seekeroftruth
Well-Known Member
Genesis 31:33 So Laban went into Jacob’s tent and into Leah’s tent and into the tent of the two female servants, but he found nothing. After he came out of Leah’s tent, he entered Rachel’s tent. 34 Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them inside her camel’s saddle and was sitting on them. Laban searched through everything in the tent but found nothing.
35 Rachel said to her father, “Don’t be angry, my lord, that I cannot stand up in your presence; I’m having my period.” So he searched but could not find the household gods.
35 Rachel said to her father, “Don’t be angry, my lord, that I cannot stand up in your presence; I’m having my period.” So he searched but could not find the household gods.
The first thing that goes through my head when I read these verses.... how are those preachers going to handle verse 35? Better yet.... how are the Junior High Sunday School Teachers going to handle it?
I found a couple of quotes but scrapped them for the commentary from Bible-commentaries.com. John Schultz deals with the story this way.
The description of the following events in vs.30 through the end of the chapter equals some of the best theater plays or novel plots in world literature. Shakespeare or Dostojewsky would have nothing to be ashamed of, had they written this.
Jacob promises a death sentence upon the person who stole the teraphim. The Bible seems to indicate that he would not have done so had he known that Rachel was the culprit. Adam Clarke says about the phrase "Let him not live" - "It appears that anciently theft was punished by death; and we know that the patriarchs had the power of life and death in their hands. But previously to the law the punishment of death was scarcely ever inflicted but for murder. The rabbies consider that this was an imprecation used by Jacob, as if he had said, Let God take away the life of the person who has stolen them! And that this was answered shortly after in the death of Rachel.
Jacob calls the people Laban had brought with him, to whom we are not introduced, as a witness, not only to demonstrate that the accusation of the theft of the teraphim would be false, but also to prove that there was nothing whatsoever to be found that Laban could claim as his own. He was evidently convinced of the perfect honesty of every member of the household. Jacob's attitude shows this strange mixture of opposing characteristics that is typical for human nature. He would never have stretched out his hand to take something that belonged to another person, but he had not scruples to cheat Esau out of his birthright or to deceive his blind father. We could call him an honest thief. The problem is that none of us is worthy to throw the first stone at him.
So Laban starts his search. After all the teraphim had not walked off by themselves, they were not that divine! The search in Jacob's tent or in the tents of Lea, Bilhah and Zilpah did not bring any result. Rachel had taken recourse to extreme measures to hide the idols. She sat on them, pretending not to be able to get up because she had her monthly period. Whether this was true or not, we do not know. If what is written in the Mosaic law about a woman in her monthly period is an affirmation of earlier customs, then it would have been inconceivable in Laban's mind that Rachel would sit on his idols and he would defile himself by touching either her or the saddle she sat on. We read in Lev 15:19,20 "When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean." If the above is true, what Rachel did was sacrilegious in the highest degree. We would conclude from this that she would have stolen the gods, not for her own use in worship, but to assure the title to Jacob's possessions.
It would also seem unlikely that she did in fact have her period at that time, because it seems doubtful that gods that had been defiled by menstrual blood would have been of any use in the protection of property. Most likely Rachel lied to her father.
Jacob promises a death sentence upon the person who stole the teraphim. The Bible seems to indicate that he would not have done so had he known that Rachel was the culprit. Adam Clarke says about the phrase "Let him not live" - "It appears that anciently theft was punished by death; and we know that the patriarchs had the power of life and death in their hands. But previously to the law the punishment of death was scarcely ever inflicted but for murder. The rabbies consider that this was an imprecation used by Jacob, as if he had said, Let God take away the life of the person who has stolen them! And that this was answered shortly after in the death of Rachel.
Jacob calls the people Laban had brought with him, to whom we are not introduced, as a witness, not only to demonstrate that the accusation of the theft of the teraphim would be false, but also to prove that there was nothing whatsoever to be found that Laban could claim as his own. He was evidently convinced of the perfect honesty of every member of the household. Jacob's attitude shows this strange mixture of opposing characteristics that is typical for human nature. He would never have stretched out his hand to take something that belonged to another person, but he had not scruples to cheat Esau out of his birthright or to deceive his blind father. We could call him an honest thief. The problem is that none of us is worthy to throw the first stone at him.
So Laban starts his search. After all the teraphim had not walked off by themselves, they were not that divine! The search in Jacob's tent or in the tents of Lea, Bilhah and Zilpah did not bring any result. Rachel had taken recourse to extreme measures to hide the idols. She sat on them, pretending not to be able to get up because she had her monthly period. Whether this was true or not, we do not know. If what is written in the Mosaic law about a woman in her monthly period is an affirmation of earlier customs, then it would have been inconceivable in Laban's mind that Rachel would sit on his idols and he would defile himself by touching either her or the saddle she sat on. We read in Lev 15:19,20 "When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean." If the above is true, what Rachel did was sacrilegious in the highest degree. We would conclude from this that she would have stolen the gods, not for her own use in worship, but to assure the title to Jacob's possessions.
It would also seem unlikely that she did in fact have her period at that time, because it seems doubtful that gods that had been defiled by menstrual blood would have been of any use in the protection of property. Most likely Rachel lied to her father.
Bringing Mosaic Law into the story is very well done. I still don't want to teach these verses to a room of 7th graders.... maybe that's why the split the classes in my Sunday School.
Remember, this is the story of Jesus's family.
