Birth Wars
Notes
Transcript
Birth Wars
Genesis 29:31—30:24
The creation account’s record that God created only one wife for Adam made it clear for all who would follow that anyone who takes an extra wife is going beyond what God intended. The creation decree is implicitly monogamous: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (2:24).
In agreement with this, the polygamous marriages in Genesis were darkly cast.
· Lamech’s chest-thumping Sword Song before his wives Adah and Zillah exuded brutality (4:23)
· Next, Abraham “listened to the voice” of his wife (an echo of Adam’s listening to the voice of his wife at the fall; 3:17) and took Hagar as his wife, consequently complying to the marital ethics of Mesopotamia (6:2). Bitterness followed.
· Ungodly Esau married two Hittite women (26:34) and added a third by taking an Ishmaelite wife (28:6–8).
· And in Genesis 29 the polygamy that Jacob was tricked into can only be described as disastrous. It is true that the later Hebrew kings were scandalously polygamous. But their marriages were also catastrophic.
Clearly, the ideal for Hebrew marriage was always monogamy, despite the examples of royalty.
So, in the Old Testament polygamy was understood to be a violation of the covenant faithfulness that God demanded of his bride Israel as dramatically portrayed in the book of Hosea. And, of course, God spoke the final word in his Son who called his people to the joyous, monogamous love and fidelity that was characteristic of his love for his bride, the church (Ephesians 5:25–33).
Now as we again take up Jacob’s life, he’s a polygamist.
Strictly speaking, it wasn’t his fault. Certainly, we know that it wasn’t his choice! But there was a kind of justice here as the victimizer became the victim. Jacob was made to drink his own duplicity-laced medicine.
His marital situation wasn’t promising. He was in pagan Mesopotamia at the mercy of his scoundrel uncle, Laban, to whom he was indentured for seven years and then for seven more years. He had a wife he wasn’t attracted to and didn’t love. And this unloved wife had savaged her sister by masquerading as her on her wedding night and engaging her groom.
And more, this triangle was made up of difficult and unpromising human material. Jacob had demonstrated that he was an accomplished cheat. And, we’ll see, the sister-wives were both sharp-tongued and harsh. Both women would use the births of their own and their surrogate children as opportunities to put their feelings into words, to celebrate or to gloat.
This is messy—multiple wives, multiple births, sister hatred, brother hatred—all of which will be acted out over the years.
But despite all of this, we have here the genesis of the twelve tribes of Israel from one father and four mothers.
Jacob didn’t know that he would father twelve sons. All he knew about his offspring was what he had heard the Lord say from above the angel-filled ladder at Bethel:
Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.
Certainly, Jacob didn’t know that his children would come in three sets of four.
· Initially, four would be born to Leah.
· Next, four would be born to the slave-maids Bilhah and Zilpah.
· And the last four would come from the sisters, two from Leah and two from Rachel.
And, of course, Jacob didn’t have the slightest clue of the birth wars that lay ahead.
Let’s first look at:
Four by Leah
Four by Leah
When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben, for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”
She conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon.
Again she conceived and bore a son, and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi.
And she conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she ceased bearing.
Now, we need to understand that Jacob didn’t hate Leah as we normally use the word. “Hated” is used in 29:31 in the relative sense of “unloved,” which is clear from the preceding verse: “So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah” (v. 30).
This understood, we are ready for the essential revelations of the opening sentence of the passage under discussion:
31 When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
Despite the sin and polygamy that surrounded Jacob’s marriage, the Lord had begun to work out his own purposes. God had closed Rachel’s womb and opened the womb of her sister.
Rachel was devastated. As Jacob’s choice wife, she expected to be the matriarch who would fulfill the Bethel promises. And in the Mesopotamian context, barrenness was not so much pitied as disdained. In contrast, her older sister Leah was marvelously fertile, having one son after another while Jacob worked off his seven-year debt for Rachel.
Naturally, unloved Leah’s hopes soared. Maybe now Jacob would come to love her. Barren Rachel, of course, felt increasingly diminished by her sister’s successes. Consequently, we have two desperate women—one desperate for love and the other desperate for children.
The barometer of Leah’s pathetic hope of love is enshrined in her naming of the four boys. Reuben means “look, a son.”
32 And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben, for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”
Significantly here, as in two other namings, Leah credited the Lord for the birth. There was no doubt in her mind that it was God’s doing. Also, as in all the subsequent namings, she attached the name’s meaning (“look, a son”) with an explanation of the significance of the name—“the Lord has looked upon my affliction.” With this initial birth, her hope to be loved peaked—“now my husband will love me.”
Simeon means “the Lord has heard.” So of child two:
33 She conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon.
Possibly this little boy would melt Jacob’s hatred into love. The Lord had heard; so maybe Jacob would hear.
Levi means “attachment,” and so we read of boy number three:
34 Again she conceived and bore a son, and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi.
Here much sobered Leah did not wish for love but attachment. This was a lonely, pitiful speech. Her hope faded, and she demanded less.
Judah means “praise.” So, with boy four we have this sense
35 And she conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she ceased bearing.
Here Leah didn’t appeal for love or improved relations with her husband. She’d given up. But even though she may never know Jacob’s love, God had given her four sons, and she had to be thankful for that. And if Leah could have seen down the generations, she would have been astonished at how blessed she was, because her last two sons.
Levi and Judah would respectively father the priestly and kingly tribes of Israel. Leah’s blood would flow in the veins of Moses, Aaron, David and Christ!
As it stood, poor Leah remained unloved.
There were four by Leah and next:
Four by the Slave Wives
Four by the Slave Wives
On the other hand, Rachel’s barrenness became increasingly intolerable with each of Leah’s births. She was humiliated. But on top of that, Leah’s little boys inflamed her maternal desires. Piteous envy gripped her soul. Envy’s dark grip diminished her own blessings and puffed Leah’s blessings way beyond reality. In her bitterness, Rachel had forgotten that her barrenness was God’s doing, that He is the giver of life.
At this point, thoughts of God were far from her.
So, we see the hostile exchange:
When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she envied her sister. She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I shall die!”
Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?”
Rachel knew that children were a gift from God and that Jacob’s sharp reply was deserved. But despite her husband’s scolding, Rachel decided to take matters into her own hands through the substitute use of her maid Bilhah.
Now, Rachel knew all about the Sarah-Hagar fiasco. She knew of Esau’s foolish unions. And, more, she had once treasured the ideal of a exclusive lifelong marriage to Jacob. But now she tossed it all aside as, taking up her own devices, she stepped up the birth wars.
Maybe she could catch up with Leah through Bilhah.
Rachel’s plan was a smashing success. Bilhah bore her two sons in quick succession, Dan and Naphtali. Dan means “judged” or “vindicated.”
Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan.
This was her declaration that God was beginning to set things right for her. Justification at last! Naphtali means “wrestlings.”
Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his name Naphtali.
“Look, Leah, my stubbornness is being rewarded.” Rachel’s surrogate was gaining.
But Leah struck back by giving Zilpah to Jacob, and she quickly gave Leah two more sons, Gad and Asher. Gad means “good fortune,” and Asher means “happy.”
And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad.
Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son.
And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.” So she called his name Asher.
“Bye, bye, Rachel. I’m leading 6 to 2! Don’t you see, you poor childless thing, that you’re as close as you’re going to get? God’s fortune is smiling on me, not on you. What happy days!”
Rachel was losing the war, and she knew it.
There were four by Leah, Four by the Slave Wives and finally:
Four by Leah and Rachel
Four by Leah and Rachel
Could the baby wars get any worse?
They did, in fact, because we read,
In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.”
14 In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah…
What boy number one found was a fertility drug and a love potion. According to Genesis scholar Gordon Wenham, “The mandrake is a perennial Mediterranean plant that bears bluish flowers in winter and yellowish plum-sized fruit in summer. In ancient times, mandrakes were famed for arousing sexual desire (Song of Solomon 7:13) and for helping barren women to conceive.”
Indeed, the supposed powers are certainly seen here in Genesis and in the Song of Solomon, where the bride says:
The mandrakes give forth fragrance, and beside our doors are all choice fruits, new as well as old, which I have laid up for you, O my beloved.
Significantly, the Hebrew word translated “mandrakes” is almost the same as the Hebrew word for “love.” Many ancients called mandrakes “love apples” or “May apples.”
The power of mandrakes was and is superstitious and not scientific. But what’s clear is that Rachel and Leah believed the mandrake myth and so the mandrakes became coins for a desperate bargain.
Tellingly, it is Rachel who again suggests the ungodly expedient, and “It is a further example, in this family, of trading in things that should be above trade, and resorting in trouble only half-heartedly to God” (Kidner).
The family ethics here seem more like those of a dog kennel!
In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.”
But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.”
When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night.
…Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.”
15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.”
16 When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night.
This is really ugly. Leah, seeing she has the upper hand, speaks of Jacob as “my husband,” despite her scandalous wedding night masquerade. And it’s apparent in this sleazy arrangement that Rachel controls which wife or slave-wife sleeps with Jacob and when. It seems that at Rachel’s direction Leah has been shut out from her marital rights for some time.
The deal takes place, of course, because both women are now desperate for children. Leah gets her night, and Rachel gets the mandrakes.
The Bible makes it clear that their beliefs in mandrakes are an old wives’ tales because Leah, who gives up the mandrakes, has two more children! And Rachel, who has the mandrakes, remains childless for three more years.
So much for the love apples!
The text is explicit that Leah’s renewed fertility comes from God:
And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son.
So again, we see that God was accomplishing his divine purpose amidst this marital mess. As to Leah’s two children, Issachar means “wages,” a name that Leah ironically employs to denigrate Rachel’s making her hire Jacob with the mandrakes.
The meaning of Zebulun is unclear, but Leah’s upbeat mention of endowment and honor conveys the positive thrust of the name. This note of triumph is sustained as she calls her daughter Dinah: “judgment, vindication.”
Meanwhile, Rachel, in the deep lowliness of her barrenness, had been praying for a child. Her petition was no doubt daily, and maybe even hourly.
And God answered!
Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb.
She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”
And she called his name Joseph, saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!”
Rachel had come to the end of herself.
The beautiful, favored wife had given up on her devices. There were no surrogates and no mandrakes. Everything was of God, pure and simple. Here the words “opened her womb” duplicate the words that began the story in 29:31, forming a literary inclusion.
Both Leah and Rachel had children only because God did it. Both had been visited in their low estate. This was grace alone. All was of God. The angel-filled ladder with God’s agents ascending and descending on Jacob had been fully operational throughout the scheming and manipulation, the surrogate competition, the love potions, the selling of intimacy, the celebrating and the gloating, the humiliations and the tears of the loveless and childless.
Truly, God made “the wrath of man [to] praise [him]” (Psalm 76:10). Clearly, God would have no trouble using Jacob’s sons, whether they were of Leah or Rachel or Bilhah or Zilpah.
With the birth of Joseph, joy almost leaps from the page. God had taken away Rachel’s reproach. She called her son Joseph (“may he add”), saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!” (v. 24).
And truly, God would one day do just that with Benjamin, son number twelve.
How fascinating this section of Scripture must have been at the exodus when every man and woman could find his or her ancestral father and mother in this narrative. And how fascinating to see that human determination and cleverness would not, could not accomplish the work of God.
In fact, God comes to the lowly as he did first to Leah in her humble condition and then to Rachel in her lowliness.
How fascinating this is for those of us who possess the revelation of Christ in the New Testament!
When Martin Luther read this account, he asked, “Does God have no other occupation left than to have regard for the lowliness of the household?”
Luther’s question was answered not only here but in the good news of the gospel, as we have it in Luke. When Mary heard Elizabeth confirm that her womb bore her Lord:
And Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant. For behold, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
At the birth of Jesus, the angels voiced the Gloria to lowly shepherds (Luke 2:8–20).
When Mary and Joseph brought Jesus to the temple, godly Simeon, who had been humbly waiting for the Lord, swept the baby into his arms, declaring:
“Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace, according to your word;
for my eyes have seen your salvation
And when Jesus initiated the preaching of the gospel, he quoted from Isaiah:
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”