Integrity and faithfulness are two virtues which we cherish above all others. Deception is abhorred, no matter in what condition, or by whom it is practiced. But since Jacob is a Patriarch of the Bible and one of God's favorites, deception when practiced by him is excusable. Pardonable also is the prostitutional bickering between two wives when related in the Bible. Were such a scene to be found in any other book it would very properly be called vulgar and judged too coarse for cultural reading.
The story goes that Jacob came unto the house of Laban, who had two daughters. Leah, tender eyed, was the elder; but Rachel, the younger, was beautiful and well favoured. But let the story be told as the Bible records it.
I quote Genesis, Chapter 29, Verses 15-20.
15. And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be? 16. And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
17. Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured.
18. And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
19. And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me.
20. And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.
Now so much for the bargain. Jacob served seven years for the girl he loved. Surely such a servitude is well deserving of payment. Since there was no pretense made as to why Jacob wanted Rachel as his wife, I will quote it here.
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verse 21.
21. And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.
It is needless to mention here the almost irrepressible desire to embrace his wife that obsesses a man on his wedding night, particularly when he has waited seven years to win the object of his love. But since the Bible has led us so far into the story we will let it continue with the narrative:
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verses 22-24.
22. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast. 23. And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
24. And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for a handmaid.
Since Leah and Rachel were not twins and since their descriptions, as Biblically described, were such as to unhesitatingly distinguish one from the other, Jacob must have been blinded by passion not to have seen that the daughter given him by Laban was not the one he had bargained for. Nevertheless, "he went in unto her," and only discovered his mistake the following morning; no doubt when the light of day shone upon her.
But back to our story, and see what happens when Jacob discovers that the woman he lay with the night before was not the one for whom he had labored seven years and was to receive as his share of the bargain. His choice was Rachel, "the beautiful and well favoured." The deception of Laban is not of interest to us at this time. Since it is Jacob's concern we will let him speak for himself.
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verse 25.
25. And it came to pass that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me?
No one can deny the fact that Jacob was perfectly justified in his complaint. For a mere pittance of another seven years of labor Laban gives Jacob, after a week's work as a bond of good faith, the daughter of his choice. But since the Bible can tell this detail of the matter better than I can, I will give way to it.
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verses 26-30.
26. And Laban said, It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27. Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.
28. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also.
29. And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be her maid.
30. And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
And now the Lord enters into this family affair, not to help the situation, as one would expect from an omniscient being, but to bring his curses with him.
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verse 31.
31. And when the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
The fecundity of Leah, after the Lord "opened her womb," is surely worth recording and it follows.
Genesis, Chapter 29, Verses 32-35.
32. And Leah conceived, and bare a son; and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the Lord hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me. 33. And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the Lord hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon.
34. And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Now this time will my husband be joined unto me, because I have borne him three sons: therefore was his name called Levi.
35. And she conceived again, and bare a son; and she said, Now will I praise the Lord: therefore she called his name Judah; and left bearing.
Unfortunately, because of Leah's fecundity, Rachel becomes jealous of her sister and demands of Jacob that she, too, bear him a child. Jacob chides her for demanding of him that which he would be only too willing to give, but the fault lies with her. As fecund as was her sister so sterile was she. But a peculiar method is pursued by the Biblical female characters when they find themselves unable to bear children. This method prevailed in the household of Abram and Sarai and I see no reason why it should not be permissible in the polygamous household of Jacob, Leah and Rachel.
Genesis, Chapter 30, Verses 1-4.
And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister; and said unto Jacob, Give me children, or else I die. 2. And Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel; and he said, Am I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?
3. And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her.
4. And she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to wife: and Jacob went in unto her.
Like Abraham, Jacob lost no time in complying with the wishes of Rachel to "go in unto" Bilhah, her handmaid. What an accommodating arrangement must have prevailed for the Biblical men of old. No wonder we have agitations to go "Back to Methuselah."
But to record the progeny of Jacob we continue to quote
Genesis, Chapter 30, Verses 5-8.
5. And Bilhah conceived, and bare Jacob a son. 6. And Rachel said, God hath judged me, and hath also heard my voice, and hath given me a son: therefore called she his name Dan.
7. And Bilhah Rachel's maid conceived again, and bare Jacob a second son.
8. And Rachel said, With great wrestlings have I wrestled with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called his name Naphtali.
That must have been a spectacular wrestling match between Leah and Rachel. But Leah was not to be outdone, and when she could no longer bear children, gives Jacob Zilpah, her handmaid, to continue the race in her desperation to overcome the comeliness of her sister.
Genesis, Chapter 30, Verses 9-13.
9. When Leah saw that she had left bearing, she took Zilpah her maid, and gave her Jacob to wife. 10. And Zilpah Leah's maid bare Jacob a son.
11. And Leah said, A troop cometh: and she called his name Gad.
12. And Zilpah Leah's maid bare Jacob a second son.
13. And Leah said, Happy am I, for the daughters will call me blessed: and she called his name Asher.
In the 11th verse just mentioned I believe there must be a mistake regarding the number of children Zilpah, Leah's maid, bore at this time. To quote: "And Leah said, A troop cometh; and she called his name Gad." Judging from the word "troop" I was led to believe that she was to bear twins or triplets, but again, I suppose I must confess my lack of spiritual understanding.
A situation which I believe quite unparalleled in the literature of the land and sufficient unto itself without further comment, follows.
Genesis, Chapter 30, Verses 14-16.
14. And Reuben went in the days of wheat harvest, and found mandrakes in the field, and brought them unto his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, Give me, I pray thee, of thy son's mandrakes. 15. And she said unto her, Is it a small matter that thou hast taken my husband? and wouldest thou take away my son's mandrakes also? And Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie with thee to night for thy son's mandrakes.
16. And Jacob came out of the field in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him, and said, Thou must come in unto me; for surely I have hired thee with my son's mandrakes. And he lay with her that night.
For a sister to bribe a sister with the sweat of her son's labor for the privilege of sexual intercourse with her own husband is too coarse an act of prostitution for me to comment upon further. Can you find in any book other than the Bible such a despicable bargaining?
"And Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie with thee to-night for thy son's mandrakes.
"And Jacob came out of the field in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him, and said, Thou must come in unto me; for surely I have hired thee with my son's mandrakes." And the Bible does not hesitate to say that "he lay with her that night!"
To dwell upon the degrading custom of polygamy as was practiced in the early Biblical days is not exactly within the scope of this work, and for that reason I will leave unmentioned some of the recorded instances of this condemned institution.
I cannot understand how public men, men of learning and experience, can insist that the Bible, which contains the stories quoted that shock even the vulgar-minded, should be our pre-eminent guide in all earthly affairs, and that it should not only be read by, but actually taught to the growing generation in search of high moral ethics.
posted
The problem with Sand's criticism is that Muhammad had sexual relations with his daughter-in-law too! This is a very well known event in Muhammad's life. Muhammad had an adopted son whose name was Zaid bin Muhammad. Zaid's wife was called Zainab. Muhammad expressed an interest in his son's wife and so Zaid offered to divorce her so that Muhammad could marry her. Initially Muhammad was hestitant but then he received a "word from God" which said it was okay.
The Bible never hides the fact that man will do things that are outside the will of God. If you read the context of the Old Testament and reflect on it, you will see the development of God's plan and law. David's sin, the arranged death of Uriah and the adultery with Bathsheba, is in fact used as an example of sincere contrition and forgiveness. David was punished by God for the death of Uriah. His son by Bathsheba, Uriah's wife, was born sick and died. Plus David's own son, Absolom, tried to kill him. David's sin against Uriah brought a curse on the house of David.
Key words: "But the thing David had done displeased the LORD"
Then Lot and his daugthers. I guess that you're trying to say that the Bible condones insest. It dosen't. Once again, the Bible is just letting it be known that it happened. But look at how it happened. The daughters got Lot drunk! Thus why the Bible says that it is a sin to be a drunkard. It's not hidden from the light of day. It's there to be seen. To be READ!
You want to know one fundamental difference between what you argue and what is reality? The difference is the regard to which you hold the "prophet" Muhammad. No Christian anywhere in the world says "You know, I choose to immulate the life of the "prophet" Lot or David. No Christian says that. Anywhere.
Does a Christian anywhere in the world then say "you know, if I get drunk and my children have sex with me, everything is fine. There is precident there from the "prophet" Lot and is therefore lawful"?
No.
On the same side of the coin, Muslims choose to "live by the example of the 'prophet' Muhammad", a man who had cuncubines, a man who pillaged, plundered, and burned villages, cities, and entire families. Why would you want to live by the example of such a man? Why is he praiseworthy at all?
Christians don't expect to take norms in a culture that is 3000-4000 years old and try to apply them to our culture today. Unlike Islam, the Bible never pretends to be a civil law for Christians. We have a historical record of how a society was run (ie Israel) and we glean facts and perspective from it, but we do not try to apply these rules to today.
You know, Islam would be wise to follow our example.
If you read the context of the Old Testament and reflect on it, you will see the development of God's plan and law. David's sin, the arranged death of Uriah and the adultery with Bathsheba, is in fact used as an example of sincere contrition and forgiveness. Christians and Jews know this. Now you should too.
If you care to sincerely read the Bible, you will see in the Gospel further exposition of God's plan. The life of Jesus is for Christians the example to follow. Mohammed has no status in Chrsitianity, not because scripture was changed, but because Jesus said all that needed to be said to complete God's revelation.
Muhammad's words and acts, thought they took place (according to Believers) in a certain time, are held to be models for all time, outside of any historical context.
Posts: 3188 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic