Return to Answer

So, while some readers might find it startling to be told that there were any "strange [foreign] gods" (35:2) among the clan, perhaps we can understand better why they were there. But even Jacob's own wife, Rachel, “had stolen the images that were her father’s” (31:19). Moreover, as some commentators aptly point out, the brothers have just looted Shechem and captured the women and children of the city; hence it is likely that they had some idols among them. Monotheism would have had to be taught to these people, especially servants whose parents were still steeped mostly in the polytheistic pagan beliefs of the Arameans and Horites.

Such earrings seemed to have had some pagan ritual significance. There are several reasons to think so. The present text describes two sets of objects in poetic, parallel construction, “all the strange gods which were in their hand” and “all their earrings which were in their ears”, and then Jacob “hid them under the oak which was in Shechem.” This implies that the two sets of objects were alike in impurity, because they were described and treated alike. When Aaron goes to make the disastrous golden calf, he instructs the people to “Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them to me.” (Ex 32:2) The golden calf was made of earrings and only earrings. With sons wearing earrings, we see that they earrings were not merely female ornaments. In Judges, Gideon tells the people, “I would desire a request of you, that ye would give me every man the earrings of his prey. (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.)” (Judg 8:) This further clarifies that men wore earrings as well, and that the more pagan Ishmaelite tribe were known to wear them.

So, while some readers might find it startling to be told that there were any "strange [foreign] gods" (35:2) among the clan, perhaps we can understand better why they were there. But even Jacob's own wife, Rachel, “had stolen the images that were her father’s” (31:19). Moreover, as some commentators aptly point out, the brothers have just looted Shechem and captured the women and children of the city; hence it is likely that they had some idols among them. Monotheism would have had to be taught to these people, especially servants whose parents were still steeped mostly in the polytheistic pagan beliefs of the Arameans and of the Hivite women of Shechem.

Such earrings seemed to have had some pagan ritual significance. There are several reasons to think so. The present text describes two sets of objects in poetic, parallel construction, “all the strange gods which were in their hand” and “all their earrings which were in their ears”, and then Jacob “hid them under the oak which was in Shechem.” This implies that the two sets of objects were alike in impurity, because they were described and treated alike. When Aaron goes to make the disastrous golden calf, he instructs the people to “Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them to me.” (Ex 32:2) The golden calf was made of earrings and only earrings. With sons wearing earrings, we see that the earrings were not merely female ornaments. In Judges, Gideon tells the people, “I would desire a request of you, that ye would give me every man the earrings of his prey. (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.)” (Judg 8:) This further clarifies that men wore earrings as well, and that the more pagan Ishmaelite tribe were known to wear them.

But the present verses are the first place in the Bible text in which the whole family is made holy for a group sacrifice. This is a remarkable thing, prefiguring the group preparations and anointings found in Exodus, such as Moses sprinkling blood on the people (Ex 24:8). But Jacob was the first patriarch recorded as practicing ritual purification, which is what is suggested here. The Levitical law is full of injunctions to wash and purify under this condition and that; changing garments prefigures later practices of wearing ritually purified ephods and priestly linens, while donning clean clothes prefigures the removal and washing of garments sullied by discharges that made them ritually impure. Jacob’s directions to his family resemble such requirements. Being rooted in law, the whole notion of being made clean for a confrontation with the Lord is thus found throughout the Bible. For example, as Matthew Henry points out, the first command in preparing for a confrontation with the Lord is to “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes” and only then, “Come now, and let us reason together” (Isa 1:16, 18). This also, as Henry aptly states, resembles baptism. The idea is quite natural: washing and changing clothes is like making oneself fresh and clean and ready for a change of heart.

Interestingly, though God has commanded him in Gen 35:1, he does not tell his family so here, at 35:3; perhaps, for all they know, he has simply decided himself to prepare the family this way. In any event, the clan, newly enlarged with Shechemite women and children (if they were not immediately sold, which is possible), is large, young, vigorous, extremely willful, and sullied by serious sin (see Gen 24). That surely is reason enough that the detailed instructions and explanation are given: there were many untaught and violent youths among them. Perhaps more importantly, Jacob is teaching his own sons the rules and substantive theological justification for performing a sacrifice. After what certainly appears to have been a disaster at Shechem, Jacob probably decided his family needed this lesson, if he was not specifically inspired by God himself to give it.

Part of the lesson concerned the offensiveness of idols. A careful examination of the text makes it clear that up to this point, the Lord has not actually forbidden the worship of other gods. The beginnings of the injunction against idolatry begins in the third generation, not the first or second. Perhaps—and I admit this is pure theological speculation on my part—the reason for the silence about idols was that the Lord wanted a robust, faithful tradition of worship of himself to have taken root before he gave the Israelites such a potentially difficult command. Abandoning a religion can be a tall order for many people, after all, and deep roots in a family tradition would help. However that might be, these verses are indeed the origin of the struggle of Israel against idolatry. So perhaps, just by the way, we need not conclude that Rachel was personally being rebuked by Jacob—but her death soon after this, in childbirth, might suggest a rebuke by God.

Such earrings seemed to have had some pagan ritual significance. There are several reasons to think so. The present text describes two sets of objects in poetic, parallel construction, “all the strange gods which were in their hand” and “all their earrings which were in their ears”, and then Jacob “hid them under the oak which was in Shechem.” This implies that the two sets of objects were alike in impurity, because they were described and treated alike. When Aaron goes to make the disastrous golden calf, he instructs the people to “Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them to me.” (Ex 32:2) The golden calf was made of earrings and only earrings. With sons wearing earrings, we see that they earrings were not merely female ornaments. In Judges, Gideon tells the people, “I would desire a request of you, that ye would give me every man the earrings of his prey. (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.)” (Judg 8:24) This further clarifies that men wore earrings as well, and that the more pagan Ishmaelite tribe were known to wear them.

But the present verses are the first place in the Bible text in which the whole family is made holy for a group sacrifice. This is a remarkable thing, prefiguring the group preparations and anointings found in Exodus, such as Moses sprinkling blood on the people (Ex :8). But Jacob was the first patriarch recorded as practicing ritual purification, which is what is suggested here. The Levitical law is full of injunctions to wash and purify under this condition and that; changing garments prefigures later practices of wearing ritually purified ephods and priestly linens, while donning clean clothes prefigures the removal and washing of garments sullied by discharges that made them ritually impure. Jacob’s directions to his family resemble such requirements. Being rooted in law, the whole notion of being made clean for a confrontation with the Lord is thus found throughout the Bible. For example, as Matthew Henry points out, the first command in preparing for a confrontation with the Lord is to “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes” and only then, “Come now, and let us reason together” (Isa 1:16, 18). This also, as Henry aptly states, resembles baptism. The idea is quite natural: washing and changing clothes is like making oneself fresh and clean and ready for a change of heart.

Interestingly, though God has commanded him in Gen 35:1, he does not tell his family so here, at 35:3; perhaps, for all they know, he has simply decided himself to prepare the family this way. In any event, the clan, newly enlarged with Shechemite women and children (if they were not immediately sold, which is possible), is large, young, vigorous, extremely willful, and sullied by serious sin (see Gen 34). That surely is reason enough that the detailed instructions and explanation are given: there were many untaught and violent youths among them. Perhaps more importantly, Jacob is teaching his own sons the rules and substantive theological justification for performing a sacrifice. After what certainly appears to have been a disaster at Shechem, Jacob probably decided his family needed this lesson, if he was not specifically inspired by God himself to give it.

Part of the lesson concerned the offensiveness of idols. A careful examination of the text makes it clear that up to this point, the Lord has not actually forbidden the worship of other gods. The beginnings of a specific injunction against idolatry begins with the third patriarch, not the first or second. Perhaps—and I admit this is pure theological speculation on my part—the reason for the silence about idols was that the Lord wanted a robust, faithful tradition of worship of himself to have taken root before he gave the Israelites such a potentially difficult command. Abandoning a religion can be a tall order for many people, after all, and deep roots in a family tradition would help. However that might be, these verses are indeed the origin of the struggle of Israel against idolatry. So perhaps, just by the way, we need not conclude that Rachel was personally being rebuked by Jacob—but her death soon after this, in childbirth, might suggest a rebuke by God.

Such earrings seemed to have had some pagan ritual significance. There are several reasons to think so. The present text describes two sets of objects in poetic, parallel construction, “all the strange gods which were in their hand” and “all their earrings which were in their ears”, and then Jacob “hid them under the oak which was in Shechem.” This implies that the two sets of objects were alike in impurity, because they were described and treated alike. When Aaron goes to make the disastrous golden calf, he instructs the people to “Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them to me.” (Ex 32:2) The golden calf was made of earrings and only earrings. With sons wearing earrings, we see that they earrings were not merely female ornaments. In Judges, Gideon tells the people, “I would desire a request of you, that ye would give me every man the earrings of his prey. (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.)” (Judg 8:) This further clarifies that men wore earrings as well, and that the more pagan Ishmaelite tribe were known to wear them.

Finally, why bury the items used in pagan idolatry under an "oak"? “Jacob hid them”—presumably, buried them in the soil—“under the oak which was by Shechem.” (Gen 35:4) Note that the definite article is used in the word that translates “oak,” here in the form הָאֵלָ֖ה or haelah (glossed “terebinth”). The definite article might suggest this oak was previously introduced in the text, or was otherwise known to the reader. There was such an oak, previously introduced, way back when Abram first arrived in Caanan: “Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem [Shechem], unto the plain [i.e., “oak” or terebinth tree] of Moreh.” (12:6) This could well be the intended to be the same tree: it might have been a famous "oak" with significant meaning for the family going back to the days of Abram. If so (and this is all rather speculative), then perhaps the notion is that these pagan items would be rendered harmless by their presence in "holy ground."

Finally, why bury the items used in pagan idolatry under an "oak"? “Jacob hid them”—presumably, buried them in the soil—“under the oak which was by Shechem.” (Gen 35:4) Note that the definite article is used in the word that translates “oak,” here in the form הָאֵלָ֖ה or haelah (glossed “terebinth”). The definite article might suggest this oak was previously introduced in the text, or was otherwise known to the reader. There was such an oak, previously introduced, way back when Abram first arrived in Caanan: “Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem [Shechem], unto the plain [i.e., “oak” or terebinth tree] of Moreh.” (12:6) The author might have intended this to be the same tree: it might have been a famous "oak" with significant meaning for the family going back to the days of Abram. If so (and this is all rather speculative), then perhaps the notion is that these pagan items would be rendered harmless by their presence in "holy ground."