Genesis 29:1-35

SECOND SECTION

Jacob’s wives and children. Jacob and Rachel, Laban’s youngest daughter. First and second treaty with Laban. His involuntary consummation of marriage with Leah. The double marriage. Leah’s sons. Rachel’s dissatisfaction. The strife of the two women. The concubines. Jacob’s blessing of children

Genesis 29:1 to Genesis 30:24

1Then Jacob went on his journey [lifted up his feet] and came [fled] into the land of the people [children] of the east [morning]. 2And he looked, and behold a well in the field, and, lo, there were three flocks of sheep lying by it [before him]; for out of that well they watered the flocks: and a great stone was upon the well’s month. 3And thither were all the flocks gathered: and [then] they rolled the stone from the well’s mouth, and watered the sheep, and put the stone again upon the well’s mouth in his place. 4And Jacob said unto them, My brethren, whence be ye? And they said, Of Haran are we. 5And he said unto them, Know ye Laban the son of Nahor? And they said, We know him. 6And he said unto them, Is he well? And they said, He Isaiah 23:7 well: and behold, Rachel [lamb, ewe-lamb] his daughter cometh with the sheep. And [But] he said, Lo, it is yet high day, neither is it time that the cattle should be gathered together: water ye the sheep, and go and feed them. 8And they said, We cannot, until all the flocks be gathered together, and till [then] they roll the stone from the well’s mouth; then [and] we water the sheep.

9And while he yet spake with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep: for she kept them. 10And it came to pass, when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, that Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the well’s mouth, and watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother. 11And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept. 12And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s brother [nephew]. And that he was Rebekah’s son; and she ran and told her father. 13And it came to pass, when Laban heard the tidings of Jacob his sister’s son, that he ran to meet him, and embraced him and kissed him, and brought him to his house. And [Then] he told Laban all these things. 14And Laban said to him, Surely thou art my bone and my flesh. And he abode with him the space of a month.

15And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother [relative], shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be. 16And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah [scarcely, the wearied; still less, the dull, stupid, 17 as Fürst, rather: the pining, yearning, desiring], and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful [as to form] and well favored [as to countenance]. 18And Jacob loved Rachel: and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter. 19And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee than that I 20should give her to another man: abide with me. And [thus] Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him [were in his eyes] but a few days, for the love he had to her.

21And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. 22And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast [wedding feast]. 23And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her. 24And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah, Zilpah [Maurer: the dewy—from the trickling, dropping; Fürst: myrrh-juice] his maid, for an handmaid. 25And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did [have] not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me? 26And Laban said, It must not be so done [it is not the custom] in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27Fulfil her [wedding] week [the week of this one—fulfil, etc. is too strong], and we will give thee this also, for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. 28And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and [then] he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. 29And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah [Maurer, Fürst: tender. Gesenius: bashful, modest] his handmaid to be her maid. 30And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.

31And when the Lord saw that Leah was hated [displeasing] he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren. 32And Leah conceived, and bare a son; and she called his name Reuben [see there, a son]: for she said, Surely the Lord hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me. 33And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the Lord hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon [schimeon, hearing]. 34And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Now this£ time [at last] will my husband be joined unto me, because I have borne him three sons: therefore was his name called Levi 35[joining, cleaving]. And she conceived again, and bare a son; and she said, Now will I praise the Lord: therefore she called his name Judah [praise of God, literally, praised, viz., be Jehovah]; and left bearing.

Genesis 30:1 And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die. 2And Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel; and he said, Am I [then] in God’s stead, who hath with held from thee the fruit of the womb? 3And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her, and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may [and I shall] also have children 4[be built] by her. And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife. And Jacob went in unto her. 5And Bilhah conceived, and bare Jacob a Song of Song of Solomon 22:6 And Rachel said, God hath judged me [decreed me my right], and hath also heard my voice, and hath given me a son: therefore called she his name Dan [Judge; vindicator]. 7And Bilhah, Rachel’s maid, conceived again, and bare Jacob a second Song of Solomon, 8 Rachel said, With great wrestlings [wrestlings of God, Elohim] have I wrestled with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called his name Naphtali [my conflict or wrestler]. 9[And] When Leah saw that she had left bearing, she took Zilpah, her maid, and gave 10her Jacob to wife. And Zilpah, Leah’s maid, bare Jacob a Song of Solomon 22:1, Song of Solomon 22:11And Leah said, A 12troop cometh [with felicity, good fortune]: and she called his name Gad [fortune]. And Zilpah, Leah’s maid, bare Jacob a second Song of Solomon 22:1, Song of Solomon 22:13And Leah said, Happy am I [for my happiness], for the daughters will call me blessed: and she called his name Asher [blessedness].

14And Reuben went in the days of wheat harvest, and found mandrakes [love-apples] in the field, and brought them unto his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, Give me, I pray thee, of thy son’s mandrakes. 15And she said unto her Is it a small matter that thou hast taken my husband? and wouldest thou take away my son’s mandrakes also? And Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie with thee to-night for thy son’s mandrakes. 16And [as] Jacob came out of the field in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him, and said, Thou must come in unto me; for surely I have hired thee with my 17son’s mandrakes. And he lay with her that night. And God [Elohim] hearkened unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare Jacob the fifth Song of Solomon 22:1, Song of Solomon 22:18And Leah said, God hath given me my hire [wages, reward], because I have given my maiden to my husband: and she called his name Issachar [Yisashcar, it is the reward]. 19And Leah conceived again, and bare Jacob the sixth Song of Solomon 22:2, Song of Solomon 22:20And Leah said, God hath endued me with a good dowry [presented me with a beautiful present]; now will my husband dwell with me, because I have borne him six sons: and she called his name Zebulun [dwelling, dwelling together]. 21And afterwards she bare a daughter, and called her name Dinah [judged, justified, judgment].

22And God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her, and opened her womb. 23And she conceived, and bare a son; and said, God hath taken away my reproach: 24And she called his name Joseph [may he add]; and said, The Lord shall add to me another [a second] son.

GENERAL PRELIMINARY REMARKS

1. The first half of the history of Jacob’s sojourn in Mesopotamia is a history of his love, his marriages, and his children. Bridal love, in its peculiar splendor of heart and emotion, never appeared so definitely in Genesis, after Adam’s salutation to Eve, as in the present case. With respect to the moral motives, by means of which Jacob became involved in polygamy, notwithstanding his exclusive bridal love, compare the preface p. lxxvi. We may divide the history into the following stages: 1. Jacob’s arrival at the shepherds’ well in Haran (Genesis 29:1-8); 2. Jacob’s salutation to Rachel and his reception into Laban’s house (Genesis 29:9-14); 3. Jacob’s covenant and service for Rachel and the deception befalling him (Genesis 29:15-25). How Jacob, under the divine providence, through the deception practised upon him, became very rich, both in sons and with respect to the future. (Göthe: It has always been proved true, That he whom God deceives, is deceived to his advantage.) 4. His renewed service for Rachel (Genesis 29:26-30); 5. The first-born sons of Leah (Genesis 29:31-35); 6. Rachel’s dejection and the concubinage of Bilhah, her handmaid (30. Genesis 29:1-8); 7. Leah’s emulation, and her handmaid Zilpah (Genesis 29:9-13; Genesis 1:8. Leah’s last children (Genesis 29:14-21); 9. Rachel, Joseph’s mother (Genesis 29:22-24).

2. Knobel finds here a mixture of Jehovistic representation with the original text. He knows so little what to make of the ancient mode of writing narratives that he remarks upon Genesis 29:16-17 : “Moreover the same writer who has spoken of Rachel already (Genesis 29:9-12), could not properly introduce the two daughters of Laban, as is done in the present instance.”

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1.Genesis 29:1. Jacob’s arrival at the shepherd’s well in Haran. Then Jacob went on his journey.—This consoling and refreshing manifestation reanimated him, so that he goes cheerfully on his journey. Of course, he must use his feet, his bridal tour differs from that of Eliezer, although he himself is the wooer. Into the land of the people of the East.—The choice of this expression, no doubt, indicates that from Bethel he gradually turned eastward, and crossing the Jordan and passing through the northern part of Arabia Deserta, he came to Mesopotamia, which is also included here. He looked, and behold.—He looks around to find out where he is. Wells, however, are not only waymarks in nomadic districts, but also places of gathering for the shepherds. It was not a well of living water,—at least not Eliezer’s well near Haran,—but a cistern, as is proved from the stone covering it. It seems to have been in the midst of the plain of Haran, and the city itself was not yet in sight. There were three flocks of sheep lying by it.—Scenes of this description were frequently seen in the ancient Orient, (Genesis 24:11, etc.; Exodus 2:16, etc.,) and may still be seen today (Robinson: “Researches,” ii. pp. 180, 357, 371; iii. 27, 250). Watering troughs of stone are placed around the well, and the rule is, that he who comes first, waters his flocks first (V. Schubert: “Travels,” ii. p. 453; Burkhardt: “Syria,” p. 128, etc.). Among the Arabian Bedouins the wells belong to separate tribes and families, and strangers are not permitted to use them without presents, i.e. pay (Burkhardt: “Bedouins,” p. 185; Robinson, iii. p. 7; comp. Numbers 20:17; Numbers 20:19; Numbers 21:22). They are, therefore, often the cause of strifes (Genesis 26:19, etc.). The Arabians cover them very skilfully, so that they remain concealed from strangers (Diod. Sic., ii. 48, 19, 94). Even now they are covered with a large stone (see Robinson, ii. p. 180). Knobel. Robinson: “Most of the cisterns are covered with a large, thick flat stone, in the centre of which a round hole is cut, which forms the mouth of the cistern. This hole, in many instances, we found covered with a heavy stone, to the removal of which two or three men were requisite.” As to the cisterns (see also Keil, p. 203). And a great stone.—This does not mean that all the shepherds were to come together, that by their united strength they might roll it away. The shepherds of these three herds must wait for the rest of the shepherds with their herds, because the watering of the herds was common and must take place in due order. The remark, no doubt, indicates, however, that the stone was too heavy to be removed by one of the shepherds. The shepherds also appear to have made the removal of the stone as easy as possible to them. My Brethren.—A friendly salutation between the shepherds. Of Haran.—[Haran lay about four hundred and fifty miles northeast from Beer-sheba. It would, therefore, be a journey of fifteen days, if Jacob walked at the rate of thirty miles a day. Murphy. A. G.] From this it does not follow certainly that the city was far off, still Laban might have had tents on the plains for his shepherds. Laban, the son of Nahor.—Nahor was his grandfather. Bethuel, his father, here retires into the background, just as in Rebekah’s history. It is yet high day.—According to Starke, Jacob, as a shepherd, wished to remind these shepherds of their duty. It is obviously the prudent Jacob who acts here. He wishes to remove the shepherds, in order to meet his cousin Rachel, who is approaching, alone (see Keil). He thus assumes that they could water their flocks separately, and afterwards drive again to the pasture.

2.Genesis 29:8. Jacob’s salutation to Rachel, and his reception into Laban’s house. For she kept them.—It is customary among the Arabians of Sinai, that the virgin daughters drive the herds to the pasture (see Burkhardt: “Bedouins,” p. 283). Knobel, Exodus 2:16. And rolled the stone.—The strong impression that the beautiful Rachel made upon her cousin Jacob is manifested in two ways. He thinks himself powerful enough to roll the stone from the mouth of the cistern out of love to her, and disregards the possibility that the trial might fail. At the same time, too, he boldly disregards the common rule of the shepherds present. Rachel’s appearance made him eager, as formerly Rebekah’s appearance even the old Eliezer, when he took out the bracelets before he knew her. The power of beauty is also recognized here upon sacred ground. Tuch thinks that the united exertion of the shepherds would have been necessary, and the narrative, therefore, boasts of a Samson-like strength in Jacob. But there is a difference between Samson-like strength and the heroic power of inspired love. [Perhaps, however, there was mingling with this feeling the joy which naturally springs from finding himself among his kindred, after the long, lonely and dangerous journey through the desert. A. G.]—Jacob kissed Rachel.—“The three-fold אחי אמו shows that he acted thus as cousin (rolling the stone from the well’s mouth, etc.). As such he was allowed to kiss Rachel openly, as a brother his sister (Song of Solomon 8:1).” Knobel. Yet his excitement betrays him even here, since he did not make known his relationship with her until afterwards. And wept.—Teals of joy, of reanimation after a long oppression and sorrow (Genesis 45:15; Genesis 46:29). He Wept aloud, with uplifted voice. Brother here equivalent to nephew (Genesis 14:16; Genesis 24:48). When Laban heard the tidings.—That Jacob made the whole journey on foot might have caused suspicion in the mind of Laban. But he is susceptible of nobler feelings, as is seen from the subsequent narration (Genesis 31:24), although he is generally governed by selfish motives. And he told Laban.—Surely, the whole cause of his journey, by which he also explained his poor appearance as the son of the rich Isaac. In the view of Keil, he relates only the circumstances mentioned from Genesis 29:2-12. Surely thou art my flesh and my bone.—He recognizes him fully from his appearance and his communication, as his near relative. The space of a month.—Literally, during some, an indefinite number of days. It was yet uncertain, from day to day, how they would arrange matters.

3.Genesis 29:15. Jacob’s suit and service for Rachel, and the deception practised upon him. Tell me what shall thy wages be.—This expression is regarded by Keil already as a mark of Laban’s selfishness, but there is no ground for this view. It is rather to be supposed that Laban wished to open the way for his love suit, which, on account of his poor condition he had not yet ventured to press. We see afterwards, indeed, that Laban willingly gives both his daughters to him. We do not, however, wish to exclude the thought, that in the meantime he may have recognized a skilful and useful shepherd in Jacob, and besides acted from regard to his own interest, especially since he knew that Jacob possessed a great inheritance at home. The name of the elder was Leah.—It is remarkable, that in the explanation of this name we are mostly inclined to follow derived significations of the word לאה (see Fürst upon this verb). The word רַךְ used to describe the eyes of Leah, means simply: weak or dull, whence the Arabians have made, moist or blear-eyed. Leah’s eyes were not in keeping with the Oriental idea of beauty, though otherwise she might be a woman greatly blessed. “Eyes which are not clear and lustrous. To the Oriental, but especially to the Arabian, black eyes, full of life and fire, clear and expressive, dark eyes, are considered the principal part of female beauty. Such eyes he loves to compare with those of the Gazelle, (Hamasa, i. p. 557, etc.” Knobel—Rachel, the third renowned beauty in the patriarchal family. If authentic history was not in the way, Leah, as the mother of Judah, and of the Davidic Messianic line, ought to have carried off the prize of beauty after Sarah and Rebekah. And well favored. “Beautiful as to her form and beautiful as to her countenance.” Beside the more general designation: beautiful as to her form, the second: beautiful מַרְאֶה must surely have a more definite signification: beautiful as to her countenance, and, indeed, with a reference to her beautiful eyes, which were wanting to Leah. Thus the passage indirectly says that Leah’s form was beautiful. Serve thee seven years for Rachel.—Instead of wages he desires the daughter, and instead of a service of an indefinite number of days he promises a service of seven years. “Jacob’s service represents the price which, among the Orientals, was usually paid for the wife which was to be won (see Winer, Realw., under marriage). The custom still exists. In Kerek, a man without means, renders service for five or six years (Ritter, Erdkunde, xv. p. 674), and in Hauran, Burkhardt (“Syria,” p. 464), met a young man who had served eight years for his bare support, and then received for a wife the daughter of his master, but must render service still.” Knobel. On the contrary, Keil disputes the certainty of the assumption that the custom selling their daughters to men was general at that time. And we should certainly be nearer the truth in explaining many usages of the present border Asia from patriarchal relations, than to invert everything according to Knobel’s view. Keil holds that Jacob’s seven years of service takes the place of the customary dowry and the presents given to the relatives; but he overlooks the fact that the ideas of buying and presenting (and barter) are not as far apart in the East as with us. Nor can we directly infer the covetousness of Laban from Jacob’s acceptance of the offer, although his ignoble, selfish, narrow-minded conduct, as it is seen afterwards, throws some light also on these Eastern transactions. It is better that I give her to thee.—“Among all Bedouin Arabians the cousin has the preference to strangers (Burkhardt, “Bedouin,” p. 219), and the Druses in Syria always prefer a relative to a rich stranger (Volney, “Travels,” ii. p. 62). It is generally customary throughout the East, that a man marries his next cousin; he is not compelled to do it, but the right belongs to him exclusively, and she is not allowed to marry any other without his consent. Both relatives, even after their marriage, call each other cousin (Burkhardt, “Bedouins,” p., 91, and “Arabian Proverbs,” p. 274, etc.; Layard, “Nineveh and Babylon,” p. 222; Lane, “Manners and Customs,” i. p. 167). Knobel. They seemed unto him but a few days.—So far, namely, as that his great love for Rachel made his long service a delight to him; but, on the other hand, it is not said that he did not long for the end of these seven years. Yet he was cheerful and joyful in hope, which is in perfect keeping with Jacob’s character. A Feast.—Probably Laban intended, at the great nuptial feast which he prepared, to facilitate Jacob’s deception by the great bustle and noise, but then also to arrange things so, that after seven days the wedding might be considered a double wedding. For it is evident that he wishes to bind Jacob as firmly and as long as possible to himself (see Genesis 30:27). Leah, his daughter.—The deception was possible, through the custom, that the bride was led veiled to the bridegroom and the bridal chamber. Laban probably believed, as to the base deception, that he would be excused, because he had already in view the concession of the second daughter to Jacob. And Laban gave unto her Zilpah.—We cannot certainly infer that he was parsimonious, because he gave but one handmaid to Leah, since he undoubtedly thought already of the dowry of Rachel with a second handmaid. The number of Rebekah’s handmaids is not mentioned (Genesis 24:61). Behold, it was Leah.—[“This is the first retribution Jacob experiences for the deceitful practises of his former days.” He had, through fraud and cunning, secured the place and blessing of Esau,—he, the younger, in the place of the elder; now, by the same deceit, the elder is put upon him in the place of the younger. What a man sows that shall he also reap. Sin is often punished with sin. A. G.] See Doctrinal and Ethical paragraphs.

4.Genesis 29:26. His renewed service for Rachel. It must not be so done.—“The same custom exists among the East Indians (see Manu.: “Statutes,” iii. 160; Rosenm., A. u. “Mod. Orient,” and Von Bohlen, upon this place). Even in the Egypt of to-day, the father sometimes refuses also to give in marriage a younger daughter before an older one (Lane: “Customs and Manners,” i. p. 169).” Knobel. Delitzsch adds the custom in old imperial Germany. This excuse does not justify in the least Laban’s deception, but there was, however, a sting for Jacob in this reply, viz., in the emphasis of the right of the first-born. But Laban’s offer that followed, and in which now truly his ignoble selfishness is manifest, calmed Jacob’s mind. Fulfil her week.—Lit., make full the week with this one, i.e., the first week after the marriage, which is due to her, since the wedding generally lasted one week (Judges 14:12; Tob 11:19). [Her week—the week of Leah, to confirm the marriage with her by keeping the usual wedding-feast of seven days. But if Leah was put upon him at the close of the feast of seven days, then it is Rachel’s week, the second feast of seven days which is meant. The marriage with Rachel was only a week after that with Leah. The seven years’ service for her was rendered afterwards. A. G.]—And we will.—Genesis 31:1; Genesis 29:23; probably Laban and his sons. Laban also, as Rebekah’s brother, took part in her marriage arrangements. Rachel his daughter.—Within eight days Jacob therefore held a second wedding, but he fulfilled the service for her afterwards. Laban, therefore, not only deceived Jacob by Leah’s interposition, as Jacob tells him to his face, but he overreached him also in charging him with seven years of service for Leah. Thus Jacob becomes entangled in polygamy, in the theocratic house which he had sought in order to close a theocratic marriage, first by the father and afterwards by the daughters.

5.Genesis 29:31. The first four sons of Leah. When the Lord saw.—The birth of Leah’s first four sons is specifically referred to Jehovah’s grace; first, because Jehovah works above all human thoughts, and regards that which is despised and of little account (Leah was the despised one, the one loved less, comparatively the hated one, Deuteronomy 21:15); secondly, because among her first four sons were found the natural first-born (Reuben), the legal first-born (Levi), and the Messianic first-born (Judah); even Simeon, like the others, is given by Jehovah in answer to prayer. Jacob’s other sons are referred to Elohim not only by Jacob and Rachel (Genesis 30:2; Genesis 30:6; Genesis 30:8), but also by Leah (Genesis 29:18; Genesis 29:20), and by the narrator himself (Genesis 29:17), for Jacob’s sons in their totality sustain not only a theocratic but also a universal destination. He opened her womb.—He made her fruitful in children, which should attach her husband to her. But theocratic husbands did not esteem their wives only according to their fruitfulness (see 1 Samuel 9:1) It is a one-sided view Keil takes when he says: “Jacob’s sinful weakness appears also in his marriage state, because he loved Rachel more than Leah, and the divine reproof appears, because the hated one was blessed with children but Rachel remained barren for a long time.” All we can say is, it was God’s pleasure to show in this way the movements of his providence over the thoughts of men, and to equalize the incongruity between these women. Reuben.—Lit., Reuben: Behold, a son. Joyful surprise at Jehovah’s compassion. From the inference she makes: now, therefore, my husband will love me, her deep, strong love for Jacob, becomes apparent, which had no doubt, also, induced her to consent to Laban’s deception. Simeon, her second son, receives his name from her faith in God as a prayer-answering God. Levi.—The names of the sons are an expression of her enduring powerful experience, as well as of her gradual resignation. After the birth of the first one, she hopes to win, through her son, Jacob’s love in the strictest sense. After the birth of the second she hoped to be put on a footing of equality with Rachel, and to be delivered from her disregard. After the birth of the third one she hoped at least for a constant affection. At the birth of the fourth she looks entirely away from herself to Jehovah. Judah.—Praised. A verbal noun of the future Hophal from ידה. The literal meaning of the name, therefore, is: “ shall be praised,” and may thus be referred to Judah as the one “that is to be praised,” but it may also mean that Jehovah is to be praised on account of him (see Delitzsch, p. 465). [See Romans 2:29. He is a Jew inwardly, whose praise is of God. Wordsworth refers here to the analogies between the patriarchs and apostles. A. G.]—She left bearing.—Not altogether (see Genesis 30:16, etc.), but for a time.

6. Rachel’s dejection, and the connection with Bilhah, her maidit went down westward to the border of the Japhletite, unto the border of Beth-horon, the nether, and to Gezer; and the goings out thereof were at (or, toward) the sea. The border followed from Bethel toward Ataroth a northerly, then a southwestern, and finally a decidedly western course (see the map). The Japhletite (הַיַּפְלֵטִי), only here as a patronymic; the prop. name יַפְלֵט (whom He, i.e. God saves, Gesen.), 1 Chronicles 7:32-33. On Beth-horon comp. partly Joshua 10:10, partly Joshua 18:13. Gezer (גֶזֶר), as the seat of a Canaanite king mentioned already Joshua 10:33; Joshua 12:12; according to Joshua 21:21; 1 Chronicles 6:52, a city of the priests; not yet discovered by modern travellers. Knobel seeks the city northwest of Beth-horon, where Menke has introduced the name. Comp. also von Raumer, p. 191, and his map, where he also has placed it northwest of Beth-horon.

Joshua 16:4. “North of the line indicated Ephraim and Manasseh took their possession.” It is therefore only the south line of both tribes, which is at the same time the north line of Benjamin, and as such is given in inverse order as before mentioned, in Joshua 18:12-13.

b. Joshua 16:5-10. The Province of the Tribe of Ephraim. Joshua 16:5. The south border is first given. Ataroth-addar appears as the starting-point, identical, according to Joshua 18:13, with our Ataroth, Joshua 16:2. Assuming this, “the author notices only the western half of the south border, and omits the eastern half,” for Beth-horon, whether the upper as here, to the lower as mentioned in Joshua 16:2, lies west, or more accurately still, southwest of Ataroth-addar. We might, it is true, and Knobel proposes this as an alternative, read עַטָרוֹת, and understand the Ataroth mentioned Joshua 16:7, which would then make the eastern part of the south border to be drawn. But in that case, ותָאַר or וְעָבַר would, it seems to us, be inserted between the two names. The first supposition therefore appears preferable, according to which we are to understand that the south border of Ephraim in its western half is specified from Ataroth-addar to Beth-horon. But even thus we have not, if we compare Joshua 16:3, this western half of the line at all complete; for from Joshua 16:3, the border proceeds still to Gezer, nay even to the sea. And the LXX. have here after Beth-horon καὶ Γάζαρα. Perhaps this, as well as what is mentioned besides, Joshua 16:3, has here fallen out. At all events we have, as Joshua 16:6 will show, to deal with a corrupt text, in which the first words of Joshua 16:6 to and including הַיָּמָה might easily have formed the conclusion of ver 5, to which they would admirably suit. [Verse 5 would thus end—Beth-horon, the upper; and the border went out to the sea]. Then the south border at least of Ephraim, from Ataroth-addar to the sea, would be completely given.

Joshua 16:6. Keil says, in reference to this verse: “With Joshua 16:6 I know as little as my predecessors how to begin. It would appear that Joshua 16:6-8 should give the northern boundary of the land of Ephraim, and that from a central point, in Joshua 16:6-7 toward the east, then in Joshua 16:8 toward the west,” as analogous to which, Knobel, who shares this view, adduces the south boundary of Zebulun, Joshua 19:10-12, and the division of the places of Benjamin, Joshua 18:21-28, as also the west border of Naphtali, Joshua 19:33 ff. “In this view, however,” as Keil further remarks, “the first clause of Joshua 16:6 is perfectly inexplicable, and must be corrupt.” Perhaps there originally stood “on the north the border went out from Michmethah, for according to Joshua 17:7, the border of Manasseh went ‘from Asher to Michmethah.’ ” It seems to us still better to assume that it originally stood:

וַיָצָא הַגְּבוּל הַיָּמָה
מִמִּכְמְתָה מִצָפוֹן.

If that were so it is obvious that the twice recurring וַיָּצָא הַגּבוּל הַיָּמָה (namely, at the end of Joshua 16:5, and at the beginning of Joshua 16:6), must have fallen away once. Let us now by this extension of Keil’s very appropriate correction restore the text, and we gain a reading at least in some degree acceptable, by which (1) Joshua 16:5 receives a good ending, and (2) Joshua 16:6 an intelligible beginning, and the whole would mean thus: And the border went out seaward, i.e. toward the west, from Michmethah on the north side, i.e. north of Michmethah. Michmethah (LXX.: Μαχθώθ) lay according to Joshua 17:7, east from Shechem. See further on Joshua 17:7. Thus we should have given the starting-point of the eastern half of the northern boundary of Ephraim, as lying north of Michmethah in the west of the land. But then, it proceeds, the border went about eastward unto Taanath-shiloh, and passed by it on the east to Janohah. Taanath-shiloh, now Tana, Ain Tana, a place of ruins, southeast of Nablus (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 295). Janoah, “according to the Onom. s. v. Ἰανώ, Janon, twelve miles, i.e. near three hours east of Neapolis, now a ruin, Janun, somewhat over two hours southeast of Nablus, Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 297” (Knobel). The border, accordingly, went from Michmethah to Janohah in a southeast direction, as Menke has indicated.

Joshua 16:7. From Janohah it went down to Ataroth, and to Naarath, and came to (struck) Jericho, and went out at the Jordan. Keil holds this Ataroth to be the same as Ataroth, Joshua 16:2, Ataroth-addar (Joshua 16:5; Joshua 18:13), thus making it the Atara discovered by Robinson (iii. 80, not that mentioned ii. 315), one and a half hours southwest of Jiljilieh, as Robinson himself also believes. Knobel explains that our Ataroth here in Joshua 16:7 cannot be identified, but must certainly, from יָרַד have lain nearer the Jordan, possibly one of the two Ataroths which the Onom., s. h. v., refers to in the district of Jerusalem. We shall come upon the question again, Joshua 18:13. Naarath = Naaran, 1 Chronicles 7:28, in the east of Ephraim. Onom.: “ Naorath villa, in quinto milliario Jerichus,” i.e. two hours from Jericho (Keil, Knobel, von Raumer, p. 215). Struck Jericho, i.e. the territory of Jericho which city, according to Joshua 18:21, belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. The border of Ephraim thus touched the northern side of this territory, comp. Joshua 18:12.

Joshua 16:8. Now follows the western half of the north border of Ephraim, described as follows: From Tappuah the border goes (יֵלֵךְ) westward to the water-course of Kanah, and the goings out thereof were at [to] the sea. Tappuah, distinct from the Tappuah (Joshua 15:34) and Beth-tap-puah (Joshua 15:53), in Judah, concerning the etymology of which we have already spoken; the residence of a Canaanite king (Joshua 12:24). Its site is doubtful. Knobel: “Probably Kefr Kud with its important well, by which the great road from Beisan and Zerin passes toward Ramleh (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 121 ff.) as in the Roman times a military road passed from Cesaræa to Scythopolis past Capercota (Tab. Peuting. ix. f., in Menke, Map vi. where an extract from the Tab. Peuting. is found”). The fact that the place is called (Joshua 17:7) עֵין ת׳, while Kefr Kud has a valuable well, would seem to favor the identity of the two places; but it may be maintained on the other hand, (1) that Kefr Kud lies too far north on the border of Manasseh toward Issachar, while it should lie on the border of Manasseh toward Ephraim (see Menke’s Map viii. compared with Map iii); (2) that the old name does not at all appear in the present name Kefr Kud. This is true rather of the present Belad (land) Tafua northeast of Shechem, toward which von Raumer, though not without hesitation, inclines. We hear of a land of Tappuah in Joshua 17:8 as the district belonging to En-tappuah. Van de Velde (Mem. p. 357) holds it to be Atuf, four hours E. N. E. of Shechem. Very improbable. Hence we decide for Belad Tafua, against which Keil brings the objection, that this opinion does not agree with the אֶל־הַיָּמִין (ch Joshua 17:7), and therefore he concludes that here also the text is corrupt. See further on Joshua 17:7, where we must at all events return again to this passage. Water-course of Kana (Reed-brook), see Joshua 17:9.

Joshua 16:9. To this province belong also the cities separated in the land of Manasseh for the children of Ephraim, of which, however, only Tappuah is mentioned Joshua 17:8. Instead of the elsewhere “unheard of” מִבְדָּלוֹת, Knobel proposes to read נִבְדָּלוֹת: Gesen. מֻבְדָּלוֹת. Maurer and Keil regard it as a substantive formed after the analogy of מִספָּתוֹת ,מִדְרָךְ, and other words. Maurer translates loca selecta. To me the change of Chireq into Kibbuts, as proposed by Gesen., appears the most simple, and thus we have a part. Hophal.

Joshua 16:10. An addition similar to Joshua 15:63. They became tributary servants (עֹבֵד וַיְהִי־לְמַם). In Genesis 49:15 the same expression is used concerning Issachar. According to 1 Kings 9:16, Pharaoh, in the beginning of the reign of Solomon, took Gezer, burned the city and drove out of it the Canaanites. Hence the LXX. add to our verse: ́Ἓως� (ΑΕΧ. τὴν πόλιν) καὶ ἐνέπρησεν αὐτὴν ἐν πυρί και τοὺς φερεζαίους, καὶ τοὺς κατοικοῦντας εν Γάζερ ἐξεκέντησαν (ΑΕΧ. εξεκέςτησεν) καὶ ἔδωκεν ἐν φερνῇ τῇ θυγατρὶ αὐτοῦ. Manifestly transferred ad libitum from 1 Kings 9:16. Knobel, Genesis 49:15, translates מַס־עֹבֵד, er ward zu Frohn des Arbeiters, i.e. he fell under tributary labor, as he himself further on explains. Lange, more poetically and more clearly: “He is become subject to tributary service.” We render the phrase here in prose, with De Wette “subject to tributary service.” The common rendering: “subject to tribute” which Bunsen still retains, gives the erroneous idea that the Canaanites had to pay a tribute in money, like the tributary states in the Turkish empire. The expression is used elsewhere, with the exception of Genesis 49:15, “of the Canaanites who became subject to the Hebrews (as Joshua 17:13; 1 Kings 9:21; Judges 1:28; Judges 1:33), and of prisoners taken in war whom the Hebrews made slaves (Deuteronomy 20:11; Isaiah 31:8)” (Knobel). Comp. also Keil on Kings, pp. 44 and 67 [Germ.].

c. Joshua 17:1-13. Portion of the Tribe of Manasseh. The description of this province by its boundaries, beginning Joshua 17:7, is preceded by some genealogical notices concerning the families of the tribe. Of these that of Machir had already received its territory beyond the Jordan.

Joshua 17:1. And there was the lot for the tribe of Manasseh. After it had fallen to Ephraim, Manasseh’s turn came. These introductory words refer only to the country allotted to this tribe west of the Jordan (Joshua 17:7-13). This lay north of the possession of Ephraim in a fertile and beautiful region.

For he was the first-born of Joseph,Genesis 41:51; Genesis 48:14. Keil: “the כִּי is not to be pressed, and the whole remark is made only with reference to the following genealogical statements.” Better Knobel: “Wherefore (because he was Joseph’s first-born) he received yet a possession in Canaan also, the land of the fathers, God’s land.” למָכִיר is placed first and is afterwards taken up by לוֹ after וַיְהִי, thus: “To Machir. … (and) to him fell Gilead and Bashan.” Why is stated in the parenthetical clause, “because he was a man of war,” Numbers 32:29 ff. This portion of the tribe, the author would have us understand, had nothing to receive west of the Jordan. They had their part already on the east side.

Joshua 17:2. The other sons of Manasseh follow, to whom the lot fell in west Palestine. They are mentioned in Numbers 26:30-32, where instead of אֲבִיעֵזֶר stands אִיעֵזֶר. By an error of transcription, as Keil conjectures, the ב appears to have fallen out. Instead of זְכָרִים to read נוֹתָרִים, as Knobel proposes, is not justifiable; rather, since in genealogies בְּנֵי may indicate all (male and female) posterity, while here, in what follows, female descendants also are mentioned, the זְכָרִים is added for perspicuity” (Keil).

Joshua 17:3. It had been stated also in Numbers 26:33 that Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, had no sons but only daughters. Zelophehad himself, according to Numbers 27:3, had died in the wilderness, but the daughters declare it an injustice (Numbers 27:4) that their father’s name should perish, and that too when he had not been of those that rose up against the Lord in the company of Korah. Moses agrees with them, and at their request grants their wish, an inheritance among their brothers. By this the name of Zelophehad was preserved, which could not have been the case without the possession of an estate to which the name of the original proprietor attached. The law which governed the case is found in Numbers 27:8-11 (compared with Numbers 36:6-10), occasioned by this occurrence. They were accordingly heir daughters, comp. Knobel on Numbers 27:1 ff.

Joshua 17:4. Now, since the land was divided, they claim their right, appealing to the command of God through Moses. Eleazar and Joshua without objection immediately promise what they desire.

Joshua 17:5-6. “According to this the inheritance coming to the Manassites had to be divided into ten parts, since the male posterity fell into five families, and so received five parts, while the sixth family, that of Hepher, was divided again into five families, through his grand-daughters, the five daughters of Zelophehad, who married men of the other families of their paternal tribe (Numbers 36:1-10), and received each her special share of the land” (Keil). Because, therefore, the daughters, as heirs, obtained their possession among the male descendants of Manasseh, the inheritance in western Palestine must need be divided into ten parts, while the land of Gilead went to the remaining Manassites. The genealogy is for the rest by no means clear. Comp. Knobel on Numbers 26:29-34; Keil on Joshua 17:1 of this chapter.

Joshua 17:7-13. Portion of the Western Branch of the Tribe of Manasseh. The author gives the boundary again from east to west, as in the case of Judah (Joshua 15:2 ff.), the sons of Joseph (Joshua 16:1 ff.) and Benjamin (Joshua 18:12 ff.). So the author of the Apocalypse also names the gates of the New Jerusalem, beginning from the east (Revelation 21:13), and Ezekiel designates the several tribe divisions in like manner from east to west (Ezekiel 48:1 ff.).

And the border of Manasseh was from Asher to Michmethah, that lieth before Shechem; and the border went along on [toward] the right hand unto the inhabitants of En-tappuah. What border is meant, the north or south? Knobel thinks the former, Keil and Bunsen the south border. The starting-point lies unquestionably in the east. Asher (אָשֵׁר), fifteen Roman miles from Shechem toward Bethshean (Scythopolis), perhaps Teyasir (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 306 f.), or Jafir (Van de Velde, ii. 295, apud. von Raumer, p. 148). This however is not certain, but only so far sure that Asher is to be sought, according to the statement of the Onom., on the road from Shechem to Bethshean, hence in the eastern part of the territory of Manasseh.

Thence the border goes to Michmethah which we have already met with at Joshua 16:5. This Michmethah (מִכְמְתָה, perhaps “hiding-place,” from כָּמַת, Gesen.) lay, as our passage would indicate, before, i.e. according to the customary use of עַל־פְּנֵי, east or northeast of Shechem, unless, as Knobel assumes, עַל־פְּנֵי is to be taken here in reference to a more remote distance = מוּל, Deuteronomy 11:30. In this case, Kubatijeh (on Menke’s Map viii. written Kabatijeh) or Kabaat (Buckingham, Syria, i. p. 453), Kabate in Seetzen (ii. p. 166), lying exactly north of Shechem, on the road from Shechem to Jenin would in his view offer itself for comparison. The etymological relationship of the two words is thus established by Knobel: “מ doubtless is to be regarded, with the LXX. as the plural of a sing. מִכְמְתָה, for which they may probably have used also כְּמָתָה (see on Joshua 12:18). Then, since m and b are frequently interchanged (see on Joshua 3:16), the present name of the place agrees, etc.” Against this we would oppose the following considerations: (1) It appears to us that the operation by which the relationship between the names Michmethah and Kubatijeh, or Kabaat, or Kabate, is attempted to be proved, is an exceedingly violent one. (2) In Deuteronomy 11:30מוּל does indeed stand for a northwest direction, but it is precisely מוּל that stands there, meaning, in a quite general way, over against, and not the more definite עַל־פְּנֵי concerning which Knobel himself admits that in geographical statements it is “certainly for the most part to the east,”—precisely in the same way, Knobel might have added, as is the case with לִפְנֵי (Genesis 23:17; Genesis 25:18; Deuteronomy 32:49). (3) If Michmethah is to be sought so far north, then Joshua 16:6, where it is brought in to determine the north border of Ephraim which lies south of Manasseh, is inexplicable. Rather may it be said, that (a) the statement of this passage: אשר על־פני שכם and ( greater strength of the mere natural life predominates. Joseph, on the contrary, the favorite son of the wife loved with a bridal love, is distinguished from his brethren, as the separated (Genesis 1:49) among them, as a child of a nobler spirit, whilst the import of his life is not as rich for the future as that of Judah.

9. If we would regard the deception and imposition practised upon Jacob as at all endurable, we must assume, on the one hand, Leah’s fanatic and vehement love; on the other, his own perfect illusion. This unconscious error and confusion of nature, seems almost to have been transmitted to Reuben, the first-born (Genesis 35:22; Genesis 49:21); and therefore, in consequence of his offence, he also lost the birthright. We cannot, however, entirely concur in Luther’s view, which Delitzsch approves, that while there was nothing adulterous in the connection of Jacob and Leah, it was still extra-natural, and in that sense, monstrous. There was undoubtedly an impure and unnatural element in it. But we must bear in mind, as was remarked above, not only Leah’s love, but also Jacob’s self-oblivion, in which the free choice is generally limited and restrained by the blind forces of the night-life, through and in which God works with creative energy. It is the moment in which the man falls back into the hand of God as the creator.

10. The difference between the house at Haran and Isaac’s house at Beer-sheba, appears from this, that Laban, entangled Jacob in polygamy. And even in this case the evil consequences of polygamy appear: envy, jealousy, contention, and an increased sensuality. Nevertheless Jacob’s case is not to be judged according to the later Mosaic law, which prohibited the marrying of two sisters at the same time (Leviticus 18:18). Calvin, in his decision, makes no distinction between the times and the economies, a fact which Keil justly appeals to, and insists upon as bearing against his harsh judgment (that it was a case of incest) (p. 205).

11. In our narrative we first read of a great and splendid wedding-feast, lasting for seven days. It is therefore not by chance that this splendid wedding-feast was followed by a painful illusion. And, leaving out of view grosser deceptions, how often may Rachel’s image have been changed afterwards into Leah’s form.
12. While the sisterly emulation to surpass each other in obtaining children is tainted with sin, there is yet at the bottom a holy motive for it, faith in the Abrahamic promise consisting in the blessing of theocratic births. Thus also we can explain how the fulness of the twelve tribes proceeded from this emulation.
13. Isaac’s prejudice, that Esau was the chosen one, seems to renew itself somewhat in Jacob’s prejudice that he must gain by Rachel the lawful heir. The more reverent he appears therefore, in being led by the spirit of God, who taught him, notwithstanding all his preference for Joseph, to recognize in Judah the real line of the promise.
14. That the respective mothers themselves here assign the names, is determined by the circumstances. The entire history of the birth of these sons, too, is reflected in their names. Of similar signification are the names: Gad and Asher; Levi and Zebulun; Simeon and Naphtali; Judah and Joseph; Reuben and Benjamin born afterwards; Issachar, Dan and Dinah.
15. The progress of life equalizes and adjusts, to a great extent, the opposition between Jacob’s love for Rachel and his disregard toward Leah, especially by means of the children. At the same time in which he recognizes Leah’s resignation, Rachel’s passionate ill-humor incites him to anger.
16. He shall add; he shall give to me another son. This wish was fulfilled, and was the cause of her death. She died at Benjamin’s birth. How dangerous, destructive, and fatal, the fulfilment of a man’s wishes may be to him, is illustrated by frequent examples in the Scriptures. Sarah wished for a son from Hagar, a source of great grief to her. The desire of Judas to be received among the disciples of Jesus was granted, but just in this position he fell into the deepest corruption. Peter wished to be as near as possible to the Lord in the house of the high priest, but hence his fall. The sons of Zebedee wished for places at the right and left hand of Jesus,—had their wish been fulfilled they would have filled the places of the malefactors on the cross, at the right and left of the Crucified. Rachel’s wish, it is true, was not the only cause of her death, but with a certain triumph the once barren one died in childbirth, just as she was completing the number twelve of Israel’s sons.

17. How important Joseph’s birth was to Jacob is seen from this: that henceforth he thinks of his journey home, although the report looked for from Rebekah tarried long. He was urged to venture a journey home.
18. This history of Jacob’s and Leah’s union sheds a softening light upon even the less happy marriages, which may reconcile us to them, for this unpleasant marriage was the cause of his becoming the father of a numerous posterity; from it, indeed, proceeded the Messianic line; leaving out of view the fact that Leah’s love and humility could not remain without a blessing upon Jacob. The fundamental condition of a normal marriage is doubtless bridal love. We notice in our narrative, however, how wonderfully divine grace may change misfortune, even in such instances, into real good. God is especially interested in marriage connections, because he is thus interested in the coming generations.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See Doctrinal and Ethical paragraphs. Jacob’s wrestlings of faith. The patriarch of hope. Jacob’s double flight, from Esau and from Laban. Rich in fortune and rich in misfortune, in both respects rich in blessing. Jacob and Rachel, or the consecration of bridal love. The shepherd and the shepherdess: the same condition. Jacob’s service for his bride a type of the same service of Christ for the church, his bride. Rachel and Leah, or God makes a great difference between his children, and yet esteems them alike according to his justice. The three marriage connections at wells: that of Isaac, of Jacob, and of Moses. The names of Jacob’s sons, a type of human weakness and divine salvation in his house. (Texts for marriage occasions.)

To Section First, Genesis 30:1-8. Starke: Cramer: If God’s command and promise are before us, we can proceed in our undertakings with joy and confidence. Places where wells are mentioned (see Concordances). (Jesus, the well of life. The stone, the impotence of human nature, to be removed by faith. Since, according to Genesis 31:47, the Chaldæans spoke a different language from that of the inhabitants of Canaan, Jacob probably made himself understood to the people of Haran, because he had learned the Chaldee from his mother (Clericus). The changing of the language of the patriarchs into the later Hebrew of the Jews.) [There is every reason to believe that these dialects were then so nearly alike that there was no difficulty in passing from one to the other. A. G.]—Because the word peace embraces both spiritual and natural well-being, the Hebrews used it as a common salutation.

Section Second, Genesis 30:9-14. Divine providence was here at work. (Allegory of the well. How Christ has removed the heavy stone of sin and death. The three herds referred to the three days in which Christ was in the grave! etc. Burmann.)

Genesis 30:13. This was necessary in order to remove all suspicion from the mind of Laban, since he still remembered what a numerous retinue had accompanied Eliezer. As three distinguished patriarchs found their brides at wells (Moses and his Zipporah), just so the Lord Christ presents to himself the church, his spiritual bride, through holy baptism, as the laver in the word. Schröder: Their first meeting a prophecy of their whole future united life.

Genesis 30:11 (Calvin). In a chaste and modest life greater liberties were allowed. (If any one turn to the true source of wisdom, to the word of God, and to the Saviour revealed therein, he will receive celestial wisdom for his bride. Berl. Bibel.)

Section Third, Genesis 30:15-25.Genesis 1:30. As a regular servant. A typical intimation of the Messiah, who in the form of a servant, with great and severe toil, obtained his bride. (Reward of Jacob’s patient waiting, of his faith and his chastity.

Genesis 30:18. Virtuous maidens do not attend large, exciting assemblies, to get a husband, but remain at their vocation, and trust in God, who is able to give to them a pious, honorable, and upright husband. Lange: If the whole difficult service became easy to Jacob from the love he had to Rachel, why should it not be said of God’s children, that it is from love to God that we keep his commandments, etc. (1 John 5:3). Bibl. Wirt.: A chaste love is a beautiful thing, by which conjugal love is afterwards more and more strengthened and confirmed.

Genesis 30:25. Here Jacob might have understood how it grieved Esau when, for the sake of his birthright, he had practised upon him such cunning and deceit. As he had done unto others, God permitted that he should receive from others. The crafty Laban wears the image of the world; whoever serves it never receives what he expects; he looks for Rachel, and behold it is Leah (Olear).

Gerlach: From this instance onward (especially) God speaks to Jacob by every occurrence. Laban deceives him, because he thinks that Laban’s (Jacob’s?) service will be profitable to him, and thus he (Laban) loses not only a great part (?) of his herds, but is also obliged to part from his children. The misery of bigamy: it was therefore expressly forbidden in the law (Leviticus 18:18) that any one should marry two sisters at the same time, or to favor one wife before the other (Deuteronomy 21:17). The seven years of service reminds us perhaps of the later statute among the Israelites, according to which servants were to obtain their freedom during the seventh year (Exodus 21:2); Jacob, therefore, as a compensation for the daughters, took upon himself a seven years’ service (slavery). (The danger of exciting Esau prevented him from bringing the price from his home, even had he entrusted his affair to God.)—Schröder: Space is no obstacle to faith, nor time to hope. An engagement of long standing, if decreed by God, may become a salutary and beneficial school for a Christian marriage. Comparisons between the deception practised by Laban upon Jacob, and that which Jacob practised upon Esau: 1. One brother upon another. 2. There the younger instead of the older; here the older, etc. 8. (Roos) He did not know Leah when he was married to her, just as his father knew him not when he blessed him. 4. Leah at the instigation of her father, Jacob at the instigation of his mother. But he received, notwithstanding his ignorance as to Leah, the wife designed for him by God, who was to become the mother of the Messiah, just as Isaac blessed him unwittingly as the rightful heir of the promise. Ah, in how many errors and follies of men, here and everywhere, do we find God’s inevitable grace and faithfulness intertwined (Roos).

Section Fourth, Genesis 30:26-30. Starke: Genesis 30:27. It is remarkable that the ancient Jews, at births, marriages, and deaths, observed the seventh day as an holy day (Genesis 21:4; Luke 2:21; Genesis 50:10; Sir 22:13). From this fact we may conclude that the ancient Hebrews already considered the day of birth and circumcision, the day of marriage, and the day of death, as the three most important ones in life. (Genesis 30:28. Jacob might have asked for a divorce.)—Jacob’s polygamy not caused by sensuality; but did not remain unpunished. (Burmann: Comparison between the two wives and the Old and New Testament, the two churches to whom the Lord is betrothed. The Old Testament Leah, the wearied, the tender eyed.)—Hall: God often afflicts us through our own friendship (relatives). He often punishes our own sins by the sins of others, before we are aware of it (2 Samuel 16:22). Osiander: Oh, what is avarice not capable of?—Hall: God’s children do not easily obtain what they wish for, but must toil hard for it; (German) work for it, tooth and nail. Schröder: Jacob’s history, in its turning-points, meets with personages who serve to bring out his character more clearly in contrast with theirs; their thoughts bound in the present,—his looking on into the future. Thus Esau and Laban.

Section Fifth, Genesis 30:31-35. Starke: Osiander: It is still customary with God to take care of the distressed. Cramer: God distributes his gifts by parts. Do not despise any one. Hall: God knows how to weigh to us in similar ways both our gifts of grace and our crosses. Bibl. Wirt.: There is nothing so bad or so complicated but that God can bring good out of it. (Signification of the word from which “Judah” is derived: 1. To thank; 2. to commend; 3. to praise; 4. to confess.) From this Judah all Jews received their beautiful name. Gerlach: Reuben: see a son; in allusion to Raah-Be-Onyi, i.e., he (Jehovah) hath looked upon my affliction. Schröoder: The mother gives the names, as she does also in Homer.

Section Sixth, Genesis 30:1-8. Starke: Bibl. Wirt.: Impatience is the mother of many sins. Even to the pious in their married life the sun of peace and harmony does not always shine; at times dark clouds of dissension and strife arise. But we must guard in time against such clouds and storms. We must not try to obtain the divine blessing by unrighteous means. Schröder: Children are God’s gift. All parents should consider this, and take such care of these divine gifts that when God calls those whom he has entrusted to them, they may render a good account (Valer. Herb.). In Rachel we meet with envy and jealousy, while in Jehovah there is compassion and grace.

Section Seventh, Genesis 30:9-13. Schröder: For all times Israel is warned by the patriarch’s culpable weakness and pliancy in relation to his wives, as well as by the frightful picture of his polygamy. (Israel, it is true, should even in this way learn to distinguish the times, to recognize the workings of divine grace in and over the errors of men, and to rejoice at the progress in his law.)

Section Eighth, Genesis 30:14-21. Starke: (Do you ask as to the nature of the Dudaim? some think they are lilies, others that they are berries, but no one knows what they are. Some call them “winter cherries.” Luther.)—The rivalry of the sisters. Thus God punished him because he had taken two wives, even two sisters. Even the holy women were not purely and entirely spiritual. Schröder: In reference to the maid’s children, God’s name is neither mentioned by Leah nor by the narrator. They were in the strictest sense begotten in a natural way (Hengstenberg). (This is wrong, for in the first place Jacob had nothing to do with the maids in the natural way of mere lust; 2. in that case they would not have been numbered among the blessed seed of Israel. The principal tribes, indeed, did not spring from them.)

Section Ninth, Genesis 30:22-24. Starke: Why barrenness was considered by Abraham’s descendants as a sign of the divine curse: 1. It appeared as if they were excluded from the promise of the enlargement of Abraham’s seed; 2. They were without the hope of giving birth to the Messiah; 3. They had no share in God’s universal command: be fruitful and multiply. Osiander: Our prayers are not to be considered as in vain, if we receive no answer immediately. If we are humbled sufficiently below the cross, then we will be exalted. Schröder: Luther says respecting Jacob’s wives that they were not moved by mere carnal desire, but looked at the blessing of children with reference to the promised seed.

Footnotes:

[1][Genesis 30:11. Lit, with a troop or band. Lange follows the Sept., Vulg., and the most of the early versions. But whether we follow the Keri, or the Chethib, as in our version, it is better to adhere to the signification, a troop or band. For while Leah uses hereafter the name אֱלֹהִים instead of יְהוָֹה indicating the lower religious state into which she has fallen, through the use of these mere human expedients, we can hardly suppose that she would thus name her child in recognition of the power of a fictitious deity, or avow her faith that her children were the result of mere fortune. Aside from this, Genesis 49:19, is decisive. A. G.

[2][Genesis 30:18. Heb. יֵשׁ שָׂכָר, there is a reward—or יִשָּׂא שָׂכָר, he brings reward. A. G.