descend from the sons of Rachel and Leah is indicated by the use of the phrase “as
one of the tribes of Israel.” This phrase “as one of the tribes of Israel” seems
redundant since Dan is one of Israel’s sons. However, its use makes perfect sense
when we understand that Israel is prophesying that even though the tribe of Dan
descended from a concubine, it would be equal to the tribes descending from the
sons of Rachel and Leah.
Genesis 49:17 “Dan shall be a serpent in the way, a horned snake in the
path, that bites the horse's heels, so that his rider falls backward.” (NASB95)
The statement “Dan shall be a serpent in the way” is inaccurate and should be
translated “May Dan be a serpent in the way.”
The reason for this translation is that “shall be” is the qal “jussive” form of the
verb hayah.
The imperfect has two usages: (1) Cohortative: Expresses the speaker’s desire
or intention to act. (2) Jussive: Expresses a desire for action from a third person
subject.
In Genesis 49:17, we have the “jussive” form of the verb hayah expressing
Israel’s Spirit inspired desire for action from the descendants of Dan. Therefore,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
354
Israel’s statement about Dan in Genesis 49:17 is a desire by the Holy Spirit for the
descendants of his son Dan, thus, refuting any interpretation that this statement is
about his descendants’ involvement with evil as symbolized by the serpent.
However, the tribe of Dan did introduce idolatry into the land of Israel on a regular
basis according to Judges 18:30-31.
Also, a son of Shelomith of the tribe of Dan was guilty of blaspheming the
name of the Lord according to Leviticus 24:11. It was also in Dan that Jeroboam
who led a rebellion that ended in the divided kingdom, set up one of his two golden
calves according to 1 Kings 12:28-30.
Furthermore, it is interesting that the tribe of Dan is not listed among the twelve
tribes of Israel during the Tribulation period according to Revelation 7:1-8.
However, in Genesis 49:17, Israel is praying that the descendants of Dan will be a
serpent on the road, a horned snake on the path, one who bites the heels of a horse
so that the rider falls backward.
Israel is praying that even though Dan would be a small tribe in Israel, like a
snake she would be aggressive, dangerous and strike unexpectedly to overthrow
nations. This was fulfilled during the history of the nation of Israel according
Judges 18. In fact, Samson, who was from the tribe of Dan, single-handedly
defeated the Philistines according to Judges 14-16.
Genesis 49:18 “For Your salvation I wait, O LORD.” (NASB95)
Suddenly, Israel interrupts his prophetic blessings on his sons and their
descendants by proclaiming that he waited with expectation for the Lord’s
salvation or deliverance. Up to this point in our study of these prophetic blessings
that Israel bestowed upon his sons, we have seen that Judah is pictured as a lion,
which refers to the military prowess of the tribe of Judah and also Dan is depicted
as a horned snake. However, the nation of Israel would not depend upon the
strength of these two tribes to deliver them from their adversaries but rather they
were to depend upon the Lord to deliver them, thus Israel proclaims that the
deliverance of the nation from its enemies must come from the Lord. Therefore,
the patriarch inserts this petition to God because his prophecies predict opposition
to the twelve tribes that would descend from him.
Israel’s prayer for deliverance from the Lord expresses Israel’s dependence
upon God’s power and not human power of his sons or their descendants to deliver
the nation from its enemies. His prayer would therefore be a reminder to his sons
and their descendants to not depend upon their own human power or military might
to defeat their enemies but to depend upon the power of the Lord to do so.
“Salvation” is the noun yeshu`ah, which does “not” refer to salvation or
deliverance in a spiritual sense but rather the context indicates that it refers to
“deliverance” from one’s enemies in the natural realm. This is indicated in that
Israel’s prayer in Genesis 49:18 is within the context of his prophecy regarding
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
355
each of the twelve tribes and the part that each would play in the future with
regards to the nation’s enemies.
“Lord” is the proper noun Yahweh, which is the covenant name of God thus
signifying that Israel had a covenant relationship with God.
Also, the term Yahweh, “Lord” emphasizes the “immanency” of God meaning
that Israel was petitioning that God would involve Himself in and concern Himself
with and intervene on behalf of the nation that would descend from his sons.
“I wait” is the verb qawah, which is used in the piel (intensive) stem and
means, “to wait eagerly, confidently, expectantly and patiently” for deliverance
from the Lord.
This prayer in Genesis 49:18 was answered at times throughout Israel’s history
during the period of the Judges and David but ultimately it will be answered at the
“Second Advent” of Jesus Christ.
The “Second Advent” is the visible return of Christ to planet earth with the
elect angels and the Church in order to save the nation of Israel from her enemies
and end the Tribulation dispensation and establish our Lord’s 1000-year millennial
reign (Daniel 2:44-45; Zechariah. 14; Matthew 24:29-31; Revelation 19:11-21).
The Lord and His armies will orbit the earth before landing on the Mount of
Olives, which was the site of His Ascension (Acts. 1:9-11) and there will be a great
earthquake when our Lord’s foot touches the Mount of Olives (Zech. 14:1-8) and it
will be a unique day having neither day nor night (Zech. 14:7). Therefore, Israel’s
prayer for the Lord to deliver the nation that would descend from him recorded in
Genesis 49:18 was prophetic in nature.
Genesis 49:19 “As for Gad, raiders shall raid him, but he will raid at their
heels.” (NASB95)
“Gad” was the first boy that Zilpah bore to Jacob, whose birth is recorded in
Genesis 30:9-11 and his name comes from “What good fortune” indicating that
Leah attributed this child to fortune or good luck rather than God and his birth.
This prophecy predicts that the tribe of Gad will have a troubled existence but will
retaliate against its enemies.
Throughout, its history, the tribe of Gad was attacked by the Ammonites
according to Judges 10-12 and Jeremiah 49:1-6. She was also attacked by the
Moabites and Arameans according to 1 Kings 22:3 and 2 Kings 10:32-33 and the
Assyrians according to 2 Kings 15:29. Gad fought back after each defeat and her
people were considered great fighters by the other tribes of Israel according to
Deuteronomy 33:20 and 1 Chronicles 5:18 and 12:8.
The statement “he will raid at their heels” means that the tribe of Gad would
only engage in guerilla warfare because she would not be big enough to engage in
a full scale war with her enemies.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
356
Genesis 49:20 “As for Asher, his food shall be rich, and he will yield royal
dainties.” (NASB95)
“Asher” is the second son that Zilpah bore to Jacob, whose birth is recorded in
Genesis 30:12-13 and his name means “women will call me happy” meaning that
Leah thought she would be envied by other women because of this child.
The statement “his food shall be rich” is a reference to the fertile territory of
the tribe of Asher, which was strip of land running north from the Carmel range
according to Joshua 19:24-31 and Deuteronomy 33:24-25. The tribe of Asher lived
alongside the Canaanites and Phoenicians and traded with them according to
Judges 1:32 and Ezekiel 27:17.
The statement “he will yield royal dainties” in the Hebrew text literally reads,
“He will produce royal delicacies,” which refers to the tribe of Asher supplying
foreign courts with great food products because of the fertile region in which she
settled.
Genesis 49:21 “Naphtali is a doe let loose, he gives beautiful words.”
(NASB95)
“Naphtali” was the second child that Bilhah bore to Jacob and his name means,
“my wrestling” reflecting Rachel’s attitude in which she viewed her relationship
with her sister Leah to be like a wrestling match and his birth is recorded in
Genesis 30:7-8.
“Doe” is the noun `ayyalah, which refers to an adult female deer.
“Beautiful words” is composed of the noun `emer, which means, “fawn” and
the noun shepher, which means, “lovely.” Therefore, the Hebrew text of Genesis
49:21 literally reads, “Naphtali is a doe let loose, which produces lovely fawns.”
This prophecy refers to the freedom and frequent movements of the tribe of
Naphtali according to Deuteronomy 33:23, Judges 4:6, 10 and 5:18.
Jacob Pronounces Prophetic Blessings on Rachel’s Sons
Israel’s prophetic blessings on Rachel’s sons are recorded in Genesis 49:22-27
and the narrator’s conclusion appears in Genesis 49:28.
Genesis 49:22 “Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a spring; Its
branches run over a wall.” (NASB95)
“Joseph” was the eleventh son of Jacob born in Paddan Aram and he was the
first child that Rachel bore to Jacob according to Genesis 30:22-24.
The name “Joseph” refers to his sons “Ephraim” and “Manasseh” whom
Israel adopted giving them equal status with their uncles as progenitors of the
tribes that will bear their names and inheritors of the land of Canaan (See Genesis
48:1-20).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
357
The use of the name “Joseph” for the tribes of “Manasseh” and “Ephraim” is
also used in Numbers and Joshua.
“Fruitful bough” is composed of the noun ben, which means, “son” and the
verb parah, which means, “to produce fruit.” Therefore, the Hebrew text literally
reads, “Joseph is a son who produces fruit,” which is a metaphor for fertility and a
play on the name of his second son “Ephraim” whose name means, “He (God) has
made me fruitful.”
The term ben, “son” is used in a metaphoric sense for a vine and the verb
parah, “who produces fruit” is used substantively to describe that this vine
produces fruit abundantly.
In the statement “Joseph is a son who produces fruit” Israel is comparing the
tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, the sons of his son Joseph to a vine that produces
fruit abundantly, which metaphorically means that Ephraim and Manasseh’s
descendants would produce offspring in great numbers. Therefore, we can translate
the term ben, “son” with this figure in mind as “vine.”
Israel further describes the fertility of Joseph’s sons and in particular Ephraim
by describing him as a vine “by a spring” which refers to the vine having access to
an abundant water supply that enables it to be fertile.
The statement “Its branches run over a wall” is composed of the noun bath,
which means, “daughter” and then we have the verb tsa`adh, which means, “to
climb over” and this is followed by the preposition `al, which means, “over” and
its object is the noun shur, “which means, “wall.”
Therefore, the Hebrew text literally reads, “with daughters that climb over a
wall,” which is a metaphor for the expansion of the territory of Joseph’s
descendants (See Joshua 17:14-18).
The term bath, “daughters” is used in a metaphoric sense for the branches of a
vine that climb over a wall.
Genesis 49:22 could be translated literally as follows, “Joseph is a son who
produces fruit by a spring with daughters that climb over a wall” or it can be
translated figuratively as “Joseph is a vine which produces fruit by a spring
with branches that climb over a wall.”
In Genesis 49:22, Israel is using figurative language comparing his favorite son
Joseph and in particular Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh to a vine, which
produces fruit abundantly, with an abundant water supply and branches that climb
over a wall. In figurative terms, he is predicting that Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and
Manasseh would be strong and numerous, producing offspring in great numbers.
This prophecy was fulfilled according to a comparison of two censuses taken
during the course of Israel’s wandering in the desert under Moses prior to entering
Canaan under Joshua.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
358
The combined number of males in Ephraim and Manasseh increased from
72,700 (See Numbers 1:32-35) in the second year after the Exodus to 85,200 forty
years later (See Numbers 26:28-37) while in contrast, the combined populations of
Reuben and Simeon during the same period decreases from 105,800 to 65,930. In
his farewell address, Moses in Deuteronomy 33:17 refers to the “myriads of
Ephraim” and the “thousands of Manasseh.”
Genesis 49:23 “The archers bitterly attacked him, and shot at him and
harassed him.” (NASB95)
This passage refers to opposition that Joseph faced throughout his life from his
brothers, Potiphar’s wife and Pharaoh’s cupbearer, which we have noted in detail
in our studies of Genesis 37-40.
Genesis 49:24 “But his bow remained firm, and his arms were agile, from
the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob (From there is the Shepherd, the Stone
of Israel).” (NASB95)
The statement “his bow remained firm and his arms were agile from the
hands of the Mighty One of Jacob” means that during the years of adversity that
Joseph endured, he maintained a dynamic mental attitude with love, joy, peace and
no bitterness and resentment because he was empowered by the Word of God (See
Hebrews 4:12).
The Word of God provided Joseph the power or capacity to handle the adversity
in his life because he trusted that God would fulfill His Word to him in the form of
the two prophetic dreams that are recorded in Genesis 37:5-11.
The title “the Mighty One” is a reference to God with emphasis upon His
omnipotence and the name “Jacob” signifies the patriarch’s weakness and
dependence upon God’s power and provision and protection. Therefore, the title
“the Mighty One of Jacob” means that the omnipotence of God was manifested in
Joseph’s human weakness and impotence when he appropriated the omnipotence
of God by having faith in the promises of God.
Therefore, the statement “But his bow remained firm, and his arms were
agile, from the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob” indicates that Joseph lived
according to the spiritual principle taught by the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:9
that God’s power is manifested in human weakness or impotence.
Since Joseph trusted the Word of God, he was able to transcend his tremendous
adversity and injustice directed towards him and so he would agree with what Paul
said in Philippians 4:12. Like Paul, the Word of God, which is alive and powerful,
gave Joseph the power or capacity to be able to persevere and endure and not fall
victim to self-pity and bitterness and disillusionment.
God is also referred to as a “Shepherd” emphasizing that God protected and
nourished Joseph during his years of adversity. The figure of God as a Shepherd of
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
359
His people is used throughout the Scriptures (See Psalm 23:1-3; John 10:11;
Hebrews 13:20-21).
Genesis 49:24 “But his bow remained firm, and his arms were agile, from
the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob (From there is the Shepherd, the Stone
of Israel).” (NASB95)
God is also referred to by Israel as the “Stone of Israel,” which the Hebrew
literally reads, “the Rock of Israel,” which refers to the power and strength and
firm foundation that God provided for the soul of Joseph during his times of
adversity. This figure is used of the Lord Jesus Christ elsewhere in Scripture (See
Psalm 118:22-23; Isaiah 28:16; Mark 12:10-11).
The name “Israel” means, “one who fights and overcomes with the power of
God” and reflects strength and character produced by appropriating the power of
the Word of God by claiming the promises of God in prayer. Therefore, the title
“the Rock of Israel” means that Joseph overcame his adversities by appropriating
the omnipotence of the Word of God by having faith in the promises of God.
Genesis 49:25 “From the God of your father who helps you, and by the
Almighty who blesses you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep
that lies beneath, blessings of the breasts and of the womb.” (NASB95)
The phrase “the God of your father” would assure Joseph and his descendants
that the same God who delivered Jacob from Esau, Laban, and famine and all his
adversities would deliver him and his descendants.
Commenting on this expression, Nahum Sarna writes, “The title stresses the
continuity of the generations, the unbroken chain of religious tradition that alone
makes the dying patriarch’s blessing meaningful and effective.” (JPS Torah
Commentary, page 344, Jewish Publication Society).
“God” is not the usual Elohim but rather the singular form of the noun, which is
El in order to express the uniqueness of the God of Jacob.
“Almighty” is the noun shadday, which denotes God’s ability or power to
provide Joseph and his descendants with various blessings.
“Bless” is the verb barakh, which means, “to endue with power for success,
prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.” and so this verb indicates that God endued
Joseph and his descendants with power for success, prosperity, fecundity
(offspring in great numbers) and longevity.
“Blessings” is the noun berakhah, which refers to various temporal gifts from
God.
The expression “the blessings of heaven above” refers to fertility of land
because of an abundant water supply from the earth’s atmosphere and “blessings
of the deep that lies beneath” refers to fertility of land due to an abundant water
supply underneath the earth. Therefore, this expression predicts that the territory in
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
360
which the descendants of Manasseh and Ephraim would settle would be extremely
fertile.
The expression “blessings of the breasts and of the womb” refers to the
fertility of the human body (See Numbers 6:24-26; Deuteronomy 33:15; Hosea
12:8). Therefore, this expression predicts that the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim
would have fertility of the body meaning abundant offspring. These blessings were
fulfilled to a certain extent during the history of Joseph’s descendants and will find
their ultimate fulfillment during the millennial reign of Christ.
Genesis 49:26 “The blessings of your father have surpassed the blessings of
my ancestors up to the utmost bound of the everlasting hills; May they be on
the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of the one distinguished
among his brothers.” (NASB95)
Israel’s statement “The blessings of your father have surpassed the blessings
of my ancestors up to the utmost bound of the everlasting hills” is an
acknowledgement that God has blessed him more than his grandfather Abraham
and his father Isaac. In relation to children, God had blessed Jacob more than
Abraham and Isaac in the sense that Abraham had one child through Sarah, Isaac
and he had through Hagar, Ishmael and six sons through Keturah whereas Isaac
had only Jacob and Esau but Jacob had twelve children. Jacob’s descendants
numbered seventy when he came to Egypt from Canaan. Therefore, in terms of
posterity, God blessed Jacob more than his grandfather Abraham and his father
Isaac.
The green mountain tops of Carmel and Hermon in the land of Canaan were an
image of God given life and prosperity.
The phrase “May they be on the head of Joseph” is incorrectly translated but
rather should be rendered “they (the blessings) will be on the head of Joseph”
since we do not have the “jussive” form of the verb hayah, which would express
Israel’s desire for action from God upon his son Joseph and his descendants.
Therefore, Israel is not praying for these blessings to come upon Joseph
descendants but that they will and is thus prophetic and not a petition.
The expression “the one distinguished among his brothers” refers to the
preeminence of Joseph in that he was superior to his brothers in both character and
spirituality as well as his position in life as the prime minister of Egypt. This
expression also means that Joseph was elected by God to perform a special service
for Him as the prime minister of Egypt in order to deliver not only his family from
famine as well as the nation of Egypt but also the entire world.
Genesis 49:27 “Benjamin is a ravenous wolf; In the morning he devours
the prey, and in the evening he divides the spoil.” (NASB95)
“Benjamin” was the last child that Rachel bore to Jacob and his name means,
“son of my right hand” and his birth is recorded in Genesis 35:16-18.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
361
Israel’s prophecy concerning the descendants of Benjamin refers to the
successful military victories that they would achieve in the future (See Judges
3:15-30; 5:14; 20:14-21; 1 Samuel 9:1; 13:3; 1 Chronicles 8:40; 12:2-27, 29;
Esther 2:5; Romans 11:1).
The statement “he divides the spoil” predicts that the tribe of Benjamin will
share its military victories with the other tribes of Israel.
Genesis 49:28 All these are the twelve tribes of Israel, and this is what their
father said to them when he blessed them. He blessed them, every one with the
blessing appropriate to him. (NASB95)
“All these” is a reference of course to Israel’s twelve sons, Reuben, Simeon,
Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher.
The statement “this is what their father to said to them when he blessed
them” is a reference to the prophetic blessings that Israel pronounced upon his
twelve sons who would be the progenitors of the twelve tribes of Israel, which are
recorded in Genesis 49:3-27. This is the first Biblical reference to the twelve tribe
of Israel.
The twelve tribes would include, Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun,
Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Manasseh and Ephraim. Levi is excluded
because he did not receive land but was the priesthood of the nation whereas
Joseph is not included since his sons Manasseh and Ephraim were adopted by his
father who in turn received and split Joseph’s double portion as the recipient of the
birthright (See Joshua 14:4; 1 Chronicles 5:1-2; Genesis 48; Numbers 1:10, 47).
The number twelve in the Bible denotes “governmental perfection.” The twelve
tribes descending from Israel (See Genesis 35:23-26) correspond in number to the
twelve tribes of Nahor (see Genesis 22:20-24), of Ishmael (See Genesis 25:12-18),
and of Edom (see Genesis 36:10-14).
Jacob’s Burial Instructions
Genesis 49:29 Then he charged them and said to them, “I am about to be
gathered to my people; bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field
of Ephron the Hittite, 30 in the cave that is in the field of Machpelah, which is
before Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought along with the
field from Ephron the Hittite for a burial site.” (NASB95)
In Genesis 47:27-31, we saw Israel requesting that Joseph bury him in Canaan
and now here in Genesis 49:29-30 he makes this request of all his sons.
Israel’s request to be buried in the land of Canaan is repeated for the third time
(first time: Genesis 47:27-31; second time: Genesis 48:21-22; third time: Genesis
49:29-30) and expresses his faith in God’s promises that Canaan would be the
home of the Israelites by requesting burial in the Cave of Machpelah.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
362
The expression gathered to my people” is always used with reference to
believers (Abraham in Genesis 25:8; Ishmael in Genesis 25:17; Isaac in Genesis
35:29; Jacob in Genesis 49:33; Aaron in Numbers 20:24, 26; Deuteronomy 35:20).
It does “not” refer to Israel’s death and burial because he was not buried with his
ancestors but rather it refers to his life after death with those who before him died
in faith such as Adam, Eve, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and his father Isaac.
Prior to the ascension of Jesus Christ, which is recorded in Acts 1:9-11, Old
Testament saints when they died went to a compartment of Hades, which the Lord
Jesus Christ referred to as “Abraham’s bosom” in Luke 16 and called “Paradise”
when He spoke to the thief on the Cross.
“Paradise” or “Abraham’s bosom” is known as “Sheol” in the Old Testament
and “Hades” in the New Testament and the Scriptures reveals that it contains four
compartments: (1) Paradise: the place of the departed souls of believers before the
resurrection of Christ (Lk. 23:39-43; Eph. 4:8-9) who were transferred to heaven
after the resurrection and ascension of Christ (Eph. 4:10). (2) Torments: the
temporary fire for the souls of unbelievers from all dispensations (Lk. 16:19-31)
who will be transferred to the Great White Throne Judgment that concludes human
history and from there will be cast in the Lake of Fire forever (Rev. 20:11-15). (3)
Tartarus: the abode of the fallen angels of Genesis 6 who had sex with women in
order to corrupt the human race and prevent the incarnation of the Son of God (1
Peter 3:18-22; 2 Peter 4; Jude 6). (4) The Abyss: the place of imprisonment for the
demons who violated certain rules for angelic creation and will be released during
the Tribulation (Lk. 8:30-31; Rom. 10:7; Rev. 20:1-3).
Prior to the resurrection, ascension and session of the Lord Jesus Christ, Old
Testament saints when they died did not go to the third heaven but rather to
Paradise. These Old Testament saints such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ascended
with Jesus Christ into heaven as part of our Lord’s triumphal procession as victor
in the angelic conflict and were part of the booty from our Lord’s victory that was
accomplished through His death and resurrection.
Ephesians 4:8 Therefore it says, “WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH, HE
LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO
MEN.” (NASB95)
“He led host a host of captives” refers to Old Testament saints that were
temporarily residing in the second compartment of Hades called Paradise (Lk. 16;
23:43).
Israel states to his sons that the cave of Machpelah was purchased from a man
named “Ephron the Hittite.”
“Ephron” was the son of Zohar and was among the crowd of Hittites who had
come to the gate of the city where Abraham negotiated the purchase of the burial
plot with the Hittites and was an outstanding individual among these people.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
363
The Hittites were present in the land of Canaan during the time of Abraham
according to Genesis 15:19-21. They reached the zenith of their power sometime
later and still possessed great power at the time of Solomon a thousand years later
according to 2 Chronicles 1:17.
The Hittites served as witnesses to the sale of the cave of Machpelah to
Abraham. Genesis 23 records that for four hundred shekels of silver, Abraham
purchased from Ephron the Hittite “the cave of Machpelah” as a burial plot for
Sarah, himself and his descendants.
The name “Machpelah” means, “double” or “split cave.” “Machpelah” is
located west of modern Hebron on the outskirts and the city is situated on the
eastern slope of a narrow valley, which runs north and south and is surrounded by
rocky hills.
“Hebron” was located nineteen miles southwest of Jerusalem, on the way to
Beersheba and was 3,040 feet above sea level, dominating a beautiful and fruitful
area and ancient oaks (terebinths) filled the area.
Israel states that the cave of Machpelah was “before Mamre, in the land of
Canaan.”
“Mamre” was located in “Hebron” as indicated by the phrase “that is,
Hebron” in Genesis 23:19 and received its name from its owner, Mamre, who was
a chief of the Amorites who sought security in an alliance with Abram and was
blessed because of Abram (cf. Gen. 14:13, 24).
The “oaks of Mamre” evidently were a grove of terebinth trees that was owned
by Mamre, which was the location of Abram’s encampment when he came up
from Egypt according to Genesis 13:18, 14:13 and 18:1.
By buying the land for his dead, Abraham was forced to realize that God’s
promises do not end with this life. God will do far more than He has done in this
life, which is the confident expectation of all who die trusting in the Lord. In this
life, the patriarchs such as Abraham and Sarah were sojourners but in death they
were heirs of the promise and occupied the land. The patriarchs died not receiving
the promises and yet they died in faith (see Hebrews 11:39-40).
Abraham bought this gravesite in the land of Canaan in the confident
expectation of God fulfilling His promise to give the land of Canaan to himself and
his descendants as a permanent possession. He died trusting that God would fulfill
His promise and so we too must die in faith. As Abraham had a confident
expectation of God fulfilling His promise in the future for him and his descendants,
so believers today are to be confidently expecting God to fulfill His promises of a
resurrection body and rewards for faithfulness.
Our natural inclination is to mourn death as the world does but in reality death
should be the time of a believer’s greatest demonstration of faith because the
recipient of God’s promises has a hope and a glorious future beyond the grave.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
364
Remember, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself referred to Abraham when discussing
the resurrection with the Sadducees (see Matthew 22:31-32) and stated that God’s
promises demand resurrection.
Not only was Sarah buried at this site but so also were Abraham, Isaac,
Rebekah, Jacob and Leah were buried there as well (See Genesis 25:9; 35:27, 29,
49:31; 50:13) and all of these demonstrated their faith in God’s promises by being
buried with Sarah. This little piece of land gives promise of the whole land and
makes clear that Abraham and Sarah were aliens and strangers seeking a
homeland, which they will receive at the resurrection of Old Testament believers.
With this purchase of land in Hebron facing Mamre, Abraham wanted his
descendants to know that he had believed in the Lord’s promises. The presence of
the grave site among his descendants in later years would be mute but eloquent
testimony to them all that Abraham was sure that God would fulfill His promises.
Genesis 49:31 There they buried Abraham and his wife Sarah, there they
buried Isaac and his wife Rebekah, and there I buried Leah, 32 the field and
the cave that is in it, purchased from the sons of Heth. (NASB95)
Notice that Leah and not Rachel was buried alongside Jacob in the cave of
Machpelah along with Abraham and Sarah and Isaac and Rebekah indicating that
Leah and not Rachel was Jacob’s right woman in the eyes of God.
The Word of God indicates that Leah and not Rachel was Jacob’s right woman
as indicating by the following. First of all, when we take into consideration the
providence of God, which expresses the fact that the world and our lives are not
ruled by chance or fate but by God, we must acknowledge that, in spite of the
deceptiveness of Laban, Leah was Jacob’s wife.
Furthermore, it was Leah, not Rachel, who became the mother of Judah, who
was to be the heir through whom the Messiah would come (cf. 49:8-12) and it was
Levi, a son of Leah, who provided the priestly line in later years.
It seems noteworthy that both Leah and her handmaid had at least twice the
number of children as compared to Rachel and her maid (cf. 29:31-30:24; 46:15,
18, 22, 25).
Also, the superiority of Leah to Rachel is also revealed in that Rachel died at an
early age, yet she was the younger sister and when she died, she was buried on the
way to Bethlehem (35:19) and yet when Leah died later, she was buried with Jacob
in the cave at Machpelah (49:31).
Another thing to consider is that the Word of God reveals that Jacob chose
Rachel based solely upon looks and did not take into consideration her character as
Abraham’s servant Eliezer did when selecting Rebekah for Isaac.
Lastly, when choosing Rachel, Jacob never prays for guidance from the Lord in
order to discern if Rachel was his right woman as Abraham’s servant Eliezer did
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
365
when choosing Rebekah and neither did he test the character of Rachel as Eliezer
did with Rebekah!
“The sons of Heth” is another term for “Hittite” and were descendants of Heth
who was the son of Canaan (See Genesis 10:15), who were in possession of
Hebron that Abraham was residing in at the time.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
366
Chapter Eighteen: Jacob’s Death and Burial
Genesis 49:33 When Jacob finished charging his sons, he drew his feet into
the bed and breathed his last, and was gathered to his people. (NASB95)
The fact that Jacob “drew his feet into his bed” indicates not only that he had
been sitting on the side of his bed when he pronounced the prophetic blessings
upon his sons and their descendants but also that he was in full possession of his
faculties at the moment of physical death.
“Breathed his last” is the verb gawa, which pictures the act of drawing one’s
last breath.
Israel was 147 years of age when he died according to Genesis 47:28. Israel’s
death like the death of every human being is the sovereign decision of God based
upon the integrity of God and omniscient knowledge of all the facts.
The fiftieth and final chapter of the book of Genesis is divided into three
sections: (1) Joseph buries Jacob in the cave of Machpelah (Genesis 50:1-14). (2)
Joseph assures his brothers that he won’t seek revenge upon them (Genesis 50:1521). (3) Conclusion of Joseph’s life, his last words and death (Genesis 50:22-26).
The first section, which is divided into four parts: (1) Joseph grieves for his
father (Genesis 50:1). (2) Jacob is embalmed and mourned (Genesis 50:2-3). (3)
Pharaoh grants Joseph permission to bury his father in Canaan (Genesis 50:4-6).
(4) Jacob is buried at the cave of Machpelah (Genesis 50:7-14).
Genesis 50:1 Then Joseph fell on his father's face, and wept over him and
kissed him. (NASB95)
“Wept” is the verb bakhah, which refers to audible weeping. The verb refers to
Joseph’s emotional grief in mourning over the death of his father Israel.
In general, Orientals such as Joseph did not weep quietly but were inclined to
loud weeping and lamenting. Weeping is an emotion and emotion composes one
fifth of the human soul with the other elements of the soul being the volition, selfconsciousness, mentality and conscience. Emotion is the responder to what is in
the mentality of the soul. Joseph’s loud crying was an expression of his emotion of
grief for the death of his father.
This is the fifth and final time that Joseph weeps in the book of Genesis (See
Genesis 42:24; 43:30; 45:1-2; 14-15; 50:17).
The kiss was an expression of Joseph’s affection for his father as well as a
farewell gesture to his father.
There are at least three reasons why the narrator emphasizes that Joseph grieved
for his father and not his brothers, which is not to say that his brothers did not
grieve for their father, they did. The narrator is emphasizing Joseph since this
incident features Joseph and the Egyptians in relation to Jacob’s burial whereas in
Genesis 50:12-15, the emphasis is back on the brothers again.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
367
The second reason why the narrator emphasizes Joseph’s grief and not his
brothers is that he was the closest to his father. The third and final reason is that the
narrator is attempting to demonstrate that God was keeping His promises to Jacob
since in Genesis 46:4, God promised Jacob that Joseph would close his eyes.
Genesis 50:2 Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his
father. So the physicians embalmed Israel. 3 Now forty days were required for
it, for such is the period required for embalming. And the Egyptians wept for
him seventy days. (NASB95)
Genesis 50:3 records that the period of embalming in Egypt took forty days
whereas the period of mourning took another thirty days. Joseph orders his
physicians to embalm his father for two reasons.
The first was “political” in that by embalming his father, Joseph would be
honoring his father in the eyes of the Egyptians since they would embalm their
honored dead.
The second reason was “practical” in that by embalming his father, Joseph
would be preparing his father’s corpse for the long journey to Canaan where he
would bury his father at the cave of Machpelah.
The Egyptians embalmed their dead since according to their religion they
believed it would assist in the journey after death. Embalming the dead played a
crucial role in the Egyptian religion and was bound up with the cult of Osiris and
conceptions of the afterlife. The Egyptians believed in an afterlife and in relation to
this they thought it important to preserve the physical body. In fact, they took
meticulous care to prevent the decomposing of the corpse in order to ensure the
right of the deceased to immortality but the embalming of Jacob and Joseph is
without any religious significance.
The Israelites did not embalm their dead like the Egyptians since they did not
subscribe to the Egyptian religion. However, the Israelites did handle the body of
the deceased in a dignified fashion and would place the body in a grave in
confident expectation of the resurrection.
The ancient historian Herodotus describes the process of embalming by the
Egyptians, he writes, “They first take a crooked piece of iron and with it draw out
the brain through the nostrils, thus getting rid of a portion while the skull is cleared
of the rest by rinsing with drugs; next they make a cut along the flank with a sharp
Ethiopian stone, and take out the whole contents of the abdomen, which they then
cleanse, washing it thoroughly with palm wine and again frequently with an
infusion of pounded aromatics. After this they fill the cavity with the purest
bruised myrrh with cassia and every other sort of spicery except frankincense and
sew up the opening. Then the body is placed in natrum for seventy days and
covered entirely over. After the expiration of that space of time, which must not be
exceeded, the body is washed and wrapped round from head to foot, with bandages
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
368
of fine linen cloth, smeared over with gum, which is used generally by the
Egyptians in the place of glue, and in this state it is given back to the relations, who
enclose it in a wooden case which they have had made for the purpose, shaped into
the figure of the man.” (The History, Great Books volume 5, page 66, section 86;
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.).
Our text says that the Egyptians mourned for Joseph’s father for seventy days,
which were the number of days that the Egyptians would observe for an Egyptian
king. Therefore, we see the nation of Egypt honored Joseph for his service to their
nation in delivering it from famine by honoring his father and mourning for him as
if his father was a dead Egyptian king.
Next, we will note Genesis 50:4-6 in which we will see Pharaoh granting
Joseph permission to bury his father in Canaan.
Genesis 50:4 When the days of mourning for him were past, Joseph spoke
to the household of Pharaoh, saying, “If now I have found favor in your sight,
please speak to Pharaoh, saying, 5 ‘My father made me swear, saying,
‘Behold, I am about to die; in my grave which I dug for myself in the land of
Canaan, there you shall bury me.’ Now therefore, please let me go up and
bury my father; then I will return.” (NASB95)
Joseph is conveying the conversation that he had with his father prior to his
death, which is recorded in Genesis 47:27-31.
The expression “the household of Pharaoh” refers to the members of the
Egyptian government who assisted Pharaoh in state affairs. Some commentators
suggest that Joseph spoke directly to Pharaoh’s advisors rather than Pharaoh
himself because he was considered by the Egyptians as ceremonially unclean due
to the mourning rites of the Egyptians however, the text does not say this to be the
case. Since Joseph was the second most powerful man in Egypt, he needed to
guard against giving an impression that he no longer needed to be accountable to
Pharaoh. Therefore, he requests permission through Pharaoh’s advisors rather than
Pharaoh directly since he wants to demonstrate to all of Pharaoh’s advisors that he
still respects Pharaoh’s authority and considers himself accountable to Pharaoh.
Joseph tactfully omits the oath ceremony with his father in which his father
prohibited him from burying him in Egypt since it might suggest a lack of
commitment to Egypt on the part of Joseph (See Genesis 47:27-31) but instead he
emphasizes with Pharaoh that his father had a tomb already prepared for himself.
The expression “If now I have found favor in your sight” is deferential
language, which is normally used by an inferior when speaking to a superior and is
used by Joseph in order to acknowledge that he is subordinate to Pharaoh and his
dependence upon Pharaoh to permit him to meet his need in burying his father in
Canaan.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
369
Genesis 50:6 Pharaoh said, “Go up and bury your father, as he made you
swear.” (NASB95)
Pharaoh grants Joseph permission to bury his father in Canaan without any
hesitation since he greatly respects Joseph as a result of his service to the nation of
Egypt and trusts Joseph since he has demonstrated great concern for the Egyptian
people.
Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father, and with him went up
all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his household and all the elders of
the land of Egypt, 8 and all the household of Joseph and his brothers and his
father's household; they left only their little ones and their flocks and their
herds in the land of Goshen. (NASB95)
“All the servants of Pharaoh” does “not” refer to slaves who are in bondage to
another against their will but rather refers to Pharaoh’s advisers and officials in his
cabinet who helped him in deciding state affairs.
“Elders of his household” refers to the senior dignitaries from Pharaoh’s court.
“Elders of the land of Egypt” refers to the senior dignitaries throughout the
Egyptian empire.
“The household of Joseph” would include his wife Asenath, the daughter of
Potiphera, the priest of On and his sons, Ephraim and Manasseh.
The expression “his brothers and his father’s household,” seems redundant
since Joseph’s brothers were a part of their father’s household, but such
expressions are common in Hebrew and should be understood as “his brothers
and in particular his father’s household.”
“His brothers” refers to Joseph’s eleven brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi,
Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad, Asher, Benjamin, Dan, and Naphtali.
“His father’s household” would include the wives and children and
grandchildren of Jacob’s sons, not to mention the women and children of Shechem
who were absorbed into Jacob’s family according to Genesis 34:29 as well
servants.
The statement “they left only their little ones” would include of course the
mothers of the children. Joseph’s family left only their little ones and their flocks
and their herds in the land of Goshen for two reasons. First, it was a practical
necessity and secondly, to assure Pharaoh that Joseph intends to return to Egypt as
prime minister.
Genesis 50:9 There also went up with him both chariots and horsemen;
and it was a very great company. (NASB95)
The chariots and horseman accompanied the large funeral procession for
protection from any would be hostile forces. So we can see that this was a massive
state funeral to honor Joseph’s father.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
370
Jacob’s funeral takes place in two stages according to Genesis 50:10-13: (1)
The entire procession proceeds to a place at which a great public mourning
ceremony is held. (2) After a week, then the immediate family continues the
journey to the cave of Machpelah where in a private ceremony the body of Jacob is
buried.
Genesis 50:10 When they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is
beyond the Jordan, they lamented there with a very great and sorrowful
lamentation; and he observed seven days mourning for his father. (NASB95)
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on the location of “Atad,” writes, “The sixth
century A.D. Madeba mosaic map locates an Alon Atad (terebinth of Atad) near
Beth Agla (Beth Hogla-modern Deir Hajlah) between Jericho and the Dead Sea.”
(Genesis, page 620-621, Zondervan)
“Threshing floor” is the noun goren, which was a place near a city where the
people separated grain from straw and chaff and was often a bare rock on top of a
hill where the wind could drive away the chaff.
Seven days was the usual period of time to mourn for the dead in Israel and in
the ancient Middle East (See 1 Samuel 31:13; Job 2:13; Ezekiel 3:15).
“Lamented” is the verb saphadh, which connotes that of loudly wailing, or
specifically, short cries or exclamations of sorrow for someone who recently died.
The verb was connected with other practices of mourning rites, such as tearing
clothes, wearing sackcloth, a coarse and uncomfortable material worn next to the
skin (2 Sam. 3:31), fasting (2 Sam. 1:12) and beating one’s breast (Isa. 32:12).
These actions were considered appropriate signifying anguish in the ancient world
of Joseph’s day.
“Lamentation” is the noun mispedh, which is used to describe more of a
prolonged mourning custom that involves certain rituals, which we have noted
rather than mere expressions of emotion.
The public display of sorrow indicated the communal and not just individual,
nature of mourning. Mourning for the dead began immediately at death, went on as
the body was carried to the tomb, was observed at the tomb and lasted at least
seven days after the burial.
Genesis 50:11 Now when the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw
the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous
mourning for the Egyptians.” Therefore it was named Abel-mizraim, which is
beyond the Jordan. (NASB95)
The term “Canaanite” denotes those individuals descended from Canaan who
lived in the land west of the Jordan River before the conquest of Joshua and whose
western border was the Mediterranean Sea, especially in the lower and coastal
regions (Gen. 13:12; Num. 33:51).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
371
In Genesis 10:19, Moses defines the borders of the Canaanites because it is this
land that the Lord will dispossess for Israel and fulfill the prophecy of Noah in
Genesis 9:24-25 regarding Canaan. The northern border of the land of the
Canaanites went as far as Sidon, which is 120 miles north of Jerusalem and the
southern border extended to Gerar, which is about 11 miles south-southeast of
Gaza, which was on the coast 50 miles southeast of Jerusalem.
The Canaanites who lived in the highland regions were often called “Amorite.”
At times the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, were
called “Canaanites” but strictly speaking the nations who dwelt on the coasts or
river lowlands were called “Canaanite” (Nm. 13:29).
The Canaanites were so impressed with the massive state funeral that the
Egyptians were holding for Israel that the Canaanites named the place “Abelmizraim,” which means, “mourning of Egypt.”
Bruce K. Waltke commenting on the meaning of the name “Abel-mizraim,”
writes, “The name involves a pun. Hebrew `ebel means, “mourning,” and `abel
means “brook,” but only as the first part of a Canaanite place name (e.g. 2 Sam.
20:14, 15; Judg. 11:33; 2 Chron. 16:4). Hence the name means “brook of Egypt,” a
play with “mourning of Egypt.” (Genesis, page 621, Zondervan).
Genesis 50:12 Thus his sons did for him as he had charged them 13 for his
sons carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave of the field
of Machpelah before Mamre, which Abraham had bought along with the field
for a burial site from Ephron the Hittite. (NASB95)
Genesis 50:12-13 records Israel’s sons obeying his command to bury him in the
cave of Machpelah in the land of Canaan, and which command appears in Genesis
49:29-32. Also, by burying his father in the land of Canaan, Joseph was obeying
his father’s command to bury him in Canaan, which is recorded in Genesis 47:2931.
Genesis 23 records that for four hundred shekels of silver, Abraham purchased
from Ephron the Hittite “the cave of Machpelah” as a burial plot for Sarah,
himself and his descendants.
“Machpelah” is located west of modern Hebron on the outskirts and the city is
situated on the eastern slope of a narrow valley, which runs north and south and is
surrounded by rocky hills.
“Hebron” was located nineteen miles southwest of Jerusalem, on the way to
Beersheba and was 3,040 feet above sea level, dominating a beautiful and fruitful
area and ancient oaks (terebinths) filled the area.
“Mamre” was located in “Hebron” as indicated by the phrase “that is,
Hebron” in Genesis 23:19 and received its name from its owner, Mamre, who was
a chief of the Amorites who sought security in an alliance with Abram and was
blessed because of Abram (cf. Gen. 14:13, 24).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
372
“Ephron” was the son of Zohar and was among the crowd of Hittites who had
come to the gate of the city where Abraham negotiated the purchase of the burial
plot with the Hittites and was an outstanding individual among these people.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
373
Conclusion
So we come to the end of our study of the life of Jacob. We can all identify with
this man. Like ourselves, he was a man who was a sinner and committed terrible
sins and yet like us, God forgave him and treated him in grace. Like him we all
have made bad mistakes, and dysfunctional families and adversities. Yet, he
overcame all of this and was victorious by means of faith. Like him, we can
overcome all these things by means of our faith. What an encouragement his story
has been to myself and I hope for you as well.
Therefore, we can see that God’s grace characterized the life of Jacob as well as
faith in God’s promises. This too must characterize our lives if we are to bring
glory to God as he did.
What is grace? Grace is all that God is free to do in imparting unmerited
blessings to those who trust in Jesus Christ as Savior based upon the merits of
Christ and His death on the Cross. It is God treating us in a manner that we don’t
deserve and excludes any human works in order to acquire eternal salvation or
blessing from God.
Grace means that God saved us and blessed us despite ourselves and not
according to anything that we do but rather saved us and blessed us because of the
merits of Christ and His work on the Cross. It excludes any human merit in
salvation and blessing (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) and gives the Creator all the credit
and the creature none.
By means of faith, we accept the grace of God, which is a non-meritorious
system of perception, which is in total accord with the grace of God. Grace and
faith are totally compatible with each other and inseparable (1 Tim. 1:14) and
complement one another (Rom. 4:16; Eph. 2:8). Grace, faith and salvation are all
the gift of God and totally exclude all human works and ability (Eph. 2:8-9).
The unique Person of the Lord Jesus Christ and His finished work on the Crossis the source of grace (2 Cor. 8:9) and He is a gift from the Father (2 Cor. 9:15).
Jesus Christ was full of “grace and truth” (John 1:17) and the believer receives
the grace of God through Him (John 1:16). It is by the grace of God that Jesus
Christ died a substitutionary spiritual death for all mankind (Heb. 2:9). Therefore,
the throne in which Christ sits is a “throne of grace” (Heb. 4:16).
The grace of God has been extended to every member of the human race
because of the act of love and justice on the Cross. At the Cross, the Father
imputed the sins of every person in history-past, present and future to the
impeccable humanity of Christ in hypostatic union on the Cross and judged Him as
a substitute for the entire human race (Titus 2:11).
The message of God’s saving act in Christ is described as the “gospel of the
grace of God” (Acts 20:24), and the “word of His grace” (Acts 20:32; cf. 14:3).
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
374
By His grace, God justifies the undeserving and unworthy through faith in His Son
Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24). Grace is an absolute and is no longer grace if we are
saved on the basis of human works (Rom. 11:6).
A Christian is someone who is a “partaker” of the grace of God (Phil. 1:7) and
he is to live by the same principle of grace after salvation (Col. 2:6; Rom. 6:4).
Grace is the Christian’s sphere of existence (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; Col. 1:2). The
believer who rejects this principle is said to have “fallen from grace,” (Gal. 5:15).
God in His grace and love disciplines the believer in order to get the believer
back in fellowship with Himself (Heb. 12:5-12). He also trains the believer through
undeserved suffering in order to achieve spiritual growth (2 Cor. 12:7-11).
The believer is commanded to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord
Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18). The believer experiences the grace of God while in
fellowship with God, which is accomplished by obedience to the Word of God.
God in His grace has given the believer the ability to learn and apply bible doctrine
through the ministry of God the Holy Spirit in order to achieve spiritual maturity
(Jn. 16:13-15; 1 Cor. 2:9-16).
What is faith? It is one of three forms of perception: (1) Empiricism: Trusting in
one’s experiences in life to make decisions. (2) Rationalism: Trusting in one’s
intellect to make decisions in life. (3) Faith: Trusting in the authority of another to
make decisions in life.
Faith is the only system of perception that God will accept because it is
compatible with His grace policy.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that
not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. (NASB95)
A sinner is saved and receives the forgiveness of his sins-past, present and
future based upon the merits of the object of his faith, Jesus Christ and His death
on the Cross. Therefore, in relation to the sinner’s justification, the noun pistis
“faith” refers to making the non-meritorious decision to trust or place one’s
complete confidence in the Person of Jesus Christ for salvation.
The object of the Christian’s faith at the moment of salvation is the Lord Jesus
Christ and the object of his faith after conversion is the written Word of God.
Faith for the Christian is trusting in the authority of the Word of God in order to
govern one’s life. Faith is obedience to God’s commands and is the positive
response to God’s commands and acting upon those directions.
The Bible never separates faith from obedience. In fact, faith is demonstrated in
our lives by our obedience to God’s Word since faith produces obedience.
Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out
to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not
knowing where he was going. (NASB95)
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
375
Unbelief on the other hand is disobedient and is the negative response to God’s
commands and as a result the failure to act upon God’s commands.
Hebrews 3:12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an
evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. (NASB95)
After conversion the believer is to walk by means of faith in the Word of God.
2 Corinthians 5:7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. (NASB95)
Galatians 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who
live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by
faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. (NASB95)
Romans 1:16 For I am never ashamed of the gospel for it is as an eternal
spiritual truth God’s power resulting in deliverance for the benefit of
everyone who as an eternal spiritual truth believe, to the Jew first and then to
the Greek. 17 For by means of it, the righteousness originating from God is as
an eternal spiritual truth revealed from faith to faith. Just as it stands written
for all of eternity, “But the righteous shall choose for himself to live by means
of faith’” (Author’s translation)
Galatians 3:11 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is
evident; for, “THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”
(NASB95)
Hebrews 10:37 FOR YET IN A VERY LITTLE WHILE, HE WHO IS
COMING WILL COME, AND WILL NOT DELAY. 38 BUT MY
RIGHTEOUS ONE SHALL LIVE BY FAITH; AND IF HE SHRINKS
BACK, MY SOUL HAS NO PLEASURE IN HIM. (NASB95)
Just as the Christian received the Lord Jesus as his Savior by exercising faith in
Him for eternal salvation, so after salvation he is to live by the same principle of
faith (Compare Ephesians 2:8-9 with Colossians 2:5-7).
The principle of faith operates quite simply: (1) God speaks and we hear His
Word. (2) We trust His Word and act on it no matter what the circumstances are or
what the consequences may be.
The circumstances may be impossible, and the consequences frightening and
unknown but we obey God’s Word just the same and believe Him to do what is
right and what is best.
Hebrews 11:1-3 gives a definition of faith and also a description of the nature of
faith or in other words, what faith does and how it works.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction
of things not seen. 2 For by it the men of old gained approval. 3 By faith we
understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is
seen was not made out of things which are visible. (NASB95)
Faith is the positive response and obedience to God’s commands and
prohibitions and acting upon those directions whereas unbelief on the other hand is
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
376
disobedient and is the negative response to God’s commands and as a result the
failure to act upon God’s commands.
A Christian’s faith is based upon trusting in the authority of the Scriptures in
order to govern his life and is a non-meritorious system of perception. The object
of the sinner’s faith for eternal salvation is the Lord Jesus Christ and the object of
his faith after conversion is the written Word of God. In order for the Christian to
please God and gain His approval he must trust in the authority of the Scriptures to
govern his life (See Hebrews 11:6).
Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who
comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who
seek Him. (NASB95)
Fellowship with God is based upon a moment-by-moment walk of faith in the
Lord.
Galatians 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who
live, but Christ lives in me; and the {life} which I now live in the flesh I live by
faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. (NASB95)
Faith in the Word of God is the way to victory over the enemy, Satan.
1 John 5:4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is
the victory that has overcome the world -- our faith. (NASB95)
In fact, the believer is commanded to take up for himself the shield of faith.
Ephesians 6:16 In addition to everything, I solemnly charge all of you to
take up for yourselves your shield, which is your faith because that will enable
all of you to extinguish all the flaming arrows originating from the evil one.
(Author’s translation)
The believer acquires faith through hearing the communication of the Word of
Christ.
Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of
Christ. (NASB95)
Answered prayer requires faith and is thus an expression of confidence in God’s
ability to meet one’s need (Matt. 8:10; Luke 7:9; Matt. 9:22; Mark 5:34; Luke
8:48; Matt. 9:29; 17:20; Luke 17:5; Mark 9:29; Matt. 21:22; Mark 11:24; 1 John
3:21-22; James 1:5-8; 5:15).
True faith regards what has been requested as one’s own possession even
though the request has not been received. Faith is an attitude toward God, in which
the believer considers God to be faithful who will perform all that which He is
promised in His Word. This attitude is illustrated in Philippians 1:6.
The great Old Testament saints were men and women who lived by this
principle of faith. Hebrews 11:1-3 gives a definition of faith and also a description
of the nature of faith or in other words, what faith does and how it works. Hebrews
11 lists many individuals who express faith in God by being obedient to His Word,
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
377
thus God bears witness to them in His Word…what an honor. They honored God
by trusting in His promises, thus God honors them. These individuals are
summarized in Hebrews 12:1 as the “so great a cloud of witnesses.”
Hebrews 11:4-40 is devoted to a summary of the lives and labors of great men
and women of faith who lived in Old Testament dispensations, Abraham being one
of them and his wife Sarah as well. In each instance, you will find the same
elements of faith: (1) God spoke to them through His Word. (2) They responded to
His Word and obeyed God. (3) God bore witness about them.
The Lord will test the believer’s faith after conversion in order to produce
endurance in them.
James 1:2 Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various
trials, 2 knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance 3 and let
endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete,
lacking in nothing. (NASB95)
The Lord rewards the believer after his faith has been tested.
James 1:12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has
been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised
to those who love Him. (NASB95)
This principle is illustrated in the life of Abraham who is called the father of the
believer’s faith. Abraham was a man of faith. He was saved by faith and he walked
with God by means of faith in Him (Romans 4). It is also illustrated in the life of
his grandson Jacob, the man who fought with God and men and overcame with the
power of God, and which power he appropriated by means of his faith in God’s
promises.
2012 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
378