Jacob A Lesson in Retributive Justice Great and marvelous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints . . . for thy judgments are made manifest—Revelation 15:3,4 David Stein Have you ever been deceived? Do you remember how you reacted? Most of us probably would react with a little irritation even though we might not show it. A common reaction in the world is a desire to get even, to turn the tables. In fact, there is a saying under such circumstances: don’t get angry, get even. This always leads to a string of such deceptions, everyone trying to even a score which never gets settled. Of course such a reaction is not proper for the consecrated. As Christians we have a standard of behavior quite in contrast to the way the world acts. The Lord has very graciously recorded admonitions for us to maintain a proper balance in the face of deception. He says, “Do not be deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap” (Galatians 6:7). The lesson here is the principle of retributive justice. Jesus alluded to the retributive nature of judgment when he said, “Judge not that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again” (Matthew 7:1,2). In the book of Genesis there is a string of deceptions that occur during the life of Jacob. They are remarkable for the lessons they teach along the lines of retributive justice. Compensation occurs for each deception, each injustice, and it usually occurs in a striking parallel to the offense, showing the fulfillment of Paul’s principle of reaping what you sow. For us the character lessons are invaluable. God is a strict bookkeeper when it comes to justice and injustice and the scales of his justice must eventually balance. This is true even if it takes action into the Millennium. (Notice this particularly in 1 Timothy 5:24,25.) The string of events recorded during the life of Jacob is a lesson to us along the lines of retributive justice. We are being trained to be associate judges with Christ, therefore we can learn much from these providentially overruled dramas. Our study centers around the family of Jacob. Let’s first review his background and early experiences to pick up the thread of time. In Genesis 25:22,23 we read a description of Jacob’s prenatal life. The enmity between Jacob and Esau are foretold. Thus Rebekah knows something about her children’s future. We are not told who she tells about this prophecy, if anyone. In Genesis 25:24-28 the account acquaints us with the personality of the two boys. Esau is the firstborn. His name, which means rough, is given for his rough, hairy appearance at birth. Jacob, whose name means supplanter, is born holding onto the heel of his brother! The character sketch which follows describes Esau as the hunter and outdoorsman, while Jacob is a shepherd with a more domesticated demeanor. The Purchase of the Birthright This brings us to a pivotal moment in the life of both which precipitates a series of events that stretch for many decades afterward. In Genesis 25:29-34 we have the account of the selling of Esau’s birthright to Jacob. Let us first take note that there was nothing in this transaction that violated justice. Esau comes upon his brother after what apparently was an unfruitful hunting mission. He is tired and very hungry. Jacob is boiling some stew. Esau gets one sniff of the delicious broth and immediately asks for some. The canny Jacob sees an opportunity. He asks Esau to sell him his birthright for a bowl of the stew. Esau, who clearly did not appreciate that birthright, quickly agrees. It becomes what is called today a “done deal.” Jacob acts most appropriately. Scripture says that Esau despised his birthright (Genesis 25:34). Paul places the matter of Esau’s priorities very clearly: “... no immoral person, no one worldly-minded like Esau. He sold his birthright for a single meal, and you know that although he wanted afterwards to claim the blessing, he was rejected; though he begged for it to the point of tears, he found no way open for second thoughts” (Hebrews 12:16,17, New English). Since Jacob now was the legitimate owner of the birthright, he could expect to receive the blessings which were to flow from it. These would include the special blessing from his father, Isaac, a double portion of the family inheritance, and the right to lead the family in worship as patriarch priest of the family. Since he should have been a godly man, as a worshiper of Jehovah, he should have had faith to await the outworking of all of this by God. Here is where Jacob, and particularly his mother Rebekah, take a wrong turn. The Deception of Isaac We read in Genesis 27 that Isaac, now in his old age, had decided to give the firstborn blessing to his eldest son. He sends Esau out to bring him some venison in preparation for the act. Rebekah overhears this. A just course of action would have been to bring Jacob before Isaac, describe the prophecy that was given to her before the birth of the children, and recount to Isaac the sale of the birthright and Jacob’s rightful claim to it. This is not the course of action she chooses. Instead she goes to Jacob and tells him what his father plans to do and plots to get the blessing by deception. Though Jacob is the key player in this trickery, Rebekah is the brains behind it. Note the following in Genesis 27:
In fact, Jacob seems a bit reluctant about the whole affair (Genesis 27:11,12). Nevertheless, he joins in with the deception, even to the point of lying three times to his father:
The ruse is effective and he gets the blessing he seeks (Genesis 27:28,29). Almost immediately thereafter, Esau returns and the deception is exposed (Genesis 27:30, 36, 37). Did God approve of this deception? There is no word of disapproval recorded in Scripture. But we can hardly imagine God approved lying. So though the birthright was legitimately Jacob’s, he should not have deceived his father to obtain it. An injustice was done which would have to be rectified, and rectified it was. For Rebekah, who masterminded the whole affair, we but take note that in instructing her beloved son Jacob to flee from the wrath of his brother, she evidently never sees him again, dying before his return. For Jacob, justice comes back to him in a most appropriate and ironic way. To see this we must move to Genesis chapter 29. The First Deception of Jacob Jacob fled to his uncle Laban. While there he fell in love with Rachel and asked for her hand in marriage. Laban thinks this is a good idea and asks Jacob for seven years labor in exchange for her hand in marriage. Jacob works the seven years and it comes time for his wedding. The marriage feast is done and Jacob goes into his new bride in the evening. However, in the morning he makes an astonishing discovery. Laban has switched his daughters! What a deception has been played upon Jacob! However, when we think this through, we find some amazing parallels to the deception which Jacob perpetrated upon his father. Laban exchanged Leah (the firstborn) for Rachel (the younger) in reverse parallel to what Jacob did to Isaac (the younger for the firstborn). Put another way, Jacob, who took the firstborn position of his brother, now suffers due to the firstborn position of his beloved’s sister! In each case there was a firstborn swap. The retributive justice toward Jacob is striking in this parallel. Of course, Laban has not played fairly either. Perhaps this should have been a warning to Jacob to not deceive further. But he seems not to have paid attention because we have another deception in Genesis chapter 30. The First Deception of Laban After Jacob’s 14 years of service he transacts a new arrangement with Laban. In payment for his continued service over his father-in-law’s flocks, Jacob will take all of the oddly colored (speckled and spotted and brown) as his own. Laban, who was a shepherd himself, knew what numbers of these odd colored animals could be expected to be produced and agreed to surrender that apparently smaller number to Jacob. However, Jacob had discovered some means to change the ratios of normal colored animals to oddly colored animals. After some time, Jacob’s flocks begin to outnumber Laban’s. There is an interesting connection here that we might make with Laban’s deception and the possible payback to it. Laban deceived Jacob with respect to Rachel and Leah. Jacob deceived Laban back by getting, among all other animals, his ewes and rams. (Compare Genesis 31:38 and 32:14.) What is ironic is that in Hebrew the name Rachel means ewe and Leah is a twist on the word for ram. Thus for Laban’s having deceived Jacob by substituting Leah for Rachel, Laban is now repaid by losing his ewes and rams (his Rachels and Leahs). Here again, the payback contains a hint of the original offense. The Second Deception of Laban and its Tragic Consequences Evidently Rachel still felt she had a score to settle with her father for swapping her sister Leah for her on her wedding night. When Jacob leaves Laban’s house, Rachel steals her father’s teraphim (“images” in the KJV). While these may have been religious idols, it is more probable that they were representations or icons of the family wealth and prosperity. Three days later Laban discovers the loss and chases after Jacob, catching him on the tenth day. When Laban tells Jacob what the problem is, he is sympathetic. He understands how important these were to Laban and the callousness of someone to steal them. So, unaware that Rachel is the thief, he unwittingly curses his wife, saying, “With whomever you find your gods, let that person not live” (Genesis 31:32). Then he allows Laban to search his camp. Meanwhile, Rachel has hidden the teraphim in her saddlebag and then sat upon it. When Laban reaches her tent she says: “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” (Genesis. 31:35). There are two items that have ironic and tragic recompense. First, Jacob in ignorance pronounces judgment upon her, that being the curse of death. Second, she hides the teraphim from her father under the deception of being in the monthly “custom of women.” How ironic it is that she dies in childbirth as recorded just four chapters later. The parallels here are quite intense inasmuch as childbirth involves the cessation of the monthly cycle, and death reminds us of Jacob’s unwitting curse of his wife. Once again a parallel between the deception and the recompense describes the retributive character of justice. The Second Deception of Jacob The Bible now records a second deception of Jacob. Why a second? We must assume that justice is not yet served. The first deception was a minor inconvenience. No lies, just omissions. The second deception involved damaging lies and caused real suffering. Jacob’s sons, jealous of Joseph, sell Joseph into slavery in Egypt. In order to thoroughly deceive Jacob about their deed, they take Joseph’s coat of many colors and dip it into a goat’s blood. Then they take it to Jacob and say “We found this. Do you recognize it?” Jacob does and draws the wrong conclusion—he is deceived! (See Genesis 37:33-35.) Once again the retributive character of justice is seen in several items paralleling previous experiences. First consider the twin themes of goat and garment. In this scene we have the garment of Joseph, his coat. Does this not call to mind the garments of Esau (goodly raiment, Genesis 27:15) used by Jacob and his mother to deceive Isaac? Secondly, the goat’s blood used to mimic the blood of a slain Joseph bring to mind the goat’s skin used of Rebekah to deceive Isaac into thinking Jacob was Esau. One can take the goat theme one step further by noting the following: the word for goat in Hebrew is seir which coincidentally is also the name of the location where Easu settled (Genesis 33:16). And to make the connection even more, it is also the word for hairy, descriptive of Esau’s hair, thus giving us a double pun of reminder. (See Strong’s numbers 8163 and 8165.) The Deception of Judah This account is found in Genesis chapter 38. We are told that Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. Er, the oldest, married a girl named Tamar, but because of his wickedness, he died by the hand of Jehovah before leaving offspring. So in the patriarchal tradition, Tamar is married off to the next son to raise up seed for him. But Onan appears to have no better character than his brother and because of his callousness, he also is slain by Jehovah. Now the third son, Shelah, is promised to Tamar. But Judah is fearful that he too will die, so he tries to deceive Tamar by saying that Shelah is too young yet to marry and she should wait a while. However, time marches by and Judah makes no wedding plans. Judah is only trying to preserve the life of his youngest son, but his deception is an injustice to Tamar. Eventually this intention of Judah becomes clear to Tamar, so she takes action to get justice for herself. She puts off her widow garments, covers herself with a vail, and poses as a harlot on a road she knows Judah will pass over. Judah, newly widowed, propositions her and sleeps with her, promising to pay her one goat. As a pledge for payment he leaves some personal attire (a signet, a bracelet and his staff). Curiously, Judah never recognizes her during this encounter. The result of this encounter is that Tamar is later found to be pregnant. Judah, the patriarch judge of his family, confronts her with her apparent sin. She confronts Judah right back with his property and says “Recognize these?” He does! And he sees what she has done and declares her righteous. She obtained the justice she was seeking. Thus was Judah deceived in recompense for his deception of Tamar and the story again presents us several intriguing parallels. First we note that Judah lost two sons in connection with Tamar. He gains back two sons from Tamar (twin boys, Pharez and Zarah). Tamar got her family and Judah regained two sons. It is also of interest that we again see the twin themes of goat and garments, the price of a goat for the encounter with Tamar and the items of Judah’s personal attire as a pledge. The Final Deceptions—Genesis 42-45 We now move some 13 years later in the narrative and the scene changes to Egypt. Joseph has risen to extraordinary political power in Egypt having become the second in command. His brothers come in the midst of famine looking for food. Joseph recognizes them but they do not recognize him. It is ironic that the brothers address themselves to Joseph as “your slaves” in view of the fact that they once sold him as a slave (Genesis 42:10). Joseph by this time is a mature and wise ruler and he does not allow his emotions to push him into any brash actions. So he does not reveal himself to them in order to ascertain their true heart motives. They remain deceived as to Joseph’s true identity. First he accuses them of being spies. They deny it and identify themselves as sons of one man. Joseph then proposes a test: they are to bring the youngest brother as proof of their claims. However, they are to spend three days in jail first, fitting because afterward this brings to their minds their treatment of Joseph (Genesis 42:21,22). At the end of that time Joseph keeps Simeon hostage in prison while he dispatches the brothers to their home to fetch Benjamin. The choice of Simeon is quite appropriate insofar as justice is concerned. Call to mind the account of the selling of Joseph to the Ishmaelites. All of the brothers, except Reuben and Judah, were in favor of the idea of murdering Joseph. Reuben was clearly against it and plotted a way to save Joseph from his brothers. We surmise that Judah suggesting the selling of Joseph to spare his life. Under patriarchal tradition, the eldest brother leads. We are told that Reuben was absent during much of the narrative. Who then was the ringleader in the plot to murder Joseph? The likely choice would be the next oldest brother, none other than Simeon! Thus was he recompensed for his action. Now Joseph did one other thing to the brothers that was undoubtedly calculated to trouble them a bit more. The brothers came to purchase food in the midst of famine. As the nine remaining brothers make their trek back home (Benjamin didn’t come, Simeon is in jail, and Joseph is, of course, in Egypt), they discover that the money they used to pay for the food has been returned (Genesis 42:27,28). This discovery fills them with dread and uncertainty. They ask, “What is this that God hath done unto us?” There is a fascinating connection of this money return with the original sale of Joseph. Joseph was sold for 20 pieces of silver, the going rate for an adolescent slave. (The price for an adult slave was 30 pieces of silver.) The brothers of Jacob got their money returned twice. The first occasion was with the nine brothers. The second occasion was when the brothers returned with Benjamin. They again purchased food and again had the money returned covertly by Joseph. On this second occasion there were 11 brothers. So the total money value returned to the brothers amounted to 9+11 measures, or 20 measures! The connection with the first sale is intense. 20 pieces of silver = 20 measures of silver. They get the silver a second time but now under very different circumstances. They learn what it means to feel helpless, to be the victims of injustice. As they deceived they are deceived. Joseph finally ends this whole string of deception, the attitude of tit for tat, by the simple medium of forgiveness! Joseph could have demanded great compensation from his brothers. But he applied the principle, “Love covers a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8, NIV). The lessons for us in this are straightforward. We must develop a strong sense of justice, of what is right and what is wrong. And we must appreciate the principle of retributive justice and its rightness. All of our dealings with our brethren must be just and honest, and we must strictly avoid any compromise of these principles, recognizing that retributive experiences will be the result (1 Thessalonians 4:6, 7; Galatians 6:7). |