Verse by Verse

¹² Then his brothers went to feed their father’s flock in Shechem.

¹³ And Israel said to Joseph, “Are not your brothers feeding the flock in Shechem? Come, I will send you to them.” So he said to him, “Here I am.”

¹⁴ Then he said to him, “Please go and see if it is well with your brothers and well with the flocks, and bring back word to me.” So he sent him out of the Valley of Hebron, and he went to Shechem.

¹⁵ Now a certain man found him, and there he was, wandering in the field. And the man asked him, saying, “What are you seeking?”

¹⁶ So he said, “I am seeking my brothers. Please tell me where they are feeding their flocks.”

¹⁷ And the man said, “They have departed from here, for I heard them say, ‘Let us go to Dothan.’ ” So Joseph went after his brothers and found them in Dothan.

¹⁸ Now when they saw him afar off, even before he came near them, they conspired against him to kill him.

¹⁹ Then they said to one another, “Look, this dreamer is coming!

²⁰ Come therefore, let us now kill him and cast him into some pit; and we shall say, ‘Some wild beast has devoured him.’ We shall see what will become of his dreams!”

²¹ But Reuben heard it, and he delivered him out of their hands, and said, “Let us not kill him.”

²² And Reuben said to them, “Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit which is in the wilderness, and do not lay a hand on him”—that he might deliver him out of their hands, and bring him back to his father.

Shechem (v.12) was at least 50 miles from Hebron. Jacob did own land there (Genesis 33:19; John 4:5), but with Esau gone, it’s surprising that there wasn’t pasturage closer to home. Especially since Jacob’s family had left Shechem with fear of the surrounding people after Simeon and Levi had killed the men of the city (Genesis 34:30). It was far enough away that Jacob  hadn’t heard from his sons and was concerned. Only Joseph and Benjamin remained at home.

At Shechem, Joseph met a man who told him his brothers had moved on to Dotham, about 20 miles north, further away from home.

The word “Dothan” is believed to mean “two cisterns,” and was presumably so named because of two storage wells there. [It is probable that] one of these cisterns was dry at the time Joseph’s brothers were there, and it was into this well that they later decided to place him. — Morris, page 539.

His brothers recognized Joseph “when they saw him afar off” (v.18). This would seem to indicate that his coat really was uniquely of many colors and not simply long-sleeved as some conjecture. Their hatred and resentment of Joseph must have been very active because they developed their plot between the time they recognized Joseph and when he arrived.

The Hebrew word for “dreamer” (v.19) implies one who is a master at dreaming, perhaps suggesting that he is good for nothing else. — Morris, page 541.

__________

Apparently this plan was hatched mainly by the younger brothers, perhaps supported by Simeon and Levi, since neither Reuben nor Judah would go along with it. Reuben, of all the brothers, would seem to have the most cause to resent Joseph, since Jacob obviously intended to give Joseph the birthright instead of him, the oldest son. His defense of Joseph is, therefore, the more commendable. Though he had lost his right of primogeniture through his incestuous relation with Bilhah, [Genesis 35:22] he must have … tried as best he could under the circumstances to exercise the moral leadership which his firstborn position in the family should have elicited.

[Reuben] persuaded [his brothers] not to slay [Joseph] right then, at least, but to catch him and throw him into the pit alive, perhaps [suggesting] letting him die of thirst rather than shedding his blood. They well knew God’s primeval command against the shedding of human blood (Genesis 9:6). Though Simeon and Levi may have felt justified in shedding blood in the matter of the Shechemites, … there was no such justification in this case; furthermore, Joseph was their father’s son. … [see Genesis 42:22.]

Joseph evidently realized that Reuben was really trying to save him, [perhaps] Reuben actually whispered words to this effect as they cast him into the pit. Years later, Joseph indicated he remembered this by holding Simeon (the next oldest of the sons), rather then Reuben captive in his prison (Genesis 42:24). — Morris, pages 542-543.

1 Now Jacob dwelt in the land where his father was a stranger, in the land of Canaan.

² This is the history of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen years old, was feeding the flock with his brothers. And the lad was with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives; and Joseph brought a bad report of them to his father.

³ Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age. Also he made him a tunic of many colors.

⁴ But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peaceably to him.

⁵ Now Joseph had a dream, and he told it to his brothers; and they hated him even more.

⁶ So he said to them, “Please hear this dream which I have dreamed:

⁷ There we were, binding sheaves in the field. Then behold, my sheaf arose and also stood upright; and indeed your sheaves stood all around and bowed down to my sheaf.”

⁸ And his brothers said to him, “Shall you indeed reign over us? Or shall you indeed have dominion over us?” So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.

⁹ Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, “Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.”

¹⁰ So he told it to his father and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?”

¹¹ And his brothers envied him, but his father kept the matter in mind.

The story of Joseph’s life must have been originally written down by the sons of Jacob, especially by Joseph himself. This is probably indicated by the reference in Exodus 1:1, terminating this account, to the “names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt.” This is essentially equivalent to the standard formula which would have said: “now these are the generations of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt.” This section, however, probably more than those preceding, had been subject to Moses’ editorial emendations, in view of his more immediate connection to it. — Morris, page 533.

__________

This [vs.2a] constitutes the concluding statement and the signature of Jacob’s long record, beginning with Genesis 25:19b. Although he had trusted for years in God’s promise that he would inherit the land, the same as God had promised Abraham and Isaac, he, like they, continued to live as a “foreigner” in the land of Canaan. They did not yet own the land, only certain very small portions that they had purchased. Nevertheless, God had indeed blessed them materially with great possessions [see Hebrews 11:9, 13]. — Morris, page 534.

__________

God never actually appeared to [Joseph], as He had to [Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob], nor were the covenant promises given to him in any special way. In fact, of the sons of Jacob it was Judah, not he, through whom God would fulfill the coming of the Savior. — Morris, page 534.

Most of my commentaries present Joseph as a type of Christ—loved by his father, rejected by his brothers, truthful in the face of opposition, put to “death,” remaining faithful, ruling. Morris, however, says this:

Though a number of interesting parallels can be noted, it should not be forgotten that the New Testament nowhere speaks of Joseph as a type of Christ. In view of the dangers inherent in allegorical interpretation, it is generally safest to avoid spiritualizing, allegorizing, and typological interpretations in general except where there is explicit Biblical warrant. — Morris, page 535.

The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher, would have been about Joseph’s age. Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah were older, Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin were younger.

Morris believes that the phrase “feeding the flock” (v.2) indicates that Joseph was in charge of his four older brothers as the chief shepherd.

son of his old age (v.3) — some commentaries believe this means that Joseph was wise, with intelligence beyond his years. My guess is just that it refers to the fact that Jacob was old before his favorite wife had a son.

many colors (v.3) — some translations believe this may mean “long-sleeved” and doesn’t refer to color. Whatever the case, it demonstrated Jacob’s favoritism for Joseph over his other sons. It may have been an indication that Jacob intended to give Joseph the birthright as the son of his favorite wife.

The true hatred of Joseph’s brothers is fanned into life (i.e., mentioned for the first time) only after their father’s natural inclination toward Joseph as the son of his old age is outwardly displayed by the giving to him of a varicolored tunic—by its nature also a continual reminder to the brothers of Joseph’s favored status. — Wechsler, page 248.

The Bible doesn’t say whether Joseph was right or wrong to display his father’s favoritism to his brothers, to give their father bad reports about them, or tell them his dreams. When I read the passage, it seemed to me that Joseph may have been hard to get along with at this stage of his life. Wechsler disagrees:

Joseph cannot be justly criticized for [telling his family his dreams], since we are not told he related these dreams boastfully or in an otherwise improper fashion—especially seeing that these dreams were in fact prophetically truthful; and who else, after all, should he seek to discuss their significance than the men in his family? Joseph can no more be censured for inciting enmity by relating these prophecies than can Jeremiah, Zechariah, or Jesus for the internecine enmity that their prophecies engendered. — Wechsler, pages 248-249.

__________

Jacob, though having come to a place of true and growing dependence on God, is not perfect, and hence he falls (not surprisingly) into the same pattern of sin expressed by his parents—to wit, showing clear favoritism for one among several siblings. Just as Isaac’s preference for Esau and Rebekah’s preference for Jacob fueled the fraternal enmity that eventually prompted Esau to plot his brother’s murder (see Genesis 27:42), so too does Jacob’s preference for Joseph—whom his father loved … more than all his brothers—fuel an outright hatred of him on the part of his brothers that culminates in their collective plotting to put him to death (v.18). — Wechsler, page 248.

your sheaves stood all around and bowed down to my sheaf (v.7) — Now Joseph was governor over the land; and it was he who sold to all the people of the land. And Joseph’s brothers came and bowed down before him with their faces to the earth (Genesis 42:6). So Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, and he was still there; and they fell before him on the ground (Genesis 44:14).

The Bible doesn’t say whether Joseph’s dreams were from the Lord, although the fact that they were fulfilled makes it likely. Jacob, who knew the Lord, rebuked Joseph for telling them, although he also wondered if they were true.

Joseph is the most prominent of Jacob’s/Israel’s 12 sons in [the remainder of the book of Genesis]; yet this should not be allowed to obscure the importance of Judah, who, in terms of space, is the second most prominent brother of all. In this we have something of a parallel to the focus on Enoch and Noah in Genesis 5:21-24, 29, in which the former, like Joseph, serves as a reminder of the hope of present redemption and the latter, like Judah, as a reminder of the hope of final (i.e., messianic) redemption. — Wechsler, pages 246-247.

__________

The account of Joseph, around whom the majority of this last major section in Genesis revolves, presents us with a paradigm that is employed time and again by God throughout later history as one among several means of displaying His solicitude for Israel—namely, elevating a Jew to the upper echelons of governmental power, resulting in elevating of Jewish socio-political standing, and often also the improvement of their material welfare. Other examples from the biblical period include Moses (the adopted son of Pharaoh; see Exodus 2:10), David (commander and bodyguard of the Philistine king Achish; see 1 Samuel 28:2), Daniel (advisor to every Babylonian king from Nebuchadnezzar until Cyrus; see Daniel 1:21), Esther (queen of the Persian king Xerexes; see Esther 2:17), her uncle Mordechai (first chamberlain of Xerxes, then second to the king himself; see Esther 2:21; 10:3), and Nehemiah (cupbearer to the Persian king Artaxerxes; see Nehemiah 1:11). — Wechsler, page 247.

1 Now this is the genealogy of Esau, who is Edom.

² Esau took his wives from the daughters of Canaan: Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite; Aholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite;

³ and Basemath, Ishmael’s daughter, sister of Nebajoth.

⁴ Now Adah bore Eliphaz to Esau, and Basemath bore Reuel.

⁵ And Aholibamah bore Jeush, Jaalam, and Korah. These were the sons of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan.

⁶ Then Esau took his wives, his sons, his daughters, and all the persons of his household, his cattle and all his animals, and all his goods which he had gained in the land of Canaan, and went to a country away from the presence of his brother Jacob.

⁷ For their possessions were too great for them to dwell together, and the land where they were strangers could not support them because of their livestock.

⁸ So Esau dwelt in Mount Seir. Esau is Edom.

⁹ And this is the genealogy of Esau the father of the Edomites in Mount Seir.

¹⁰ These were the names of Esau’s sons: Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, and Reuel the son of Basemath the wife of Esau.

¹¹ And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz.

¹² Now Timna was the concubine of Eliphaz, Esau’s son, and she bore Amalek to Eliphaz. These were the sons of Adah, Esau’s wife.

¹³ These were the sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah. These were the sons of Basemath, Esau’s wife.

¹⁴ These were the sons of Aholibamah, Esau’s wife, the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon. And she bore to Esau: Jeush, Jaalam, and Korah.

¹⁵ These were the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz, the firstborn son of Esau, were Chief Teman, Chief Omar, Chief Zepho, Chief Kenaz,

¹⁶ Chief Korah, Chief Gatam, and Chief Amalek. These were the chiefs of Eliphaz in the land of Edom. They were the sons of Adah.

¹⁷ These were the sons of Reuel, Esau’s son: Chief Nahath, Chief Zerah, Chief Shammah, and Chief Mizzah. These were the chiefs of Reuel in the land of Edom. These were the sons of Basemath, Esau’s wife.

¹⁸ And these were the sons of Aholibamah, Esau’s wife: Chief Jeush, Chief Jaalam, and Chief Korah. These were the chiefs who descended from Aholibamah, Esau’s wife, the daughter of Anah.

¹⁹ These were the sons of Esau, who is Edom, and these were their chiefs.

²⁰ These were the sons of Seir the Horite who inhabited the land: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah,

²¹ Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. These were the chiefs of the Horites, the sons of Seir, in the land of Edom.

²² And the sons of Lotan were Hori and Hemam. Lotan’s sister was Timna.

²³ These were the sons of Shobal: Alvan, Manahath, Ebal, Shepho, and Onam.

²⁴ These were the sons of Zibeon: both Ajah and Anah. This was the Anah who found the water in the wilderness as he pastured the donkeys of his father Zibeon.

²⁵ These were the children of Anah: Dishon and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah.

²⁶ These were the sons of Dishon: Hemdan, Eshban, Ithran, and Cheran.

²⁷ These were the sons of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Akan.

²⁸ These were the sons of Dishan: Uz and Aran.

²⁹ These were the chiefs of the Horites: Chief Lotan, Chief Shobal, Chief Zibeon, Chief Anah,

³⁰ Chief Dishon, Chief Ezer, and Chief Dishan. These were the chiefs of the Horites, according to their chiefs in the land of Seir.

³¹ Now these were the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the children of Israel:

³² Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom, and the name of his city was Dinhabah.

³³ And when Bela died, Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his place.

³⁴ When Jobab died, Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his place.

³⁵ And when Husham died, Hadad the son of Bedad, who attacked Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his place. And the name of his city was Avith.

³⁶ When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place.

³⁷ And when Samlah died, Saul of Rehoboth-by-the-River reigned in his place.

³⁸ When Saul died, Baal-Hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his place.

³⁹ And when Baal-Hanan the son of Achbor died, Hadar reigned in his place; and the name of his city was Pau. His wife’s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab.

⁴⁰ And these were the names of the chiefs of Esau, according to their families and their places, by their names: Chief Timnah, Chief Alvah, Chief Jetheth,

⁴¹ Chief Aholibamah, Chief Elah, Chief Pinon,

⁴² Chief Kenaz, Chief Teman, Chief Mibzar,

⁴³ Chief Magdiel, and Chief Iram. These were the chiefs of Edom, according to their dwelling places in the land of their possession. Esau was the father of the Edomites.

By the time Isaac died, when Jacob and Esau spent some time together in connection with Isaac’s burial, Esau and Jacob were each 120 years old (Genesis 25:26; 35:28). Esau had been married for eighty years (Genesis 26:34), whereas Jacob had been married less than forty. Esau, consequently, had at least a full generation of descendants more than Jacob, and this fact is reflected in the extensive list of names given in this chapter. … It is also probably that Moses later augmented these original records with additional data that had come into his possession. by Moses’ time, the descendants of Esau (by then known as the Edomites) were a nation of considerable concern to the Israelites. — Morris, page 525.

__________

[There is an] apparent contradiction between the names of Esau’s wives as given here [Aholibamah, daughter of Anah; Adah, daughter of Elon; Bashemath, daughter of Ismael] and as given in Genesis 26:34 [Judith, daughter of Beeri; Bashemath, daughter of Elon] and 28:9 [Mahalath, daughter of Ismael].

Comparison of the names above indicates that, probably, Judith is the same as Aholibamah; Bashemath, daughter of Elon, is the same as Adah; and Bashemath, daughter of Ishmael, is the same as Mahalath. That it was not uncommon for one person to have two names is well known. The women were probably known by the first set of names early in their lives (when Jacob had known them, as recorded in his “generations”), and by the second set of names later, at the time Esau wrote them down in his “generations.” It is possible that the women were given new names at the time of marriage, and the first set of names corresponded to their unmarried, given names. Similarly, Beeri must have been the same man as Anah.

Aholibamah is also said to have been the “daughter” of Zibeon, but since she is clearly the daughter of Anah (v.25), she must have been the daughter of Zibeon in the sense of being his descendant, probably his granddaughter. The fathers of Esau’s first two wives were said to  be Hittites (Genesis 26:34), but one of them here (v.2) is said to be a Hivite and also (v.20) a Horite (the same people known to archaeologists as Hurrians). All three groups were scattered throughout Canaan, and were Canaanite tribes; so there was undoubtedly much intermarriage among them, and the names were frequently used interchangeably.

Esau had five sons and an unknown number of daughters, as well as many servants and much cattle. After realizing that Jacob was destined to be the heir of Isaac and to possess the land of Canaan, he realized there would not be enough room for both of them, so began to move southward into the mountainous regions southeast of the Dead Sea. Both he and Isaac, and Jacob when he returned, were still “strangers” (foreigners) in these lands, owning little property of their own but pasturing their flocks and herds wherever there was room for them.

The region into which Esau (also known as Edom) migrated had previously been settled by the descendants of Seir, and the central range of mountains had come to be known as Mount Seir. To some extent the children of Esau had subjugated the Horites (equivalent to Horims, or Hurrians) by force (Deuteronomy 2:12, 22), but perhaps to an even greater extent had essentially assimilated them through intermarriage, so that the people eventually known as Edomites were a misture of Semitic (through Isaac and Esau) and Canaanitic (through Seir) inheritance. — Morris, page 527.

__________

The listing of Korah as one of the dukes in the family of Eliphz (when he is not listed in v.11 as one of Eliphaz’ natural sons) is probably best explained by assuming he was Eliphaz’ son-in-law. It is interesting that the name of Eliphaz’ concubine, Timna, is given, whereas that of his wife is not given. [Perhaps] this is because of the future prominence of her son, Amalek, who became the ancestor of the notorious Amalekites, the inveterate enemies of Israel in later years. The mention of Amalekites at the time of Abram (Genesis 14:7) is presumably an editorial addition by Moses to identify the region as it was known in his day. … The Amalekites in general lived west of the rest of the Edomites. — Morris, pages 527-528.

__________

chiefs (v.15) — The word translated “chiefs” (“dukes” in the KJV) means leader. It’s literal meaning is “ox.” Bultema says:

The ox was in Israel the leading and most useful animal which first in plowing and threshing gave the main pull and thus it became the symbol of a leader of the people. It became even the letter of the alphabet which once had the form of an ox head. The dukes of Edom then were … leaders of their people. — Bultema, page 67.

__________

If we assume [verses 31-35] to be an insertion of Moses, it is interesting to see that he began by stating these kings of the Edomites reigned long before there was any king in Israel. Of course, the Israelites had no kings even in Moses’ time, but Moses did know prophetically that they eventually would have kings (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).  …

It is interesting that the Edomite kings never became a family dynasty. When each king died, another unrelated individual acceded to the throne, probably by force of arms. Altogether, eight such kings are listed. The fact that each king died is also noted, except in the case of the last one, Hadar, who [may have been] still alive at the time Moses wrote. Three of them are listed as having a particular city of their own; there was evidently no permanent capital city in Edom. … The Midianites lived south of Edom, and the Moabites north of Edom. It seems probable that the Midianites during this period had swept northward through Edom (or perhaps around to the east of Edom’s mountains) on a mission of conquest into Moab, and that Hadad had taken his own army into Moab to defeat them (v.35). — Morris, pages 530-531.

__________

… Most of these “generations of Esau,” including the material from about 36:15 through 36:43 (most of it, at least), have been incorporated in the genealogical lists of 1 Chronicles 1:35-54. — Morris, page 531.

After reading this chapter, my response was “So what?” Morris’ attempt to explain its inclusion on the basis that God is concerned with each individual obviously doesn’t hold water—millions of people aren’t listed in the Bible. Wechsler, however, addresses it convincingly.

Just as for Ishmael in Genesis 25:12-18, so too here for Esau we are presented with a record of the generations of the older brother who was not chosen by God as a link in the line of Promise (i.e., the Abrahamic Covenant). One of the purposes for this—which is in the main a purpose shared by the genealogy of Ismael—is to bear out the fulfillment of God’s word concerning the older brother, that his descendants would likewise come to constitute a nation. There is, however, an important difference: whereas Ismael is blessed by God and promised to become a great nation (see Genesis 17:20)—ensuring that his descendants will be eternally represented in God’s Kingdom— Esau is simply declared to become a “nation” (Genesis 25:23), without explicit connection to divine blessing; and in fact Esau’s descendants—i.e., the nation of Edom (36:8)—are eventually wiped out as a distinct people because of their opposition to the LORD and His people (see Malachi 1:3-4).

it will also be observed that the presentation of Esau’s “generations” is roughly six times longer than that of Ishmael, the reason having to do with the nature (both immediate-practical and general-theological) of two addition purposes unique to the genealogy of Esau. The first of these concerns the sons of Seir the Horite presented in verses 20-30. Though Seir was not a descendant in the Abrahamic line, his descendants, as we’ve seen here, became interlinked with those of Esau through intermarriage with Esau’s descendants. Among the descendants common to both was Amalek, the son of Esau’s son Eliphaz and Seir’s daughter Timna (vs. 12, 22). Now because the descendants of Esau (i.e., the Edomites) became more numerous and prominent than the descendants of Seir, the entire region, which included the dwelling place of the sons of Seir, was designated after the former—i.e., the land of Edom (v.21)—and its inhabitants, though not all linked to Esau, known generally as “Edomites,” and in particular “Amalekites,” since these latter became the predominant tribe among the Edomites (analogous to the eventual use of the term “Judean” [hence, “Jew”] for a descendant of any of the 12 tribes). Amalek, however, was one of the few tribes cursed by God with complete annihilation (at the hands of Israel) because of their extreme perversity and opposition to His people (see Exodus 17:14), yet had the specific details of Amalek’s descent, together with those of Seir, not been here presented, the Israelites would inevitably have killed all those people known after the predominant tribe as “Amalekites” who were not in fact related to the Amalekites at all.  These details thus serve the binary purpose of preventing the Israelites from the sin (albeit committed in ignorance) of “shedding innocent blood” (cf. Deuteronomy19:10; 21:7-9) and exemplifying God’s discriminating application of justice (as earlier affirmed by Abraham in Genesis 18:23).

The second purpose unique to Esau’s genealogy concerns the kings who reigned in the land of Edom presented in verses 31-39. The eight kings enumerated (Bela, Jobab, Husham, Hadad, Samlah, Shaul, Baal-hanan, and Hadar) provide a striking contrast with the monarchy later established in Israel. Each of these kings of Edom epitomizes enthronement by human effort, since each one of them is explicitly associated with a different city (and not all of them in Edom, at that, such as Bozrah, which is in Moab (see Jeremiah 48:24), hence discounting genealogical succession, whereas the later monarchy of Israel epitomizes enthronement by divine effort, since it is founded, maintained, and in the end personally upheld by God alone (cf. 2 Samuel 7:12-16). Indeed, this contrast is even more vividly borne out by explicit statement that these eight Edomite kings reigned well before any king reigned over the sons of Israel (i.e., they had a substantial “head-start” of the Israelite monarchy), yet already by the eighth king in the true Israelite (Judaean) monarchy—i.e., Jehoshaphat (those before him being Asa, Abijah, Rehoboam, Solomon, David, Ish-bosheth, and Saul)—there was no longer any king in Edom (1 Kings 22:47), thus also bearing out the fulfillment of God’s declaration in Genesis 25:23b. — Wechsler, pages 244-246.

¹⁶ Then they journeyed from Bethel. And when there was but a little distance to go to Ephrath, Rachel labored in childbirth, and she had hard labor.

¹⁷ Now it came to pass, when she was in hard labor, that the midwife said to her, “Do not fear; you will have this son also.”

¹⁸ And so it was, as her soul was departing (for she died), that she called his name Ben-Oni; but his father called him Benjamin.

¹⁹ So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).

²⁰ And Jacob set a pillar on her grave, which is the pillar of Rachel’s grave to this day.

²¹ Then Israel journeyed and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder.

²² And it happened, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard about it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve:

²³ the sons of Leah were Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn, and Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun;

²⁴ the sons of Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin;

²⁵ the sons of Bilhah, Rachel’s maidservant, were Dan and Naphtali;

²⁶ and the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant, were Gad and Asher. These were the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Padan Aram.

²⁷ Then Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, or Kirjath Arba (that is, Hebron), where Abraham and Isaac had dwelt.

²⁸ Now the days of Isaac were one hundred and eighty years.

²⁹ So Isaac breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his people, being old and full of days. And his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.

Previous to this pilgrimage, after years of barrenness, Jacob’s beloved wife Rachel had finally borne a son, before they left Laban and the region of Haran (Genesis 30:22-25). She had named him Joseph and had, at the time, expressed faith that God would give her still another son. That, however, had been nearly fifteen years before, and her faith had not yet been rewarded. No doubt she had continued to pray about it, and God had finally answered. Rachel must have been well along in years by now, as Jacob was certainly 105 years old or more by this time. Finally, however, she became pregnant again. Jacob’s other wives had long since ceased bearing children, so Rachel gave birth to Jacob’s twelfth and last son. — Morris, page 522.

you will have this son also (v.17) — Genesis 30:24

Ben-Oni (v.18) = the son of my sorrows

Benjamin (v.18) = son of my right hand

Bethlehem (v.19) — the first reference in the Bible to the town where Jesus Christ was born.

The fact that Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn (when he was perhaps around 30 years old), laid with Bilhah (who would have been much older than Reuben), one of his father’s concubines, gets only passing mention here. But in Genesis 49:3-4, when Jacob was speaking to his sons, he had this to say to Reuben: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity and the excellency of power. Unstable as water, you shall not excel, because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it—he went up to my couch.” In other words, Reuben lost his birthright.

Here (vs.23-26) is the first complete list of the twelve sons of Jacob. … From them came the twelve tribes of Israel, the tribal blessing being given each of them respectively at the time of Jacob’s death (Genesis 49). The names reappear in the genealogies of 1 Chronicles 2:1-2. As tribal names, they are listed on seven different occasions in the Book of Numbers, and appear again in the blessing of Moses (Deuteronomy 33), in the division of the land in Joshua 1:5, elsewhere in the Old Testament, and finally as the twelve sealed tribes of Revelation 7:4-8. The order in which the names are given varies. — Scofield, pages 51-52.

__________

Here was the birth of a son near Bethlehem. Rachel is used in connection with the slaughter of the innocents as the standing emblem of Israel’s love for her children and captives. Compare Jeremiah 31:15 with Matthew 2:18.

The name Ben-Oni means son of sorrow, suffering, and has always been taken as a faint and yet clear type of the suffering Man of sorrow. To father Jacob the son became Benjamin, the son of the right hand, and this is taken commonly as a shadow of the risen Christ who took His session at the right hand of God the Father. The type is clear: to the mother [Mary] he was the son of suffering, to the father, a Son seated at the right hand of glory. — Bultema, page 65.

__________

At the age of 180, Isaac died. This must actually have been about 25 years after Jacob came back from Padan-aram, since Isaac had probably been about 135 years old or so when Jacob left home. Actually, Isaac must have still been living at the time Joseph was sold into Egypt, but the writer found it appropriate to mention his death at this point. Mention of the fact that he “was gathered unto his people” is evidence that although nothing much is said about it in this part of the Bible, the patriarchs did believe in life after death. …

It is noteworthy that Esau and Jacob were still in fellowship with each other, these many years after their first reunion, as the two once-alienated brothers came together to participate with each other in the burial ceremonies for their father. Isaac was buried in the same sepulcher with Rebekah, and with Abraham and Sarah, in the cave in the field which Abraham had purchased in Mamre (Genesis 49:29-31). — Morris, page 524.

__________

The “records of the generations of Isaac” (Genesis 25:19) here ends with a summary look at at God’s overall blessing of Isaac. His material blessing of Isaac (and Jacob) is represented, first and foremost, by his “full quiver” (to employ the terminology of Psalm 127:4-5) of sons—i.e., in addition to Jacob and Esau, his twelve grandsons from whom the promised nation (Genesis 12:2, etc.) would descend. God’s material blessing of Isaac is further indicated by the reference to him dying as an old man, ripe of age—which latter phrase is literally translated “satisfied of (i.e., with his) days.” Indeed, this phrase also hints at God’s spiritual blessing of Isaac (i.e., that he truly knew/was known by God, since, of its remaining four occurrences, all are applied to men who died as believers, mature in faith (viz. Job [Job 42:17]; David [1 Chronicles 23:1; 29:28]; and Jehoiada (2 Chronicles 24:15]). — Wechsler, page 243.

⁹ Then God appeared to Jacob again, when he came from Padan Aram, and blessed him.

¹⁰ And God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; your name shall not be called Jacob anymore, but Israel shall be your name.” So He called his name Israel.

¹¹ Also God said to him: “I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body.

¹² The land which I gave Abraham and Isaac I give to you; and to your descendants after you I give this land.”

¹³ Then God went up from him in the place where He talked with him.

¹⁴ So Jacob set up a pillar in the place where He talked with him, a pillar of stone; and he poured a drink offering on it, and he poured oil on it.

¹⁵ And Jacob called the name of the place where God spoke with him, Bethel.

The great name of “Israel,” promised to him in chapter 32 at Penuel, is now given at Bethel; and, with it, is revealed the glorious title El-Shaddai, i.e. God Almighty—the God who was able to fulfill to him the promises here made. To Jacob personally, as to Isaac and Abraham, resurrection is assured; for He says: “to thee will I give this land.” Note: (Genesis 32:28) “Thy name shall be”: (35:10) “He called his name.” — Williams, page 36.

I think it’s interesting that v.9 says that “God appeared to Jacob.” Since we know that no man has ever seen God the Father (John 1:18), this can only mean it was a theophany—a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ. And that makes it a clear statement of the deity of Christ because He identified Himself to Israel as El-Shaddai.

God once again appeared to Jacob, renewing the promises made thirty years before at the same spot. God identified Himself as “God Almighty” (Hebrew El Shaddai). God had revealed Himself by this name to Abram (Genesis 17:1) and to Isaac (Genesis 28:3), and now to Jacob. The name is related to the Hebrew word for “breast” (shad), and conveys the idea of God as the One who nourishes and provides, who is strong enough to meet every need.

Once again God promised Jacob that he and his seed, which would be a great multitude, would possess this land, as He had promised also to Abraham and Isaac. Furthermore, though he would be a “nation,” he would also be a “company of nations,” [perhaps] a reference to the continuing distinctiveness of the twelve tribes of Israel.

God also reaffirmed and reimpressed on Jacob that he now had a new name, Israel. He was a prevailing and powerful prince of God! He should therefore live and comport himself as one who possessed such a high calling. — Morris, pages 520-521.

__________

The first mention of the drink offering (v.14). It is not found among the Levitical offerings of Leviticus 1–7, though included in the instructions for sacrifice in the land (Numbers 15:5-7). It was always “poured out,” never drunk, and may be considered a type of Christ in the sense of Psalm 22:14; Isaiah 53:12. — Scofield, page 51.

1 Then God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there; and make an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you fled from the face of Esau your brother.”

² And Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Put away the foreign gods that are among you, purify yourselves, and change your garments.

³ Then let us arise and go up to Bethel; and I will make an altar there to God, who answered me in the day of my distress and has been with me in the way which I have gone.”

⁴ So they gave Jacob all the foreign gods which were in their hands, and the earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree which was by Shechem.

⁵ And they journeyed, and the terror of God was upon the cities that were all around them, and they did not pursue the sons of Jacob.

⁶ So Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him.

⁷ And he built an altar there and called the place El Bethel, because there God appeared to him when he fled from the face of his brother.

⁸ Now Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried below Bethel under the terebinth tree. So the name of it was called Allon Bachuth.

Bethel (v.1) was about 15 miles south of Shechem and 1,000 feet higher in elevation. It was the place where God had confirmed the Abrahamic covenant to Jacob (Genesis 28:10-19).

El Bethel (v.7) = the God of Bethel. Compare Genesis 28:19, where it was the place, as the scene of the ladder-vision, which impressed Jacob. He called the place “Bethel,” i.e. the house of God. Now it is the God of the place, rather than the place, and he calls it “El-Bethel,” i.e. the God of the house of God. — Scofield, pages 50-51.

__________

God reminded Jacob of his encounter with Him at Bethel, and of his promises there, and commanded him immediately to move onto Bethel. With a broken and repentant heart, Jacob did what he should have done long ago: he required his family and servants to abandon all remnants of idolatry; discard their images, earrings, and other amulets; put away their “foreign gods” and even the garments they had been wearing; then wash themselves clean and put on fresh clothing symbolic of the pure worship of Jehovah. … All these remnants of the “old life” were buried under the “oak” of Shechem, quite possibly the same terebinth tree that had been noted by Abram (Genesis 12:6) as he entered Canaan. — Morris, pages 518-519.

__________

The surrounding Canaanite tribes were far superior to [Jacob’s household] numerically, but nevertheless became so fearful of them that they refrained from attacking them. … Jacob and his company therefore arrived safely at the little community of Luz, which he had renamed Bethel, and he immediately proceeded to build the altar and its associated house of worship there. He had named the place Bethel, and now he named the altar El-Bethel (“The Strong God of the House of God”).

It was at this time and place that Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died. … She was well loved and revered by the family, and there was sincere grief at her departing, as indicated by their naming the place of her burial “The Oak of Weeping.”

Jacob had known Deborah all his life. She had come with Rebekah from Mesopotamia when Rebekah had left to marry Isaac (Genesis 24:59), and no doubt had cared for Jacob from the time he was born. She had not … accompanied him when he fled from Esau to Haran … The record does not say when she rejoined Jacob, but it [may have been] the occasion of one of his visits to see Isaac while he was living at Shechem. In fact, her presence in Jacob’s household is one of the reasons we [think] he visited his father during those years. Furthermore, the fact that she was now with Jacob [is a strong indicator] that Rebekah herself was dead. — Morris, page 520.

__________

Notwithstanding this expected human response [Genesis 34:30] Jacob—again reflective of his spiritual “turnaround” in Genesis 32:28—knows that God, in keeping with His Covenant promises, will not let his family be destroyed. Thus he exhorts his household to purify themselves and, with him, to turn to God, who answers (not “answered”) him in the day of his distress and has been with him wherever he has gone (v.3). Despite their many imperfections, therefore, Jacob’s family is preserved—and the patriarch’s faith affirmed—by God’s causing a great terror to fall upon the cities which were around them (v.5). — Wechsler, page 242.

²⁵ Now it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, each took his sword and came boldly upon the city and killed all the males.

²⁶ And they killed Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah from Shechem’s house, and went out.

²⁷ The sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and plundered the city, because their sister had been defiled.

²⁸ They took their sheep, their oxen, and their donkeys, what was in the city and what was in the field,

²⁹ and all their wealth. All their little ones and their wives they took captive; and they plundered even all that was in the houses.

³⁰ Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have troubled me by making me obnoxious among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites; and since I am few in number, they will gather themselves together against me and kill me. I shall be destroyed, my household and I.”

³¹ But they said, “Should he treat our sister like a harlot?”

Jacob speaks only of the danger to himself and his family from the enraged Canaanite. He expressed no horror at the treachery and bloodshed of which his sons were guilty. He does so years afterwards; but his actions and his language here are deplorable. He seems to have quite forgotten the Divine assurance of safety which had been repeated to him again and again; he takes his eyes off God, he looks only at the violence of Simeon and Levi, and he cries out: “I shall be destroyed!” — Williams, page 35.

__________

“And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, ‘Ye have troubled me, to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites: and I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.'” Thus, it was the consequences in reference to himself that affected Jacob most. He seems to have walked in constant apprehension of danger to himself or his family, and in the manifestation of an anxious, a cautious, timid, calculating spirit, utterly incompatible with a life of genuine faith in God.

It is not that Jacob was not, in the main, a man of faith; he assuredly was, and as such, gets a place amongst the “cloud of witnesses” in Hebrews 11:21. … [But] he ought to have known that not a hair of his head could be touched, and therefore, instead of looking at Simeon and Levi, or the consequences of their rash acting, he should have judged himself for being in such a position at all. If he had not settled at Shechem, Dinah would not have been dishonored, and the violence of his sons would not have been exhibited. — Mackintosh, page 307-308.

Including Wechsler’s quote (below) to show, that in his opinion, Jacob was in favor of the Shechemites’ circumcision, considered it a conversion to faith in the true God, and considered Dinah legally married.

As the Shechemite men are recovering in pain from their circumcision—with Dinah having already been taken to Shechem’s house (thus married), the two brothers go throughout the city and kill every male. — Wechsler, page 241.

¹³ But the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father, and spoke deceitfully, because he had defiled Dinah their sister.

¹⁴ And they said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a reproach to us.

¹⁵ But on this condition we will consent to you: If you will become as we are, if every male of you is circumcised,

¹⁶ then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters to us; and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people.

¹⁷ But if you will not heed us and be circumcised, then we will take our daughter and be gone.”

¹⁸ And their words pleased Hamor and Shechem, Hamor’s son.

¹⁹ So the young man did not delay to do the thing, because he delighted in Jacob’s daughter. He was more honorable than all the household of his father.

²⁰ And Hamor and Shechem his son came to the gate of their city, and spoke with the men of their city, saying:

²¹ “These men are at peace with us. Therefore let them dwell in the land and trade in it. For indeed the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters to us as wives, and let us give them our daughters.

²² Only on this condition will the men consent to dwell with us, to be one people: if every male among us is circumcised as they are circumcised.

²³ Will not their livestock, their property, and every animal of theirs be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will dwell with us.”

²⁴ And all who went out of the gate of his city heeded Hamor and Shechem his son; every male was circumcised, all who went out of the gate of his city.

we will become one people (v.16) — We aren’t told what Jacob thought of all this. He knew God had called his people to be a separate nation. Did he think circumcising the Shechemites would solve this issue? Wechsler thinks so (below). Or was he party to the plot to kill the Shechemites? Or had he left and not heard this part of the conversation? He was angry with Simeon and Levi after the fact (v.30).

Pretending to go along with Hamor’s proposition that there should be general intermarriage between the two peoples, with consequent commercial advantage to both, they said that the only problem was a religious one. It was their religious conviction that every male in their own nation should be circumcised. If indeed they were from that time on to be one people, then the Shechemites also would need to be circumcised. Otherwise, they would have to take Dinah back and keep the two peoples completely segregated in the future. Whether the other brothers knew about the murderous plan or not, the Bible is not clear, but it was Simeon and Levi who carried it out. — Morris, pages 512-513.

the gate of their city (v.20) — At this time, the gate of the city was where the men met and conducted business.

There were certain other nations, beside the Israelites, who practiced circumcision in early times, so that the terms of the agreement did not sound too strange or offensive to the men of Shechem. Hamor gathered them all together at the city’s gate, and laid the whole proposition before them, stressing that they would eventually own all the property of the Israelites as well as have access to their women. The men of Shechem were easily persuaded by such inducements. — Morris, page 513.

__________

The petition [for Shechem to marry Dinah] is made also in the presence of Jacob’s sons, who, though grieved and angry over the crime, nonetheless agree to the marriage—with Jacob’s implicit approval—on the condition that every male among Shechem’s people be circumcised and thus become one people with the family of Israel. Implicit in this arrangement, since the Schchemites are uniting with Israel on Israel’s terms, is submission to the God of Israel (i.e., conversion) and hence inclusion in the Abrahamic Covenant of which circumcision is the outward sign (see Genesis 17:11). — Wechsler, page 241.

1 Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land.

² And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her.

³ His soul was strongly attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman and spoke kindly to the young woman.

⁴ So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, “Get me this young woman as a wife.”

⁵ And Jacob heard that he had defiled Dinah his daughter. Now his sons were with his livestock in the field; so Jacob held his peace until they came.

⁶ Then Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him.

⁷ And the sons of Jacob came in from the field when they heard it; and the men were grieved and very angry, because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter, a thing which ought not to be done.

⁸ But Hamor spoke with them, saying, “The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him as a wife.

⁹ And make marriages with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters to yourselves.

¹⁰ So you shall dwell with us, and the land shall be before you. Dwell and trade in it, and acquire possessions for yourselves in it.”

¹¹ Then Shechem said to her father and her brothers, “Let me find favor in your eyes, and whatever you say to me I will give.

¹² Ask me ever so much dowry and gift, and I will give according to what you say to me; but give me the young woman as a wife.”

Dinah (v.1) — Genesis 30:21

The following paragraph by Morris is pure speculation, but he does attempt to draw some context around the events of the chapter. However, he tries to paint a picture that makes Dinah somewhat complicit in the sin and Shechem just a young man in love (albeit a pagan young man). Wechsler (bottom) takes a different view based on the meaning of the Hebrew word for “took.”

Dinah … had probably met some of the Shechemite girls and gotten to know them. This … raised problems, since their standards were quite different from those Jacob and Leah had tried to teach her. Whether she had become a bit rebellious against these standards is not mentioned, but it is possible, in view of the circumstances. In any case, Dinah, being now and then in the company of the Shechemite girls, could hardly have failed also to come to the attention of some of the Shechemite young men. She must have seemed particularly attractive, being of a different nationality, as well as possessed of a grace and charm which was not shared by girls raised in an atmosphere of idolatry and lasciviousness such as characterized most Canaanite communities. — Morris, page 509.

__________

Marriage was not as easily accomplished as a simple sexual adventure, however. In those days, even among pagans, marriage had to be arranged by the parents. Consequently, Shechem asked his father to take the necessary steps with Dinah’s father to obtain Dinah as his wife. It is an interesting commentary on the Shechemite culture to note that Hamor apparently thought nothing about the moral implications of what his son had done. He neither rebuked Shechem nor apologized in any way to Jacob or Dinah’s brothers [so far as we know]. For a young man to lie with a young woman, even by force, was apparently such a common thing in Canaanite towns that no one gave it a second thought. — Morris, page 510.

Hamor suggested, not only that Shechem marry  Dinah, but that there be widespread intermarriage between the Shechemites and the Israelites. He apparently thought this would result in the eventual assimilation of Jacob’s family, which would add Jacob’s wealth to his own.

Shechem himself, who had evidently come with his father but had remained discreetly silent to this point, then eagerly offered to pay Jacob and his sons whatever they would require in the way of a dowry and other gifts. Though he obviously really did love Dinah, and was more interested in having her than in his father’s concern for full amalgamation with the Israelites, he did not seem to feel any pangs of conscience for what he had done to her, or for the terrible offense to her family.

Quite possibly it was this matter-of-fact, businesslike attitude of Hamor and Shechem that infuriated Dinah’s brothers beyond limit. Here these men were making a monetary offer for their beloved sister, just as though she were nothing but a harlot (v.31) whose body could be purchased for the asking. — Morris, page 512.

__________

When Shechem, the eponymous prince of the city outside of which Jacob and his family are encamped, sees Jacob’s daughter Dinah, he lay with her by force (lit. “humiliated her”—i.e., raped her) and rather atypically for situations of rape (cf. 2 Samuel 13:14-15), subsequently becomes even more drawn to the girl and, through his father Hamor, petitions Jacob to be given Dinah as his wife. — Wechsler, page 241.

1 Now Jacob lifted his eyes and looked, and there, Esau was coming, and with him were four hundred men. So he divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two maidservants.

² And he put the maidservants and their children in front, Leah and her children behind, and Rachel and Joseph last.

³ Then he crossed over before them and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother.

⁴ But Esau ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept.

⁵ And he lifted his eyes and saw the women and children, and said, “Who are these with you?” So he said, “The children whom God has graciously given your servant.”

⁶ Then the maidservants came near, they and their children, and bowed down.

⁷ And Leah also came near with her children, and they bowed down. Afterward Joseph and Rachel came near, and they bowed down.

⁸ Then Esau said, “What do you mean by all this company which I met?” And he said, “These are to find favor in the sight of my lord.”

⁹ But Esau said, “I have enough, my brother; keep what you have for yourself.”

¹⁰ And Jacob said, “No, please, if I have now found favor in your sight, then receive my present from my hand, inasmuch as I have seen your face as though I had seen the face of God, and you were pleased with me.

¹¹ Please, take my blessing that is brought to you, because God has dealt graciously with me, and because I have enough.” So he urged him, and he took it.

¹² Then Esau said, “Let us take our journey; let us go, and I will go before you.”

¹³ But Jacob said to him, “My lord knows that the children are weak, and the flocks and herds which are nursing are with me. And if the men should drive them hard one day, all the flock will die.

¹⁴ Please let my lord go on ahead before his servant. I will lead on slowly at a pace which the livestock that go before me, and the children, are able to endure, until I come to my lord in Seir.”

¹⁵ And Esau said, “Now let me leave with you some of the people who are with me.” But he said, “What need is there? Let me find favor in the sight of my lord.”

¹⁶ So Esau returned that day on his way to Seir.

¹⁷ And Jacob journeyed to Succoth, built himself a house, and made booths for his livestock. Therefore the name of the place is called Succoth.

¹⁸ Then Jacob came safely to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Padan Aram; and he pitched his tent before the city.

¹⁹ And he bought the parcel of land, where he had pitched his tent, from the children of Hamor, Shechem’s father, for one hundred pieces of money.

²⁰ Then he erected an altar there and called it El Elohe Israel.

Not all at once does “Jacob” cease to dominate the walk of “Israel” (v. 14). Compare Genesis 35:1-10, where the walk becomes according to the new name. — Scofield, page 49.

Williams (below) doesn’t have a lot of good to say about Jacob at this point.  Scofield seems to be indicating the same thing (above). I’m not sure if Jacob was totally wrong, but I did wonder when I first read the passage why he told Esau he would see him in Seir and then travel to Succoth.

The action of Esau shows how groundless were Jacob’s fears, and how needless his plans. The straight path of faith and obedience is free from the tormenting apprehensions which wear out the doubting heart.

Jacob’s thigh is disjointed, but his will remains unbroken and so immediately he begins to plan how he may deceive Esau. He engages to follow him to Mount Seir, but at once sets out for Succoth! This gives further insight into the depths of unbelief and evil in the heart of man and of the exceeding riches of grace in the heart of God. Notwithstanding the vision of the Angels, and the night of wrestling with God Himself, he resumes his evil scheming for self-conservation, and distrusts the promises of Divine preservation.

The folly of following his own thoughts is seen in his building a house at Succoth. It became a memorial of sin and shame. This is the first mention of a “house” in connection with the patriarchs. …

God was the God of Bethel. He had said to him: “I am the God of Bethel.” He had not said: “I am the God of Succoth,” and if he moves from Succoth it is to buy land in a country in which he was to be a pilgrim. No doubt he erects an altar there, for the conscience is uneasy without religious forms, but the Divinely chosen place for the altar was Bethel and not Shechem. — Williams, page 34-35.

Mackintosh is in the same camp.

After all this manifestation of God’s goodness, we find Jacob settling down in Succoth, and, contrary to the spirit and principles of a pilgrim life, building a house, as if it were his home. Now, Succoth was evidently not his divinely-appointed destination. The Lord had not said to him, I am the God of Succoth; no; but, “I am the God of Bethel.” Bethel, therefore, and not Succoth, should have been Jacob’s grand object. …

Jacob then moves on to Shechem, and purchases ground, still falling short of the divine mark … — Mackintosh, pages 306-307

Morris, on the other hand, has nothing but good to say about Jacob.

No sooner had Jacob returned to his family after his night of prayer then he saw Esau and his army approaching in the distance. As one final precaution, Jacob arranged his wives and children in appropriate order, the two handmaids and their children first, then Leah and her children, then Rachel and Joseph. …

As was customary in those days (the Tell el Amarna tablets record that one approaching a king always bowed seven times in so doing), Jacob bowed low before Esau seven times as he came near him. This was not intended as an acknowledgment of servility on Jacob’s part, but as a token of respect and recognition of Esau as ruler of the region. — Morris, page 503.

__________

In the Authorized Version, both Esau and Jacob are reported as saying, “I have enough” (vs. 9, 11). However, the Hebrew words are different. Actually, Esau said, “I have much,” whereas Jacob said, “I have everything.” — Morris, page 505.

__________

Esau … headed on back to Seir. Jacob also planned to continue south, but went much more slowly, actually stopping for considerable intervals at both Succoth and Shechem, Succoth (meaning “booths”) is probably the same place mentioned later in the time of Joshua (Joshua 13:27) and Gideon (Judges 8:5-16). It was still east of the Jordan and probably north of the Jabbok, in a plain where there was pasture for the flocks and where they could rest awhile to regain their strength. — Morris, page 506.

__________

Jacob probably stayed longer in Succoth than he had originally anticipated, but eventually moved on. All of his company finally pulled up stakes and headed westward across the Jordan River. After crossing the Jordan, they came to a valley near the city of Shechem, and there Jacob pitched his tent. This was not very far from Succoth, but it was definitely in the land of Canaan and, actually, it was the place where God had first appeared to Abram as he entered the land (Genesis 12:6-7).

[Jacob dug a well near Shechem.] The well is not mentioned in Genesis but is referred to in the New Testament (John 4:6). Shechem was a prominent city throughout Biblical history, located on Mount Gerizim in what later became the territory of the tribe of Ephraim. It was very close to the future city of Samaria, which became the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel.

When Jacob arrived there, the city was controlled by the Hivites, a Canaanite tribe, whose chieftain was a man named Hamor. Hamor had a son named Shechem, possibly named after the city in which they lived. (It is possible also that the city was later named after Shechem, with these early references to the city’s name being later editorial insertions for the benefit of readers in Moses’ day.)

[Jacob] soon arranged to purchase from Hamor and his sons a substantial tract of property for a goodly price, a hundred pieces of silver. Much later, Jacob’s favorite son, Joseph, would be buried on this same spot (Joshua 24:32). — Morris, pages 507-508.

__________

Patriarchal life at first was simple and the intercourse with the outer world was meager and few and far between. In their trade they bartered the produce of the ground and the lambs of the flock and the cattle. Later came the introduction of precious metals: these at first were not put out in coins but weighed out to the seller. The third step is the use of coin which seems to have been first put out in Egypt. Of Abraham we read … that he possessed “sheep and oxen, he-asses and she-asses, and camels” (Genesis 12:6), but subsequently, after he had returned from his residence in Egypt, at that time the hub of culture, we read that “he was rich in cattle, in silver and gold” (Genesis 13:2), but he still took sheep and oxen and gave them to Abimelech (Genesis 21:27), and he also presented to the Philistine king “seven ewe lambs” (Genesis 21:30).

The first recorded purchase with money we find in Abraham buying the field of Ephron with the cave of Macpelah, in order that he might bury his beloved Sarah. Here we are told that Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver current money with the merchant (Genesis 23:16).

The first time that we read of pieces of money or coins is in Genesis 33:19 where Jacob buys an inheritance for his sons from the children of Hamor for one hundred pieces of money or as we would say, one hundred dollars. Here we find the expression weighed out omitted and the word employed for piece of money is “kesitah,” which suggests that the figure of a lamb was stamped upon it, undoubtedly because it stood for a lamb and had the worth of one lamb. Even to Job was given such a “kesitah,” (Job 42:11). The Athenians had a coin with a “bous” or ox stamped on it; it having perhaps the value of an ox. These simple points show the early progress of civilization. — Bultema, pages 62-63.

__________

El Elohe Israel (v.20) — This was an act of faith on Jacob’s part. In calling that altar El-elohe-Israel (God, the God of Israel), not only did he appropriate his new name but also claimed Elohim in a new sense, as the God through whom alone he could walk according to this new name. — Scofield, page 49.