Genesis 31
1 "And he heard the words of Laban's sons, saying, Jacob hath taken away all that
was our father's; and of that which was our
father's hath he gotten all this glory."
And he - Jacob had now served twenty years with Laban, and must accordingly have
been in his ninety-seventh or
seventy-seventh year (see ch.. 27:1) - heard
the words
of Laban's sons, - who were not at this time only small youths about fourteen years
of age (Delitzsch), since they were capable of being entrusted with their father's
flocks (ch. 30:35) - saying (probably in a conversation which had been over. heard
by Jacob), Jacob hath taken away (by fraud is what they meant, an opinion in which
Kalisch agrees; but it is not quite certain that Jacob was guilty of dishonesty in
acting as he did) all that was our father's; - this was a manifest exaggeration;
sed hoe morbo laborant sordidi et nimium tenaces, ut sibi
ereptum esse putent
quicquid non ingurgitant (Calvin) - and of that which was our
father's hath he
gotten (literally, made, in the sense of acquiring, as in ch. 12:5; I Samuel 14:48)
all this glory. כָּבוד (from כָּבַד, to be heavy, hence to be great in the sense of
honored, and also to be abundant)
signifies either glory, splendor, renown, δόξα -
doxa - glory (Septuagint), as in Job 14:21; or, what seems the preferable meaning
here, wealth, riches, facultates (Vulgate), as in Psalm 49:13; Nahum 2:10. The
two ideas appear to be combined in
II Corinthians 4:17; βάρος δόξης
- baros
doxaes - weight;
burden of glory.
2 "And Jacob beheld the countenance of Laban, and, behold, it was not toward
him as before." And Jacob beheld the countenance of Laban, and, Behold, it
(i.e. either Laban or his countenance) was not toward him (literally, with him)
as before - literally, as yesterday and the day before. The evident change in
Laban's disposition, which had previously been friendly, was obviously
employed by God to direct Jacob's mind to the propriety of returning to the land
of his inheritance; and the inclination thus started in his soul was further strengthened
and confirmed by a revelation which probably soon after, if not the night following,
was sent for his direction.
3 "And the LORD said unto Jacob, Return unto
the land of thy fathers, and to
thy kindred; and I will be with thee." And the Lord - Jehovah; since the entire
journey to Padan-aram had been conducted under His special care, see ch. 28:15
(Hengstenberg), and not because the first three verses of this chapter have been
inserted or modified by the Jehovist (Tuch, Block, et al.) - said unto Jacob, probably
in a dream (compare vs. 5, 10-11). Return
unto the land of thy fathers (i.e.
and to thy kindred; and I will be
with thee. So Jehovah had promised at
twenty years before (ibid.).
4 "And Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah to
the field unto his flock,"
And Jacob sent - being unwilling to approach the house lest Laban should
discover his design (Rosenmüller) - and called Rachel and Leah - Rachel may
be placed first as the beloved wife of Jacob (Wordsworth, Lange), scarcely as the
principal wife in comparison with Leah, who was adventitia (Rosenmüller; compare
v. 14) - to the field unto his flock. The expression "his flock" indicates that Jacob
had abandoned Laban's sheep and taken possession of those which belonged to
himself - probably in preparation for his departure.
5 "And said unto them, I see your father's
countenance, that it is not toward me
as before; but the God of my father hath been
with me." And said unto them,
I see your father's countenance, that it is not toward me as before (see above);
but the God of my father - literally, and the Elohim of my father, the term Elohim
employed by Jacob not being due to "the vagueness of the religious knowledge"
possessed by his wives (Hengstenberg), but to a desire on his own part either to
distinguish the God of his father from the gods of the nations, or the idols which
Laban worshipped ('Speaker s Commentary'), or perhaps, while using an
expression exactly equivalent to Jehovah, to bring out a contrast between
the Divine favor and that of Laban (Quarry) - hath been with me - literally,
was with me; not the night before simply, but during the past six years, as he
explains in v. 7.
6 "And ye know that with all my power I have
served your father."
The term Jacob here uses for power is derived from an unused onomatopoetic
root, signifying to pant, and hence to exert one's strength. If, therefore, the
assertion now made to his wives was not an unblushing falsehood, Jacob could
not have been the monster of craft and deception depicted by some (Kalisch);
while, if it was, it must have required considerable effrontery to appeal to his
wives' knowledge for a confirmation of what they knew to be a deliberate untruth.
The hypothesis that Jacob first acquired his great wealth by "consummate cunning,"
and then piously "abused the authority of God in covering or justifying them"
(Kalisch), presupposes on the part of Jacob a degree of wickedness inconceivable
in one who had enjoyed the sublime theophany of
7 "And your father hath deceived me, and
changed my wages ten times;
but God suffered him not to hurt me." And your father hath deceived me, -
הֵתֵל, the hiph. of תָּלַל, means to rob or plunder (Furst), or to cause to fall,
as in the cognate languages, whence
to deceive (Gesenius)
- and
changed my
wages ten times; - i.e. many times, as in Numbers 14:22; Job 19:3 (Rosenmüller,
Bush, Kalisch, Lange); as often as possible, the number ten expressing the idea
of completeness (Keil, Murphy) - but God (Elohim, Jacob purposing to say that
he had been protected, not by human stratagem, but by Divine interposition)
suffered him not to hurt me - literally, to do evil to me. The verb here construed
with עִמָּד = עִם is sometimes followed by עַל (I Kings 17:20), and sometimes
by בְּ (I Chronicles 16:22).
8 "If he said thus, The
speckled shall be thy wages; then all the cattle bare
speckled: and if he said thus, The ringstraked shall be thy hire; then bare all
the cattle ringstraked." If he
(i.e. Laban) said thus, The
speckled shall be thy
wages; - by the original contract Jacob had been promised all the parti-colored
animals (ch. 30:32);" here it seems as if Laban, struck with the remarkable increase
of these, took the earliest opportunity of so modifying the original stipulation as
to limit Jacob's portion to one sort only, viz. the speckled. Yet this dishonorable
breach of faith on the part of Laban was of no avail; for, when the next lambing
season came - then (it was discovered
that) all the cattle bare speckled: and if he
said thus (changing the sort
of animals assigned to his son-in-law), The ringstraked
shall be thy hire (the result
was as before); then bare all the cattle ringstraked.
9 "Thus God hath taken away the cattle of your
father, and given them to me."
Thus - literally, and (as the result of this) - God
hath taken away the cattle of your
father, and given them to me. In ascribing to God what he had himself effected
by (so-called) fraud, this language of Jacob appears to some inexcusable (Kalisch);
in passing over his own stratagem in silence Jacob has been charged with not
telling the whole truth to his wives (Keil). A more charitable consideration of
Jacob's statement, however, discerns in it an evidence of his piety, which
recognized and gratefully acknowledged that not his own "consummate cunning,"
but Jehovah s watchful care had enabled him to outwit the dishonest craft of Laban
(Rosenmüller, Ainsworth, Bush, Candlish, Murphy).
10 "And it came to pass at the time that the
cattle conceived, that I lifted up
mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the
rams which leaped upon the
cattle were ringstraked,
speckled, and grisled." And it came to pass at
the time
that the cattle conceived (this obviously goes back to the commencement of the
six years' service), that
I lifted up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold,
the rams - עַתֻּדים, he-goats, from an unused root, to be ready, perhaps because
ready and prompt for fighting (Gesenius, sub voce) - which leaped (literally,
going up) upon the cattle were ringstraked, speckled, and grisled. The grisled
(beruddim, from barad, to scatter hail) were spotted animals, as if they had been
sprinkled with hail, not a fifth sort in addition to the four already mentioned
(Rosenmüller), but the same as the teluim of ch. 30:35 (Kalisch). Wordsworth
observes that the English term grisled, from the French word grele, hail, is a
literal translation of the Hebrew. Gesenius connects with the Hebrew root the
words πάρδος - pardos - leopard (so called from its spots), and the French broder,
to embroider. The Septuagint understood the עַתֻּדים to include both sheep and
goats, and translate οἱ τράγοι
καὶ οἱ
κριοὶ ἀναβαίντες
ἐπὶ τὰ
πρόβατα καὶ τὰς
αἰγας -
hoi tragoi kai
hoi krioi anabaintes epi ta probate kai tas aigas
- the male goats
which leaped on the flock were streaked, speckled
and grizzled.
11 "And the angel of God spake
unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And
I said, Here am I." And the angel of God - literally, the angel (or Maleach)
of Elohim, i.e. of the God who was with me and protecting me, though himself
continuing unseen - spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I
said, Here
am I (see ch. 20:1, 11).
12 “And he said, Lift up now thine
eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon
the cattle are ringstraked,
speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban
doeth unto thee.” And he
said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams
which
leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled. Since all the parti-colored
animals had already been removed (ch. 30:35), this vision must have been intended to
assure him that the flocks would produce speckled and spotted progeny all the same as
if the ringstraked and grisled rams and he-goats had not been removed from their midst.
To insist upon a contradiction between this account of the increase of Jacob's flocks
and that mentioned in ch. 30:37 is to forget that both may be true. Equally arbitrary
does it seem to be to accuse Jacob of fraud in adopting the artifice of the pilled rods
(Kalisch). Without resorting to the supposition that he acted under God s guidance
(Wordsworth), we may believe that the dream suggested the expedient referred to,
in which some see Jacob's unbelief and impatience (Kurtz, Gosman in Lange), and
others a praiseworthy instance of
self-help (Keil). For I have seen all that Laban
doeth unto thee. If the preceding clause appears to imply that the vision was sent
to Jacob at the beginning of the six years' service, the present clause scents to point
to the end of that period as the date of its occurrence; in which case it would require
to be understood as a Divine intimation to Jacob that his immense wealth was not
to be ascribed to the success of his own stratagem, but to the blessing of God
(Delitzsch). The difficulty of harmonizing the two views has led to the suggestion
that Jacob here mixes the accounts of two different visions accorded to him, at the
commencement and at the close of the period of servitude (Nachmanides,
Rosenmüller, Kurtz,- ' Speaker's Commentary,' Murphy, Candlish).
13 “I am the God of
vowedst a vow
unto me: now arise, get thee out from this land, and return
unto the land of thy kindred.” I am
the God of
himself with Jehovah (see ch. 28:13). Contrary to usual custom, הָאֵל, though in the
construct, state, has the article
(see Ewald, ' Hebrews Synt.,'
§ 290) - where thou
anointedst the
pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me: now
arise, get thee
out from this land, and return unto
the land of thy kindred - i.e. to the
14 “And Rachel and Leah answered and said unto him, Is there yet any portion
or inheritance for us in our father's
house? 15 Are
we not counted of him
strangers? for he hath sold
us, and hath quite devoured also our money.
16 For all the riches which
God hath taken from our father, that is ours,
and our children's: now then, whatsoever God
hath said unto thee, do.”
And Rachel and Leah (see on v. 4) answered and said unto him (Kalisch
overdoes his attempt to blacken Jacob's character and whitewash Laban's
when he says that Rachel and Leah were so entirely under their husband s
influence that they spoke about their father "with severity and boldness
bordering on disrespect." It rather seems to speak badly for Laban that his
daughters eventually rose in protest against his heartless cruelty and insatiable
greed), Is there yet any portion or inheritance for us in our father's house? The
interrogative particle indicates a spirited inquiry, to which a negative response is
anticipated (compare ch. 30:2; see Ewald, ' Hebrews Synt.,' § 324). Kalisch obviously
regards it as preposterous that Rachel and Leah should have expected anything, since
"married daughters in the East never had any such claim where there were sons."
But Laban had not treated Jacob's
wives even as daughters. Are we not counted
of him strangers? for he hath sold us (however much they loved Jacob they could
not but resent the mercenary meanness of Laban, by which they, the free-born
daughters of a chieftain, had been
sold as common serfs), and hath quits devoured
also our money - literally, and hath eaten up, yes, even eating up, our money, the
infinitive abstract, אָול, after the finite verb, expressing the continuance (Keil)
and intensity (Kalisch) of the action (see Ewald, 'Hebrews Synt.,' § 280). For –
כִּי is by some interpreters rendered but (Jarchi), so that (Keil), indeed (Kalisch),
though there is no sufficient reason for departing from the usual meaning "for"
(Rosenmüller) - all the riches which God hath taken from our father, - thus
Rachel and Leah also recognize the hand of God (Elohim) in Jacob's unusual
prosperity - that is ours, and our children's (Rachel and Leah mean to say that
what Jacob had acquired by his six years of service with their father was no more
than would have naturally belonged to him had they obtained their portions at the
first): now then, Whatsoever God hath said unto thee, do. It is clear that, equally
with himself, they were prepared for breaking off connection with their father Laban.
17 “Then Jacob rose up, and set his sons and his
wives upon camels; 18 And he
carried away all his cattle, and all his goods
which he had gotten, the cattle of
his getting, which he had gotten in Padanaram, for to go to Isaac his father in
the
and alacrity with which, having obtained the concurrence of his wives, Jacob set
about fulfilling the Divine instructions), and set his sons - his children, as in v. 1,
here; ch. 32:12, including Dinah, if by this time she had been born (see ch. 30:21) –
and his wives upon camels.
Since neither were able to undertake a journey to
on foot, his oldest son being not more than thirteen years of age and his youngest not
more than six. On the camel, see ch. 12:16. And he carried away - the verb נָהֵג,
to pant, which is specially used of those who are exhausted by running (Gesenins,
sub voce – see more), may perhaps indicate the haste with which Jacob acted –
all his cattle, - Mikneh, literally, possession, from kanah, to procure, always used
of cattle, the chief wealth of a
nomad (compare ch. 13:2; 26:14) - and
all his goods
which he had gotten, - Recush, literally, acquisition, hence substance, wealth in
general, from racash, to acquire (see ch. 14:11, 16, 21; 15:14), which, however,
is more specifically described as - the cattle of his getting, which he had gotten
(both of the above verbs, kanah and racash, being now employed) in (i.e. during his
stay in) Padan-aram, for
to go to Issac his father in the
19 “And Laban went to
shear his sheep: and Rachel had stolen the images that
were her father's.” And Laban went - or, Now Laban had gone, probably to the
other station, which was three days journey from Jacob's flocks (see ch. 30:36; and
compare ch. 31:22) - to shear his sheep. In this work he would probably be detained
several days, the time of shearing being commonly regarded as a festal season
(compare ch. 38:12; I Samuel 25:4; II Samuel 13:23), at which friendly entertainments
were given. Whether Jacob's absence from the festivities is to be explained by the
dissension existing between him and Laban, which either caused him to be uninvited
or led him to decline the invitation (Kurtz), or by the supposition that he had first gone
and subsequently left the banquet (Lange), the fact that Laban was so engaged afforded
Jacob the opportunity he desired for making his escape. And Rachel had stolen (or,
"and Rachel stole," availing herself likewise of the opportunity presented by her
father's absence) the images that were her father's. The teraphim, from an unused
root, taraph, signifying to live comfortably, like the Sanscrit trip, Greek τρέφειν –
trephein - Arabic tarafa (Gesenius, Furst, sub voce - see more), appear to have
been small human figures (compare v. 34), though the image in I Samuel 19:13
must have been nearly life-size, or at least a full-sized bust, sometimes made of
silver (Judges 17:4), though commonly constructed of wood (I Samuel 19:13-16);
they were worshipped as gods (εἰδωλα, Septuagint; see, Vulgate, compare here,
v.30), consulted for oracles (Ezekiel 21:26; Zechariah 10:2), and believed to be the
custodians and promoters of human happiness (Judges 18:24). Probably derived
from the Aramaeans (Furst, Kurtz), or the Chaldeans (Ezekiel 21:21, Kalisch,
Wordsworth), the worship of teraphim was subsequently denounced as idolatrous
(I Samuel 15:23; II Kings 13:24).
Compare with Rachel's act that ascribed to AEneas: -
"Effigies
sacrae divum, Phrygiique Penates,
Quos
mecum a Troja, mediisque ex
ignibus urbis,"
Extuleram"
(Virg., 'AEn.,' 3. 148-150). Rachel's motive for abstracting her father's teraphim
has been variously ascribed to a desire to prevent her father from discovering, by
inquiring at his gods, the direction of their flight (Aben Ezra, Rosenmüller), to
protect herself, in case, of being overtaken, by an appeal to her father s gods
(Josephus), to draw her father from the practice of idolatry (Bazil, Gregory,
Nazisnzen, Theodoret), to obtain children for herself through their assistance
(Lengerke, Gerlach), to preserve a memorial of her ancestors, whose pictures
these teraphim were (Lightfoot); but was probably due to avarice, if the images
were made of precious metals (Pererius), or to a taint of superstition which still
adhered to her otherwise religious nature (Chrysostom, Calvin, 'Speaker's
Commentary ), causing her to look to these idols for protection (Kalisch, Murphy)
or consultation (Wordsworth) on her journey.
Teraphim
(v. 19)
“Rachel had stolen the images
that were her father’s.” This the first direct
mention of images in connection with worship, though tradition
speaks of
Nimrod as an idolater (compare Joshua
24:2). Laban
calls them his gods (v. 30);
yet
he and his family knew the Lord. His use of them was A CORRUPTION
OF WORSHIP.
(I Samuel 19:13). Of different sizes and materials. The manner of their
use not very clear, but used in some way for worship.
Apparently not as
intentional rebellion against God. Rather as a help to worship Him,
but a
help chosen in self-will. It was the error forbidden in the second
commandment; a departure from the way of Abel, Noah, Abraham; the
device of a soul out of harmony with spiritual things,
and unable to realize
God’s presence in worship (compare Exodus 32:4; Judges 8:27; 17:3;
I Kings 12:28). We live in
midst of things claiming attention. (Never
before in history has this been so true as in this 21st century! – CY – 2018)
Necessities of life compel it.
And the good effect of diligence is quickly
felt. This not evil, but becomes a snare unless spiritual life
vigorous
(Matthew 13:22; I Corinthians
7:29-31). The habit of looking
earthward grows. The walk with
God becomes less close. Then unreality
in worship. Then the
attempt by material aids to reconcile worship with an
unchanged life. Hence, in the old time, teraphim; in our
days, will worship.
THE SPIRITUAL LIFE;
exemplified in Laban.
Compare him as presented
in Genesis 24 with what he now appears. There he is
hospitable, frank, and
liberal; here he is sordid, ungenerous, deceitful even to his own
nephew.
There he acknowledges the Lord
as the Guide of actions (ch. 34:50-51);
here he speaks of “the God of your father,” and of “my
gods.”
The love of
wealth had made God no longer first in his thoughts
(compare
Psalm 10:4; Philippians 3:19). Thus worship
became a thing of
times and seasons, a thing separate from daily life, and therefore possessing
no influence on daily life. So in the Christian Church great attention to
external aids and extravagant symbolism were the resources of a pervading
spirit less spiritual than in times before; and these
too often were as clouds
hiding the face of God.
to wean her father from them. More probably
wished to make use of them.
Rachel had not escaped her
father’s influence. Hence the want of a submissive
spirit (compare ch. 30:1 with I Samuel
1:11). The evil spread in Jacob’s
household (ch. 35:2). Thus the necessity
for making a stand against it
(Joshua 14:23).
a real danger in every age — of leaning upon secondary means
in religious
service. Teraphim no longer tempt us. But amid whirl of active life,
there is
a danger of leaning too much on outward impressions for
spiritual life; of
cultivating the emotions in place of spiritual
earnestness (Psalm 130:6;
Matthew 11:12); of putting
religious services (I Samuel 15:22-23) or
work (Matthew 7:22) in place of WALKING WITH GOD! Amid much
apparent religious activity the striving against self (Luke 9:23)
and growth
in grace may become languid (I John 5:21).
20 “And Jacob stole away unawares to Laban the Syrian, in that he told him
not that he fled.” And Jacob stole away unawares to Laban the Syrian, - literally,
stole the heart of Laban the Syrian, he deceived his mind and intelligence, like
κλέπτειν νόον,
Hom., ' II.,' 14. 227 (compare vs. 26-27); hence - ἔκρυψε – ekrupse –
deceive (Septuagint); so Calvin, Rosenmüller, Keil, Gesenius, and others. Lange
fancifully understands by the heart of Laban which Jacob stole either Laban's
daughters or his favorite Rachel. Gerlach contrasts Jacob's stealing with that
of Rachel, in which Jacob, had no part. The exact import of Jacob s stealing is
declared by the words that follow - in that he told him not (Lunge and Bush
interpret הִגֹּיִד impersonally, as signifying in that or because it was not told;
but in this among expositors they
stand alone) that he fled.
21 “So he fled with all that he had; and he rose up,
and passed over the river, and
set his face toward the
all that he had; and he rose up, and
passed over the river, - i.e. the
was called by preeminence the river
(compare I Kings 4:21; Ezra 4:10, 16) - and set
his face toward the
region," from an unused quadrilateral root, signifying to be hard, though, according
to the historian (by a slight change in the punctuation), "The hill, or heap of witness,"
from the transaction recorded in vs. 45-47, which name it here proleptically receives,
was not the mountain-range to the south of the Jabbok, now styled Jebel Jilad
(Gesenius), Jebel-as-Salt (Robinson), Jebel-osha (Tristram), since Jacob had not
yet crossed the river, but that upon its northern bank, called Jebel Ajlun, and
situated near Mahanaim (Delitzsch, Keil, Kalisch, Porter).
Jacob’s Flight from Laban
(vs. 1-21)
years previously Laban’s exactions and
Joseph’s birth (ch.30:25)
had combined to inspire within the heart of Jacob, returned
upon him with
an intensity that could no longer be resisted. Accelerated in
its vehemence
partly by the interposed delay to which it had been subjected,
partly by his
further acquaintance with the meanness and craft of his uncle, and
partly by
his own rapidly- accumulating wealth, it was now brought to a
head by:
Ø The calumnious remarks of Laban’s sons. Inheriting the sordid and
avaricious
nature of their parent, they were filled with envy at the
remarkable
prosperity which had attended Jacob during the past six years.
If good men are
sometimes “envious at the foolish,” it is not surprising that
wicked
men should occasionally begrudge the success of saints. Then from
sinful
desires they passed to wicked thoughts, accusing Jacob of having by
superior
craft out-maneuvered their designing father, and appropriated the
flocks
and herds that ought to have been his; which, however, was a
manifest
exaggeration, since Jacob had not taken away all their father’s
“glory,” and an unjustifiable calumny, since it was not Jacob’s stratagem,
but God’s blessing, that had multiplied the
parti-colored flocks.
And lastly,
from
wicked thoughts they advanced to evil words, not only accusing
Jacob in their
minds, but openly vilifying him with their tongues, adding to
the sin
of private slander that of public defamation — conduct which the
word of
God severely reprehends (Proverbs 30:10; I Corinthians 6:10;
Titus 3:2;
James 4:11).
Ø The manifest displeasure of Laban. During the fourteen years that Jacob
kept the
flocks for Rachel and Leah, Laban regarded him with evident
satisfaction; not perhaps for his own sake, but for the unprecedented
increase
in his (Laban’s) pastoral wealth which had taken
place under
Jacob’s
fostering care. He was even disposed to be somewhat pious so
long as
the flocks and herds continued multiplying (ch.
30:27). But
now, when
at the end of six years the relative positions of himself and
Jacob are
reversed, — when Jacob is the rich man and he, comparatively
speaking
at least, the poor one, — not
only does his piety towards God
disappear, but his civility towards man does not
remain. There are
many
Labans in
the Church, whose religion is but the shadow that waits upon the
sun of
their prosperity, and many Labans in the world, whose
amiability
towards
others is only the reflection of their complacent feeling towards
themselves.
Ø The explicit command of God. Twenty years before, at
promised
to bring Jacob back again to
instructions to His servant to return. As really, though not as visibly and
directly,
God orders the footsteps of all His children (Psalm 32:8;
37:23). If it is well not to run before God’s
providence, as Jacob would
have done
had he returned to
also well not to lag behind when that providence has been clearly made
known. The assurance given to Jacob of guidance on his homeward
journey
is extended to all who, in their daily goings forth:
o
obey
the Divine instructions and
o
follow
the Divine leadings.
Ø
The explanation of Jacob. Three contrasts complete the sum of
Jacob’s
announcements to his wives.
o
First, between the
growing displeasure of Laban their father
and the manifest favor of the Elohim
of his father (v. 5);
o
second, between the
unwearied duplicity of their father,
notwithstanding Jacob’s arduous service, and the ever-
watchful protectionof God against his
injurious designs
(vs.
6-7); and,
o
third, between the
diminishing herds of Laban and the
multiplying flocks of himself, Jacob, both of which were
traceable to Divine interposition (vs. 8, 10, 12).
After enlarging on these
contrasts, he informs them of the Divinely-
given order to return (v. 13).
Ø
The answer of Rachel and Leah. Acknowledging the
mean and
avaricious spirit of their father, who had not only sold them as
slaves,
but unjustly deprived them of the portions to which, as the
daughters
of a chieftain, they were entitled (vs. 14-15):
o
they first confess
that Jacob’s wealth was nothing more
than it would have been had they been honorably dowered
at the first;
o
second, they recognize
the hand of God in thus punishing
their father and restoring to their husband what was
practically his; and,
o
third, encourage him
to yield complete and prompt
obedience to the Divine commandment (v. 16).
discernible.
Ø
Faith. In setting his face towards
Divine instructions; and respect
unto God’s commandments is an
essential characteristic of living faith.
Ø
In determining “to
go to Isaac his father” he was
actuated by a
true spirit of filial piety.
Ø
Wisdom. In stealing away unawares to Laban,
while Laban was
providentially detained at the sheep-shearing, there was commendable
prudence, which, if possible, a good man should never lack.
Ø
Sin. Not indeed on Jacob’s part, but on that of Rachel, who,
taking
advantage of her father’s absence, carried off his Penates or
household images.
1. That the love of country and friends is
deeply implanted in the human breast.
2. That
it is a great trial for worldly men to see good fortune go past their doors.
3. That
the love of money, or the greed of gain, is the root of every kind of evil.
4. That the promises of God, however long
delayed, are
certain of fulfillment.
5. That loving husbands should consult their
wives in all important steps in life.
6. That daughters should avoid speaking ill
of parents, even should those parents
deserve it.
7. That wives should always encourage their
husbands in doing GOD’S
WILL!
8. That those who flee from oppression should
seek for safety in paths of
God’s appointing.
9. That thriving and prosperous sons should
not forget their parents in old age.
10. That daughters should not steal from their
fathers, even to the extent of
pilfering
worthless images.
The Separation from Laban
(vs. 20-21)
“And Jacob stole away unawares to Laban
the Syrian,” A great lesson
on:
Ø
Hatred and wrong are the fruits of crafty ways.
Ø
Family
dissensions occur where the things of
this world
are uppermost.
Ø
Separations which
are made in the spirit of dependence
on God rend no true bond, but rather strengthen
affection.
however much imperfection was in Jacob; yet the shield of Divine
patience
and mercy was thrown over the man who vowed the vow of
service, in whom
His grace would yet be
abundantly revealed. Laban’s action was controlled
by God. He forbad the evil design. He stilleth
the enemy and the avenger.
“Take thou heed that thou speak
not to Jacob either good or bad” (v. 29).
“Touch not mine
anointed,” (I Chronicles 16:22) When we are doing
God’s work and
walking towards His chosen end we may leave it with
Him
to speak with those who would hinder or harm us. (“When
a
man’s ways
please the Lord, He maketh even his enemies to be at
peace with
him.” -
Proverbs 16:7).
22 “And it was told Laban
on the third day that Jacob was fled. 23 And he took
his brethren with him, and pursued after him
seven days' journey; and they
overtook him in the
i.e. the third after Jacob's departure, the distance between the two sheep-stations
being a three days' journey (see ch. 30:36) - that Jacob was fled. And
he took his
brethren - i.e. his kinsmen, or nearest relations (compare ch. 13:8; ch. 29:15) –
with him, and pursued after him (Jacob) seven days' journey (literally, a way
of seven days); and
they overtook him in the
Padan-aram and
must at least have taken ten days, though Laban, who was less encumbered than his
son-in-law, accomplished it in seven, which might easily be done by traveling from
forty to forty-five miles a day, by
no means a great feat for a camel.
24 “And God came to Laban
the Syrian in a dream by night, and said unto him,
Take heed that thou
speak not to Jacob either good or bad. 25 Then Laban
overtook Jacob. Now Jacob had pitched his tent in
the mount: and Laban with
his brethren pitched in the mount of
neither because the section belongs to the fundamental document (Tuch, Bleek,
Colenso, et alii), nor because, though Laban had an outward acquaintance with
Jehovah (see v. 49), his real religious knowledge did not extend beyond Elohim
(Hengstenberg), but simply because the historian wished to characterize the
interposition which arrested Laban in his wrath as supernatural (Quarry) –
came to Laban the Syrian in a dream by night, - (compare ch. 20:3; Job 33:15;
Matthew 1:20). This celestial visitation occurred the night before the fugitives
were overtaken (see v. 29). Its intention was to guard Jacob, according to the
promise of ch. 28:15, against Laban's resentment - and (accordingly God)
said unto him, Take heed - literally, take heed for thyself, the verb being
followed by an ethical dative, as
in ch. 12:1; 21:16, q.v. - that thou speak not to
Jacob - literally, lest the, speak with Jacob; μή ποτε λαλήσυς μετὰ Ἰακὼβ
– mae
pote lalaesus meta Iakob – don’t speak to Jacob either good or bad - (Septuagint)
either good or bad. Literally, from good to bad, meaning that on meeting with
Jacob he should not pass from peaceful greetings to bitter reproaches (Bush, Lunge),
or say anything emphatic and decisive for the purpose of reversing what had
occurred (Keil); or, perhaps more simply, say anything acrimonious or violent
against Jacob (Rosenmüller, Murphy), the expression being a proverbial phrase
for opposition or interference (Kalisch). (Compare ch. 24:50; II Samuel 13:23).
Then (literally, and) Laban
overtook Jacob. Now (literally, and) Jacob
had
pitched his tent - this was done by means of pins driven into the ground, the
verb תָּקַע signifying to fasten, or fix anything by driving (compare Judges 4:21;
Isaiah 22:23, 25) - in the mount (v. 21): and Laban with his brethren (kinsmen)
pitched - his tent; not ἔστησε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς
(Septuagint) - in the mount of
(ibid.).
26 And Laban said to
Jacob, What hast thou done, that thou hast stolen away
unawares to me, and carried away my daughters, as
captives taken with the
sword? 27 Wherefore didst thou flee away secretly, and
steal away from me;
and didst not tell me, that I might have sent
thee away with mirth, and with
songs, with tabret,
and with harp? 28
And hast not suffered me to kiss my sons
and my daughters? thou
hast now done foolishly in so doing. 29 It is in the
power of my hand to do you hurt: but the God of
your father spake unto me
yesternight,
saying, Take thou heed that thou speak not to Jacob either good
or bad.
30 And now, though thou wouldest needs be gone, because thou sore
longedst after
thy father's house, yet wherefore hast thou stolen my gods?”
And Laban (assuming a tone of injured
innocence) said to Jacob, What hast
thou done, that thou hast stolen away unawares to me, - literally, and (meaning,
in that) thou hast stolen my heart (see v. 20; and compare v. 27) - and carried away
(see v. 18) my daughters, as captives taken with the sword? Literally, as captives
of the sword, i.e. invitis parentibus (Rosenmüller); language which, if not
hypocritical on Laban's part, was certainly exaggerated, since he had already
evinced the strength of his parental affection by selling his daughters to Jacob;
and besides, so far as it concerned either Jacob or his wives, it was quite untrue,
Rachel and Leah having voluntarily accompanied their husband in his flight.
Wherefore didst thou flee away secretly, - literally, wherefore didst thou hide
thyself to flee away; חָבַא (niph.), with an inf. following, corresponding to the
similar construction in Greek of λανθάνειν – lanthanein – unawares - with a
participle and being correctly rendered in English by an adverb (see Gesenius,
'Gram.,' § 142) - and steal away from me (literally, and steal me, ut supra);
and didst not tell me, that I might
(literally, and I would) have sent thee away
with mirth, and with songs, - in Oriental countries those about to make a long
journey are still sent away cantionibus et musicorum instrumentorum concentu
(Rosenmüller) - with tabret, - the toph was a drum or timbrel, consisting of a
wooden circle covered with membrane, and furnished with brass bells (like the
modern tambourine), which Oriental women beat when dancing (compare
Exodus 15:20; Judges 11:34; Jeremiah 31:4) - and with harp! For a description
of the kinnor see ch. 4:21. And hast not suffered me to kiss my sons (i.e. the
children of Leah and Rachel) and my daughters! It is perhaps judging Laban
too severely to pronounce this complete hypocrisy and cant (Alford, Bush,
Candlish, Gerlach), but equally wide of the truth is it to see in Laban's conduct
nothing but generosity of feeling (Kalisch); probably there was a mixture of both
paternal affection and crafty
dissimulation (Delitzsch). Thou hast now done
foolishly in so doing. The charge of folly in Old Testament Scriptures commonly
carries with it an imputation of wrong-doing (compare I Samuel 13:13; II Samuel
14:10). It is in the power of my hand - so the phrase יָדִי יֶשׁ־לְאֵל (compare
Deuteronomy 28:32; Nehemiah 5:5; Micah 2:1) is rendered by competent
authorities (Gesenius, Furst, Rosenmüller, Kalisch, Murphy, et alii), with
which agree ἰσχύει ἡ χειρ μου – ischuei hae cheir mou – power of my h and –
(Septuagint), and valet manus men (Vulgate), though the translation "My hand
is for God," i.e. my hand serves me as God (compare Job 12:6; Hebrews 1:11),
is by some preferred (Keil, Knobel, Jacobus)
- to
do you hurt: but the God of
your father - the use of this expression can be rightly regarded neither as a
proof of Elohistic authorship (Tuch, Bleek, Colenso, Davidson) nor as a sign
of Laban's spiritual degeneracy (Hengstenberg, Wordsworth), since it is practically
equivalent to Jehovah (see ch. 28:13), but is probably to be viewed as a play upon
the sound and sense of the
preceding clause, as thus: - "It is in the El of my hand
to do you evil, but the Elohim of your father spake to me." Another instance of
this play upon the sound and sense is to be found in vs. 19-20 - "Rachel stole
the teraphim that were her father's; and Jacob stole the heart of Laban the Syrian"
(compare Quarry on Genesis, p. 498)
- spake unto me yester night, saying,
Take
thou heed that thou speak not to
Jacob - literally, guard or keep thee for thyself
(the pleon,
pron. being added as in v. 24) from speaking with
Jacob - either
good or bad (ibid.). And now, though thou wouldest needs be gone (literally,
going thou didst go - thou hast
indeed gone), because thou sore longedst after
thy father's house (literally, because desiring thou didst desire. The verb כָּסַפ,
to be pale (whence כֶּסֶפ, silver, so called from its pale color), expresses the idea
of pining away and languishing
through strong inward longing), yet wherefore
hast thou stolen my gods? Laban had probably gone to consult his teraphim and
so discovered their loss. Augustine calls attention to this as the first Scripture
reference to heathen gods, and Calvin probably supplies the right explanation
of the sense in which they were so
styled by Laban, non
quia deitatem illie
putaret esse inclusam, sed quia in honorem
deorum imagines
illas colebat;
vel potius quod Deo sacra facturus, vertebat se ad illas imagines (compare
Exodus 32:4; I Kings 12:28). "This complaint of Laban, that his "gods were
stolen, showeth the vanity of such idolatry" (Ainsworth). Compare Judges 6:31;
16:24; Jeremiah 10:5,11,15.
31"And Jacob answered and said to Laban, Because I was afraid: for I
said,
Peradventure thou wouldest take by force thy daughters from me. 32 With
whomsoever thou findest thy
gods, let him not live: before our brethren discern
thou what is thine
with me, and take it to thee. For Jacob knew not that Rachel
had stolen them." And Jacob answered - "in an able and powerful speech"
(Kalisch) - and said to Laban (replying to his first interrogation as to why Jacob
had stolen away unawares), Because I was afraid: for I said (to myself),
Peradventure (literally, lest, i.e. I must depart without informing thee lest)
thou wouldest (or shoudest) take by force - the verb signifies to strip off as skin
from flesh (see Micah 3:2), and hence to forcibly remove - thy daughters from me
(after which, in response to Laban's question about his stolen gods, he proceeds).
With whomsoever thou findest thy gods, let him not live. If Jacob meant he shall
not live, but I will slay him with mine own hand (Aben Ezra), let God destroy him
(Abarbanel), I give him up to thee to put to death (Rosenmüller), let him instantly
die (Drusius), he was guilty of great unadvisedness in speech. Accordingly, the
import of his words has been mollified by regarding them simply as a prediction,
"he will not live," i.e. he will die before his time (Jonathan), a prediction which,
the Rabbins note, was fulfilled in Rachel (see ch. 35:16, 18); or by connecting
them with clause following, "he will not live before our brethren," i.e. let him be
henceforth cut off from the society of his kinsmen (Septuagint, Bush). Yet, even
as thus explained, the language of Jacob was precipitats, since he ought first to have
inquired at his wives and children before pronouncing so emphatically on a matter
of which he was entirely ignorant (Calvin). Before our brethren - not Jacob's sons,
but Laban's kinsmen (v. 23) - discern thou - literally, examine closely for thyself,
the hiph. of נָכַר (to be strange) meaning to press strongly into a thing, i.e. to perceive
it by finding out its distinguishing characteristics (see Furst, sub voce) - what is thine
with me, and take it to thee. For (literally,
and) Jacob
knew not that Rachel had
stolen them - otherwise he
would have spoken with less heat and more caution.
33 “And Laban went into
Jacob's tent, and into Leah's tent, and into the two
maidservants' tents; but he found them not. Then went
he out of Leah's tent,
and entered into Rachel's tent.” And Laban went into Jacob's teut, and
into
Leah's tent, and into the two maid-servants' tents; - the clause affords an
interesting glimpse into the manners of the times, showing that not only husbands
and wives, but also wives among themselves, possessed separate establishments) –
but he found them not. Then went he out of Leah's tent (he probably commenced
with Jacob's and those of the
hand-maids, and afterwards passed into Leah's), and
entered into Rachel's tent - last, because she was the favorite. Compare ch. 33:2,
in which a similar partiality
towards Rachel is exhibited by Jacob.
34 “Now Rachel had taken the images and put them in
the camel’s furniture,
and sat upon them. And Laban searched all the tent, but found them not.”
Now Rachel had taken the images (teraphim), and put them in the camel's furniture, -
the camel's furniture was not stramenta cameli (Vulgate), "the camel's straw" (Luther),
but the camel's saddle (Septuagint, Onkelos, Syriac, Calvin, Rosenmüller, Keil,
and others), here called כּר, from כָּרַר, an unused root signifying either to go
round in a circle, hence to run (Gesenius), or to be firmly wound together, hence
to be puffed up as a bolster (Furst). The woman's riding-saddle was commonly
made of wicker-work and had the appearance of a basket or cradle. It was usually
covered with carpet, and protected against wind, rain, and sun by means of a
canopy and curtains, while light was admitted by openings in the side. "That
which is now customary among the Arabs consists of a large closed basket-work,
with a place for sitting and reclining, and a window at the side; one of this kind
hangs on each side of the camel" (Gerlach) - and sat upon them. "To us the picture
of Rachel seated upon the camel furniture is true to life, for we have often seen its
counterpart. The saddle-bags and cushions which were to be set upon the camel
lay piled on the floor, while she sat upon them (Van Lennep, quoted by Inglis,
p. 254). And Laban searched - the word means to feel out or explore with the
hands (ch. 27:12; Job 12:25) - all the tent, but found them not.
35 “And she said to her father, Let it not displease
my lord that I cannot rise
up before thee; for the custom of women is
upon me. And he searched, but
found not the images.” And she said to her father, - "covering theft by subtlety
and untruth" (Kalisch), and thus proving herself a true daughter of Laban, as well
as showing
with how much imperfection her religious character was tainted – Let
it not displease my lord - literally, let it not burn with anger (יִחַר, from חָרָה, to glow,
to burn) in the eyes of my lord (Adoni) - that I cannot rise up before thee; - Oriental
politeness required children to rise up in the presence of their parents (see Leviticus
19:32; and compare I Kings 2:19). Hence Rachel's apology was not unnecessary –
for the custom of women - (literally, the way of women; a periphrasis for
menstruation (compare ch. 18:11) which, under the law, required females, as
ceremonially unclean, to be put apart (Leviticus 15:19). That, prior to the law,
this particular statute concerning women was in force among the Aramaeans
appears from the present instance; and that it was not exclusively Jewish, but
shared in by other nations of antiquity, is the opinion of the best authorities
(see Kurtz, 'History of the Old Covenant,' § 79; 'Sacrificial Worship of the
Old Testament,' § 213; Keil in loco; both of whom quote Bahr's 'Symbolik
of the Mosaic Cultus,' 2. 466). Roberts mentions that under similar circumstances
with Rachel no one in
('Oriental Illustrations,' p. 37) - is upon me. It is just possible Rachel may have
been speaking the exact truth, though the probability is she was guilty of fabrication.
And he searched (everywhere except among the camel's furniture, partly from fear
of defilement, but chiefly as regarding it impossible that Rachel in her then state
would sit upon his gods), but found not the images (teraphim). The three times
repeated phrase "he found not," emphasizes the
completeness, of Lahan's deception.
36 “And Jacob was wroth, and chode
with Laban: and Jacob answered and said
to Laban, What is
my trespass? what is my sin, that thou hast so hotly
pursued
after me?
37 Whereas thou hast searched all my
stuff, what hast thou found of
all thy household stuff? set
it here before my brethren and thy brethren, that
they may judge betwixt us both. 38 This
twenty years have I been with thee;
thy ewes and thy she goats have not cast their
young, and the rams of thy flock
have I not eaten. 39 That which was torn of beasts I
brought not unto thee;
I bare the loss of
it; of my hand didst thou require it, whether stolen by day,
or stolen by night. 40 Thus
I was; in the day the drought consumed me, and
the frost by night; and my sleep departed from
mine eyes. 41 Thus
have I been
twenty years in thy house; I served thee fourteen
years for thy two daughters,
and six years for thy cattle: and thou hast
changed my wages ten times.
42 Except the God of my
father, the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac,
had been with me, surely thou hadst sent me away now empty. God hath seen
mine affliction and the labor of my hands, and
rebuked thee yesternight.”
And Jacob was wroth, - literally, and it burned, sc. with indignation (same word
as used by Rachel, v. 35), to Jacob, i.e. he was infuriated at what he believed to be
Laban's unjustifiable insinuation about his lost teraphim - and chode - or contended;
the fundamental signification of the root, רוּב or רִיב, being to seize or tear, e.g.
the hair, hence to strive with the bands (Deuteronomy 33:7), or with words
(Psalm 103:9). The two verbs, וַתִּחַר and וַיָּרֶב, give a vivid representation of
the exasperation which Jacob felt -
with
Laban: and Jacob answered and said
to Laban, - in words characterized by "verbosity and self-glorification" (Kalisch),
or "acute, sensibility and elevated self-consciousness (Delitzsch, Keil), according
as one inclines to an unfavorable or
favorable view of Jacob's character - What is
my trespass? what is my sin, that thou hast so hotly pursued after me? The intensity
of Jacob s feeling imparts to his language a rythmical movement, and leads to the
selection of poetical forms of expression, such as דָּלַק אַחֲרֵי, to burn after, in the
sense of fiercely persecuting, which occurs again only in I Samuel 17:53, causing
the reader at times to catch
"the dance and music of actual verse" (Ewald).
Whereas
thou hast searched all my stuff, - literally (so. What is my sin) that thou hast felt all
my articles (Septuagint, Kalisch)? the clause being co-ordinate with the preceding;
though by others כִּי is taken as equivalent to כַּאֲשֶׁר, quando quidem, since
(Authorized Version, Ainsworth), or quando, when (Calvin, Murphy) - what hast
thou found of all thy household
stuff? set it here before my brethren and thy
brethren (i.e. Laban's kinsmen who accompanied him, who were also of necessity
kinsmen to Jacob), that they may judge betwixt us both - which of us has injured
the other. This twenty years have I been with thee (see v. 41); thy ewes (רָחֵל, a ewe,
whence Rachel) and thy she goats - עֵן a she-goat; compare Sanscrit, adsha, a
he-goat; adsha, a she-goat; Goth., gaitsa; Anglo-Saxon, gat; German, geis;
Greek, αἵξ - haix; Turkish, gieik (Gesenius,
sub voce) - have not cast their young,
and the rams of thy flock have I not eaten. Roberts says that the people of the East
do not eat female sheep except when sterile, and that it would be considered folly
and prodigality in the extreme to eat that which has the power of producing more
(see 'Oriental Illustrations,' p. 37). That which was torn of beasts (טְרֵפָה, a coll. fem.,
from טָרַפ, to tear in pieces, meaning that which is torn in pieces, hence cattle
destroyed by wild beasts) I brought not unto thee; I bare the loss of it; - אֲחֶטַּנָּה,
literally, I made expiation for it, the piel of חָטָא, signifying to make atonement
for a thing by sacrifice (Leviticus 9:15), or by compensation, as here; hence
"I bare the loss it" (Rashi,
equivalent to compareFurst), or ἐγὼ ἀπετίννουν
–
ego apetinnoun (LXX.), or, perhaps, "I will be at the loss of it, or pay it back"
(Kalisch) - of my hand didst thou require it, - otherwise, "of my hand require it"
(Kalisch) - whether stolen by day, or stolen by night. Without adhering literally
to the text, the Septuagint gives the sense of this and the preceding clause as being,
"From my own I paid back the stolen by day and the stolen by night." Thus I was;
(i.e. I was in this condition that)
in
the day the drought consumed me, and the frost
by night קֶרַח, ice, so called from its smoothness, hence cold. The alternation of heat
and cold in many eastern countries is very great and severely felt by shepherds,
travelers, and watchmen, who require to pass the night in the open air, and who
in consequence are often obliged to wear clothes lined with skins (compare
Psalm 121:6; Jeremiah 36:30). "The thermometer at 24° Fahr. at night, a lump
of solid ice in our basins in the morning, and then the scorching heat of the day
drawing up the moisture, made the neighborhood, convenient as it was, rather
a fever-trap, and premonitory symptoms warned us to move" (Tristram, 'The
there was a sharp frost, and ice appeared on all the little pools about the camp"
(Thomson, 'The Land and the Book,' p. 364). "Does a master reprove his servant
for being idle; he will ask, "What can I do? the heat eats me up by day, and the
cold eats me up by night'" (Roberts 'Oriental Illustrations,' p. 37; cf. Paxton's
'Illustrations,' vol. 1. p. 30). And my sleep departed from mine eyes. Syrian
shepherds were compelled to watch their flocks often both night and day, and for
a whole month together, and repair into long plains and deserts without any shelter;
and when reduced to this incessant labor, they were besides chilled by the piercing
cold of the morning, and scorched by the succeeding heats of a flaming sun, the
opposite action of which often swells and chafes their lips and face" (Paxton's
'Illustrations of Scripture,' vol. 1. p. 30). Thus have I been - literally, this to me
(or for myself) - twenty
years in thy house; I served thee fourteen years for thy
two daughters, and six years for thy cattle. The majority of expositors understand
the twenty years referred to in v. 38 to be the same as the twenty spoken of here as
consisting of fourteen and six. Dr. Kennicott, regarding the twenty years of v. 38 as
having intervened between the fourteen and the six of v. 41, makes the entire period
of Jacob's sojourn in Padan-aram to have been forty years. In support of this he
contends :
(1) that the particle זֶה, twice repeated (in v. 38 and in v. 41), may be legitimately
rendered, "This (one) twenty years I was with thee" (v. 38), i.e. taking care of thy
flocks; and "this for myself (another) twenty years in thy house," i.e. serving for thy
daughters and thy cattle (compare Exodus 14:20; Job 21:23, 25; Ecclesiastes 6:5);
(2) that on this hypothesis more time is afforded for the birth of Jacob's family,
viz. twenty-seven years instead of seven; and
(3) that it relieves the narrative of certain grave chronological difficulties in
connection with Judah and his family, which, on the supposition of the shorter
period, subsequently emerge, such as that Judah and his sons must have been quite
children when they married (see ch. 38:1-11). But, on the other hand, in favor of
the accepted chronology it may be urged:
unnatural;
sight suggest itself as that which Jacob intended;
short space of seven years (see ch. 27:1; 30:35);
not removed by the hypothesis of a forty years' sojourn in Padan-aram
any more than by a sojourn of only twenty years, since
married either after the sale of Joseph, in which case only twenty-two
years remain for the birth and marriage of Er and Onan, for Pharez and
to have two sons, Hezron and Hamul, before descending to
indeed, as Kurtz supposes,
before the sale of Joseph - indeed, if Hezron and Hamul were born in
'Speaker's Commentary,' Inglis), the computation of Dr. Kennicott does not
appear of sufficient weight to set aside the ordinary reckoning, which is
followed by interpreters of equal credit (Keil, Kalisch, Kurtz, Lange,
Canaan, before
the birth of Joseph, i.e. while
which is contrary to the narrative (see Genesis 38:1- 2). For these reasons,
though adopted by some excellent authorities (Bishop Horsley, Adam Clarke,
Murphy, Wordsworth).
And thou hast changed my wages ten times (see v. 7). Except (לוּלֵי, if not, i.e.
unless, introducing the protasis of the sentence) the God of my father, the God
of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac, - i.e. the object of Isaac's fear, not "terror"
(Oort and Kuenen, see 'The Bible for Young People,' vol. 1. p. 243), viz. God;
פַּחַד being used metonymically of that which inspires reverence or fear, like
σέβας – sebas – awe; reverence, worship, respect,
astonishment, wonder,
majesty,pride, glory and σέβασμα – sebasma – object of awe. The entire clause
is a periphrasis for Jehovah of v. 3, which is usually ascribed to the Jehovist,
while the present verse belongs, it is alleged, to the fundamental document –
had been with - or, for (compare Psalm 124:1-2) - me (during the whole period
of my sojurn in Padan-aram, but especially during the last six years), surely (כִּי,
then, commencing the apodosis) thou hadst sent me away now empty (as by thy
stratagem in changing my wages thou
didst design; but) God hath seen mine
affliction (compare ch. 29:32; Exodus 3:7) and the labor - especially that which
is wearisome, from a root signifying to toil with effort so as to become fatiguing
(compare Job 39:11) - of my hands, and rebuked - i.e. reproved thee, as in ch. 21:25
(Septuagint, Vulgate, Authorizwd Version, Calvin, Ainsworth, Lange, Kalisch, and
others); or judged, sc. it, i.e. mine affliction, in the sense of pronouncing an opinion
or verdict on it, as in I Chronicles 12:17 (Keil, Murphy); or proved, sc. it, viz. that
He had seen my affliction (Dathius, Peele); or decided betwixt us, as in v. 37 (Furst,
Gesenius) thee yester-night.
43 “And Laban answered and
said unto Jacob, These daughters are my daughters,
and these children are my children, and these
cattle are my cattle, and all that
thou seest is mine:
and what can I do this day unto these my daughters, or unto
their children which they have born? 44 Now
therefore come thou, let us make
a covenant, I and thou; and let it be for a
witness between me and thee.”
And Laban answered and said unto Jacob, - neither receiving Jacob's torrent of
invective with affected meekness (Candlish), nor proving himself to be completely
reformed by the angry recriminations of his "callous and hardened son-in-law
(Kalisch); but perhaps simply owning the truth of Jacob's wants, and recognizing
that he had no just ground of complaint (Calvin), as well as touched in his paternal
affections by the sight of his
daughters, from whom he felt that he was about to part
for ever. These daughters - literally, the
daughters (there) - are my daughters, and
these (literally, the) children
are my children, and these (literally, the) cattle are
my cattle; and all that thou seest is mine. Not as reminding Jacob that he had
still a legal claim to his (Jacob's) wives and possessions (Candlish), or at least
possessions (Kalisch), though prepared to waive it, but rather as acknowledging
that in doing injury to Jacob he would only be proceeding against his own flesh
and blood (Calvin, Rosenmüller, Gerlach, Alford). And
what can I do this day
unto these my daughters, - literally, and as for (or to) my daughters, what can
I do to these this day? The Septuagint, connecting "and to my daughters" with
what precedes, reads, καὶ πάντα ὅσα σὺ ὁρᾷς ἐμά ἐσι καὶ τῶν θυγατέρων μου –
kai panta hosa su
horas ema esi kai ton thugateron
mou - and all that you see is
mine: and what can I do this day to these my
daughters, or unto their children
which they have born? - i.e. why should I do anything unto them? An ego in
viscera mea saervirem
(Calvin). Now therefore literally, and now, νῦν οὖν –
nun oun – now come (Septuagint) - come thou, - לְכָה, imperfect of יָלַך- age,
go to, come now (compare ch. 19:32) - let us make a covenant, - literally,
let us cut a covenant, an expression which, according to partitionists (Tuch,
Stahelin, Delitzsch, et alii), is not used by the Elohist until after Exodus 14:8;
and yet by all such authorities the present verse is assigned to the Elohist
(compare Keil's
'Introduction,' part 1. § 2, div. 1. § 27) - I and thou; and let it
be for a witness between me and
thee.
Laban’s
Pursuit of Jacob (vs. 22-44)
departure, Laban at once determines on
pursuit; not alone for the purpose
of recovering his household gods, but chiefly with the view
of wreaking his
pent-up vengeance on Jacob, whom he now regarded as the spoiler of
his
fortunes, and if possible to capture and detain the much-coveted
flocks and
herds which he considered had been practically stolen by his
nephew.
Mustering his kinsmen by either
force or fraud, — by command enjoining
those belonging to his household, and by misrepresentation
probably
beguiling such as were independent of his authority, he loses not a
moment, but starts upon the trail of the fugitives. Worldly men are seldom
slow in seeking to repair their lost fortunes, and angry men are seldom
laggard in exacting revenge, it
is only God’s vengeance that is slow-footed.
in pursuit of Jacob, and now the distance of one day is all
that parts him
from the fugitives. In a dream by night he is warned by Elohim to speak
neither good nor bad to Jacob. The
incident reminds us of the Divine
superintendence of mundane affairs in general, and of God’s care for His
people in particular; of
the access which God ever has to the minds of His
dependent creatures, and of the many different ways in which He can
communicate His will; of His ability at all times to restrain the wrath of
wicked men, and check the hands of evil-doers, who meditate the spoiling
of His Church or the persecution of His saints.
Ø
The pompous harangue of Laban. Laban gives way to:
o
Passionate
reproach; charging
Jacob with having clandestinely
departed
from his service and violently carried off his daughters,
in the
first of which Jacob did nothing wrong, while the second
was a
pure exaggeration (v. 16).
o
Hypocritical
affection; declaring
that Jacob, had he, Laban, only
known,
might have been sent away with public demonstrations of
rejoicing,
while Rachel and Leah might have carried with them a
parent’s kiss,
if not a father’s blessing. But if Jacob’s leave-taking
would in
any way have excited Laban’s jubilation, it is
doubtful if
this
would not have been traceable less to Laban’s regard
for his
son-in-law
than to Laban’s anxiety about his flocks, which, in
the
absence
of the spoiler, he might hope would become prolific as
before;
while as for Laban’s love for his daughters, one
might
fairly
claim indemnity for suspecting an affection so recent in its
origin,
and so palpably contradicted by his previous behavior.
o
Boastful
assertion; passing
on, like all weak natures who love to be
considered
formidable, to brag about his power to inflict injury on
Jacob (v. 29),
and to hint that he only forbears to do so out of respect
for God,
who had appeared to him on the previous night.
o
Direct
accusation; ere he
closes his oration, deliberately impeaching
Jacob with having abstracted his teraphim.
Ø
The ingenuous response of Jacob. In this are
discernible virtues worthy
of imitation, if also infirmities deserving reprobation. If
Jacob’s candor
in declaring the reasons of his flight (v. 31) and
willingness to restore to
Laban whatever property belonged to him (v. 32) are examples to
be
copied, on the other hand, the over-confident assertion that no
one had
Laban’s gods, and the over-hasty
imprecation on any who should be
found possessing them, are not to be commended.
Ø The missing gods. On the nature, probable origin, and uses
of the
teraphim see Exposition, v. 19. The existence of
these silver or wooden
images in
Laban’s tent was a proof of the religious declension, if not
complete apostasy, of this branch of the family of Terah.
Scripture never
represents idolatry as an upward effort of the human heart, as a further
development in the onward evolution of the soul (Sir J. Lubbock on the
‘Origin of Civilisation,’ p. 256); but always as a deterioration, or a
retrogression,
or a falling away of the human spirit from its rightful
allegiance. The loss of Laban’s
manufactured deities was a ridiculous
commentary
on the folly of worshipping or trusting in a god that could be
stolen —
a complete reductio ad absurdum
of the whole superstructure of
idolatry
(compare I Kings 18. 27; Psalm 115:4-8; Isaiah 44:19; 46:6-7;
Jeremiah 10:5).
Ø The anxious devotee. Invited by Jacob to make a search for his
lost
teraphim, Laban begins
with Jacob’s tent, then with the tents of Bilhah and
Zilpah,
after which he passes into Leah’s, and finally comes to Rachel’s;
but everywhere
his efforts to recover his gods are defeated. What a
spectacle
of infinite humor, if it were not rather of ineffable sadness — a
man seeking for his lost gods! The gospel presents us with the opposite
picture
— the
ever-present God seeking for his lost children.
Ø The lying daughter. If the conduct of Rachel in carrying off
the images
of her
father was open to serious question (see Exposition, v. 19), her
behavior
towards her father in the tent was utterly inexcusable. Even if she
spoke the
truth in describing her condition, she was guilty of bare-faced
deception. This
particular passage in-Rachel’s history is painfully
suggestive of
the disastrous results of worldliness and irreligion in the
training of
children. Laban’s craft and Laban’s
superstition
had both been
factors
in Rachel’s education.
Ø The deceived parent. Worse than being disappointed in his
gods, Laban
was
dishonored by his daughter. But what else could he expect? Laban was
only reaping as he had sowed. Marvelous and appropriate
are God’s
providential
retributions. (I recommend #1246 – this website
Proverbs ch14 v14 – Spurgeon Sermon – How a Man’s Conduct
Comes Home to Him
CY – 2018)
out the vials of his wrath upon Laban,
and certainly it burned all the hotter
because of its previous suppression.
1. He upbraids Laban with the unreasonableness of his persecution (v. 36).
2. He taunts Laban with the fruitlessness of his search (v. 37).
3. He reminds Laban of the faithful service he had given for twenty years
(vs. 38-41).
4. He recalls the
crafty attempts to defraud him of which Laban had
been
guilty (v. 41).
5. He assures Laban that it was God’s gracious care, and neither his
honesty nor
affection, that had prevented him from being that day a poor
man instead of a
rich emir (v. 42).
6. He somewhat fiercely bids
Laban accept the rebuke which God had
addressed to him
the previous night.
surprise, the wrath of Laban all at once
subsided, and a proposal came
from him to bury past animosities, to strike a covenant of
friendship with
one another, and to part in peace. The seven days’ journey,
affording time
for reflection; the Divine interposition, inspiring him with
fear; the
mortification resulting from his fruitless search, convincing him that
he had
really overstepped the bounds of moderation in accusing Jacob;
the voice
of conscience within his breast re-echoing the words of
Jacob, and
declaring them to be true; and perhaps the sight of his daughters at
last
touching a chord in the old man’s heart; — all these may have
contributed
to this unexpected collapse in Laban;
but whether or not, Jacob, as became
him, cordially assented to the proposition.
1. The reality of
God’s care for His people — illustrated by
the appearances
of Elohim to Jacob and to Laban.
2. The miserable outcome of a worldly life — exemplified in Laban.
3. The efficacy of a soft answer in turning away wrath —
proved by
Jacob’s first response. (Proverbs 15:1)
4. The difficulty of restraining angry speech within just
bounds —
exemplified by
both.
5. The folly of idolatry, as seen in Laban s lost teraphim.
6. The evil
fruits of bad parental training, as
they appear in Rachel.
7. The proper way of ending quarrels — exhibited by Laban and Jacob in
their covenant
agreement.
45 “And Jacob took a stone, and set it up for a pillar.” Or Matzebah, as a
memorial or witness of the covenant about to be formed (v. 52); a different
transaction from the piling of the stone-heap next referred to (compare ch.28:18;
Joshua 24:27).
46 “And Jacob said unto his brethren, Gather stones;
and they took stones,
and made an heap: and they did eat there upon
the heap.” And Jacob said unto
his brethren, - Laban's kinsmen and his own (see v. 37) - Gather
stones; and they
took stones, and made an heap: - Gal, from Galal, to roll, to move in a circle,
probably signified a circular cairn, to be used not as a seat (Gerlach), but as an
altar (v. 54), a witness (v. 48),
and a table (v. 54), since it is added - and they
did eat there - not immediately (Lange), but afterwards, on the conclusion of
the covenant (v. 54) - upon
the heap.
47 “And Laban called it Jegarsahadutha: but Jacob called it Galeed.”
And Laban called it Jegarsahadutha: - A Chaldaic term signifying
"Heap of
testimony," βουνὸς τῆς μαρτυρίας - bounos taes marturias –
(Septuagint); tumulum testis (Vulgate) - but Jacob called it Galeed –
compounded of Gal and 'ed and meaning, like the corresponding Aramaic
term used' by Laban,
"Heap of witness," βουνὸς μάρτυς
– bounos martus
(Septuagint); acervum testimonii (Vulgate). "It is scarcely possible to doubt,"
says Kalisch, "that an important historical fact," relating to the primitive
language of the patriarchs, "is concealed in this part of the narrative;" but
whether that fact was that Aramaic, Syriac, or Chaldee was the mother-tongue
of the family of Nahor, while Hebrew was acquired by Abraham in
(Block, Delitzsch, Keil), or that Laban had deviated from the original speech
of his ancestors (Jerome, Augustine), or that' Laban and Jacob both used the
same language with some growing dialectic differences (Gosman in Lange, Inglis),
Laban simply on this occasion giving the heap a name which would be known to
the inhabitants of the district (Wordsworth), seems impossible to determine with
certainty. The most that can be reasonably inferred from the term Jegar-sahadutha
is that Aramaic was the language of
expression there is no other evidence that Laban and Jacob conversed in different
dialects; while it is certain that the word Mizpah, which was probably also spoken
by Laban, is not Chaldee or Aramaic but Hebrew.
48“And Laban said, This heap is a witness between me and thee this day.
Therefore
was the name of it called Galeed; 49And Mizpah; for he said, The LORD watch
between me and thee, when we are absent one from
another. 50 If
thou shalt afflict
my daughters, or if thou shalt
take other wives beside my daughters, no man is
with us; see, God is witness betwixt me and
thee.” And Laban said, This
heap is a
witness between me and thee this day.
The historian adding - Therefore was the name
of it called (originally by Jacob, and afterwards by the Israelites from this transaction)
Galeed (see on v. 21). The stony character of the regon may have suggested the
designation. And Mizpah; - watchtower from Tsaphah, to watch. Mizpah afterwards
became the site of a town in the district of Gilead (Judges 10:17; 11:11, 19, 34);
which received its name, as the historian intimates, from the pile of witness erected
by Laban and his kinsmen, and was later celebrated as the residence of Jephthah
(ibid. ch. 11:34) and the seat of the sanctuary (ibid. v. 11). Ewald supposes that the
mound (Galeed) and the watch tower (Mispah) were different objects, and that the
meaning of the (so-called) legend is that, while the former (the mountain) was piled
up by Jacob and his people, the latter (now the city and fortress of Mizpah on one
of the heights of
of
Hebrew story is its best refutation - for he (i.e. Laban) said, The Lord - Jehovah;
a proof that vs. 49-50 are a Jehovistic interpolation (Tuch, Bleek, Colenso, Kalisch);
an indication of their being a subsequent insertion, though not warranting the
inference that the entire history is a complication (Keil); a sign that henceforth
Laban regarded Jehovah as the representative of his rights (Lange); but probably
only a token that Laban, recognizing Jehovah as the only name that would bind
the conscience of Jacob (Hengstenberg, Quarry), had for the moment adopted
Jacob's theology ('Speaker's Commentary'), but only in self-defense (Wordsworth) –
watch between me and thee, when we are absent one from another - literally,
a man from his companion. If
thou shalt afflict my daughters, or if thou shalt
take other wives beside my daughters (Laban's concern for his daughters, though
hitherto not conspicuous, may, in the hour of parting from them, have been real:
his language shows that he was not quite at ease as to Jacob's integrity. Perhaps
the remembrance that he had been the cause of Jacob's taking two wives made
him anxious to secure that Jacob should not improve upon his evil instructions),
no man is with us; - either then they stood apart from Laban's clan followers
(Inglis); or his meaning was that when widely separated there would be no one
to judge betwixt them, or perhaps even to observe them (Rosenmüller), but –
see, God (Elohim in contrast to man) is witness betwixt me and thee.
51 “And Laban said to
Jacob, Behold this heap, and behold this pillar, which I
have cast betwixt me and thee; 52This heap
be witness, and this pillar be witness,
that I will not pass over this heap to thee,
and that thou shalt not pass over this
heap and this pillar unto me, for harm. 53
The God of Abraham, and the God
of Nahor, the God
of their father, judge betwixt us. And Jacob sware by
the fear
of his father Isaac.” And Laban said to Jacob, - according to Ewald the last narrator
has transposed the names of Laban and Jacob (see 'History of Israel,' vol. 1. p. 346) –
Behold this heap, and behold this pillar, which I have cast (same word as in v. 45.
The Arabic version and Samaritan text read yaritha, thou hast erected, instead of
yarithi, I have erected or cast up) betwixt
me and thee; this heap be witness, and
this pillar be witness, that
(literally, if, here = that) I will not pass over this heap
to thee, and that thou shalt not pass over this heap and this pillar (Laban bound
himself never to pass over the heap which he had erected as his witness; whereas
Jacob was required to swear that he would never cross the pillar and the pile, both
of which were witnesses for him) unto me, for harm. The emphatic word closes
the sentence. The God of Abraham, and the God
of Nahor, the God of their father,
judge - the verb is plural, either because Laban regarded the Elohim of Nahor as
different from the Elohim of Abraham (Rosenmüller, Keil, Kalisch, Wordsworth,
'Speaker's Commentary'), or because, though acknowledging only one Elohim,
he viewed him as maintaining several and distinct relations to the persons named
- betwixt us. Laban here invokes his own hereditary Elohim, the Elohim of
Abraham's father, to guard his rights and interests under the newly-formed covenant;
while Jacob in his adjuration
appeals to the Elohim of Abraham's son. And
Jacob
sware by
the fear of his father Isaac (see above, v. 42).
54 “Then Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount, and
called his brethren to
eat bread: and they did eat bread, and tarried all night in the mount.”
Then Jacob offered sacrifice - literally, slew a slaying, in ratification of the
covenant - upon the mount, and called his brethren (Laban's followers, who
may have withdrawn to a distance during the interview) to eat bread. The
sacrificial meal afterwards became an integral part of the Hebrew ritual
(Exodus 24:3-8; 29:27-28; Leviticus 10:14-15). And
they did eat bread,
and tarried all night in the mount.
55 “And early in the morning Laban
rose up, and kissed his sons and his
daughters, and blessed them: and Laban
departed, and returned unto his place.”
And early in the morning Laban rose up, and kissed his sons and his daughters, -
i.e. Rachel and Leah and their children. It does not appear that Laban kissed Jacob
on taking final leave of him as he
did on first meeting him (ch. 29:13) - and
blessed
them (compare ch.24:60; 28:1): and Laban departed, and returned unto his place –
Padan-aram (compare ch. 18:33; 30:25).
Galeed
and Mizpah, or the Covenant of Peace (vs. 45-55)
Ø The pillar of remembrance. The erection of the stone slab appears to
have been
the act of Jacob alone, and to have been designed to
commemorate
the important transaction about to be entered into with
Laban. It is well to keep note of those
engagements we make with our
fellow-men
in order to their punctual fulfillment; much more of those we
make with
God. It does not appear that any name was given to the column,
and this
may have been because it was intended chiefly for himself.
Ø The pile of witness. This was the work both of Laban and Jacob, which
they
conjointly performed through the instrumentality of their brethren; and
being of
the nature of a public monument, it was further characterized by a
name — Laban calling it Jegar-sahadutha,
and Jacob styling it Galeed, both
expressions
signifying heap of witness, and perhaps both of them naming it
Mizpah, or watchtower, from the nature of the
oath which they both took
on the
occasion. Men who are truly sincere in their covenant engagements
are never
afraid to bind themselves by public attestations of their good
faith,
though it is certain that of all men these least require to be so bound.
Ø The solemn engagements. On the one hand Laban
undertakes never to
pass the
stone heap on
pillar,
which was purely of Jacob’s construction, and therefore supposed to
have a
religious significance solely for Jacob; and on the other hand Jacob
records
his vow never to cross the pillar and the pile to inflict wrong on
Laban,
and in addition, as Laban might be injured in his
daughters without
crossing
the forbidden line, never to afflict Rachel and Leah by taking other
wives
besides them; The engagement on both sides is to abstain from doing
injury of
any sort to each other; and to this all men are bound by both
natural
and revealed religion without the formality of an oath; and much
more than other men, are Christians taken
bound by God’s grace and
Christ’s
blood to live peaceably with all men and be at peace amongst
themselves.
Ø The impressive oaths. If it is dubious whether Laban appealed to God or
only to
the stone-heap to witness his sincerity in promising not to harm
Jacob, it is
certain that he appealed to God to keep a strict eye on Jacob
(v. 49), and in
a semi-superstitious way united the God of Abraham and
the God
of Nahor, the God of their fathers, to judge between
them. Jacob
does not
mention either pile or pillar, but swears by the fear of his father
Isaac.
Ø The sacrifice. The offering of sacrifice was essential to the formation of
a
covenant. As between God and man, it virtually proclaimed that God
could
enter into amicable relations with sinful man only on the basis of an
atonement.
As between man and man, it was equivalent to an
acknowledgment by the covenanting parties that both required to be
covered
with the blood of propitiation. That Jacob, and not Laban,
offered
sacrifice
intimates that these truths were already in some degree
appreciated
by Jacob, though possibly they were not understood by Laban.
Ø The feast. In making this feast Jacob may only have been following the
example
of his father Isaac, who similarly entertained Abimelech
and his
statesmen
at
formed
between them; but the sacrificial feast afterwards became an
important
element in the Mosaic cultus, and was designed to
express the
idea of
house and table fellowship between the covenanting parties.
Ø The kiss of reconciliation. It is not certain that Laban kissed Jacob when
he
prepared for his departure in the morning; perhaps that was too much to
expect;
but he kissed Rachel and Leah and their children. It was a sign of
forgiveness
not alone to them, but through them also to Jacob.
Ø The paternal benediction. Laban, whose
better nature appears to have
returned
as the result of the covenant, or of the feast, or of the
contemplated parting with his daughters, poured out his feelings in a
farewell
blessing on their heads. It is the last we hear or see of Laban
in the
Scripture narrative. Let us hope it was the revival of early kindness and
piety in
the old man’s heart.
Final Covenant between Jacob and Laban (vs. 51-55)
SAFETY. Very imperfect knowledge in the Mesopotamian family.
Rachel’s theft of the household
gods a sign of both moral and spiritual
deficiency. The religion of Jacob and his descendants must be
preserved
from contamination. Intercourse with the unenlightened and
unsanctified,
though necessary for a time and in some degree, must not be
suffered to
obscure the higher light, or surround us with practical entanglements
which
hinder our faithfulness to God.
THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOLEMN PUBLIC ACTS OF
COVENANT AND TESTIMONY. We want the Galeed and the Mizpah,
the heap of witness and the watch-tower of faith. Many united
together in
the covenant, and thus became witnesses in whose presence the
oath was
taken. We are helped to faithfulness by the publicity of our
vows. But the
higher the spiritual life, the less we shall call in material
things to support it.
Jacob with Laban
is not the true Jacob. All dependence upon the symbol
and rite is more or less compromise.
THE LOWER ONE, OF THE MEANS OF PREPARING THE WORLD
FOR THE TRUTH. Laban and his family are types of the lower order of
religious knowledge and life. The covenant between the father-in-law
and
son-in-law in the name of the God of Abraham and the God of Nahor
points to a rising light in the Mesopotamian family. We may be sure
that
the influence of Christianity will be supreme wherever it is
brought face to
face with men’s religions. That influence may be embodied in matters of
common life, in covenants between man and man, in laws and
commercial
regulations and social arrangements.
NATURE, BUT REVEALS ITS SUPERIORITY TO NATURE BY
BRINGING ALL THINGS AND MEN INTO SUBJECTION TO
ITSELF. Jacob,
Rachel, and afterwards Joseph, present to the Spirit of
God elements of
character which require both elevation and renovation.
The grace is given. On a natural
foundation inherited from others God
rears by His grace a lofty structure. The crafty and the
thoughtful are often
nearly allied. It is one of the
spiritual dangers to which specially energetic
and subtle minds are exposed, that they may so easily fall into
an abuse of
their superior mental quickness to the injury of their moral purity and
simplicity. Jacob and Laban making their
covenant together, and erecting
their witnessing monuments, are another illustration of the
homage which
even very imperfect characters pay to the God of truth. They
appeal to
Him, and they do so in the
presence of a world which they know will justify
God, and not the sinner. The God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, the God
of Isaac, judged between them. Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount,
and invited his brethren to a sacrificial banquet; and it was in that
atmosphere of mingled reverence for God and human affection that
the heir
of the covenant bade farewell to all that held him in
restraint and set his
face once more
towards the land of promise.
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES
Library, LLC. All
rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.