It’s so easy to identify with Jacob in Genesis. He develops from a snake-like schemer (Gen 27) to one who bargains with God when it’s convenient (Gen 28). He’s a sufferer who reaps what he sows (Gen 29), one whom God saves despite himself (Gen 30), a desperate man who cries out to God for help (Gen 31–32), and in the end, through all his wrestling, he becomes a disciple (Gen 33, 35). The conclusion to his story highlights makes clear that the experience of Jacob/Israel represents the experience of all God’s people.

Thesis

In a sense Jacob’s character development comes to a conclusion twice, once in Genesis 33 and again in Genesis 35. The intervening story is the tragic rape of Dinah (Gen 34), and in this post I want to highlight how Dinah’s story and the two-fold conclusion to Jacob’s story set Jacob’s story within a meta-perspective. With this zoomed out perspective, the reader can see a major theme in the Old Testament: God’s presence is truly with his people even in the midst of tragic suffering. The snaky threats are always present, too, and the question is how God’s people will navigate the wilderness of hardship. God’s presence is the key. The core of the gospel is always “God with us.” The theme is highlighted at the beginning of Jacob’s story: “Surely Yahweh is in this place, and I did not know it” (Gen 28:16), and it’s true at the end, too (Gen 35:9–15), even after Jacob declared his allegiance (Gen 33:20) and walked through personal tragedy (Gen 34).

Let me explain a little more about what I’m saying regarding the meta-perspective of Dinah’s story and the two-fold conclusion to Jacob’s character development. I’m going to highlight three aspects that combine to form a meta-perspective in this story.

Aspect 1

The conversations in Genesis 34 point to a problem, a threat, more meta than a single incident of rape, as horrible as that is in-and-of itself. The words of Hamor and Shechem portray them on analogy to Pharaoh in Exodus 1. Pharaoh saw the fruit of Yahweh’s work in Abraham’s family and he wanted to stop it.¹ Pharaoh took Israel as his own and made them his slaves, and this is what both Hamor and Shechem want to do with the livestock and property with which God had blessed Jacob (Gen 34:23).

Aspect 2

The sons of Jacob make clear (Gen 34:14–15) that Shechem’s plot to marry Dinah is tied to the issue of Esau’s waywardness. As Jacob’s story gets started and you learn that God is going to carry forward the promises to Abraham through him, the author mentions three times that Esau married foreign women (Gen 26:34–35; 27:46; 28:6–9). Esau made the same mistake that Solomon did (1 Kings 11), the same mistake that led Israel into idolatry and chaos from which the land and nation never recovered, leading to exile.

This same threat is alive and well in Genesis 34, plotting for Jacob and his sons. Granted, the issue of Hamor and Shechem’s uncircumcision and the statement that it’s abominable for the family of Abraham to marry outsiders arises in the story as a matter of pretense (Gen 34:13). But the reader of the Torah knows the rest of the story. You aren’t supposed to block out all that you know about Samuel and Kings as you read Genesis. The echoes of Solomon and exile are loud and clear. The threat of compromise is clear.

Aspect 3

Furthermore, the violence done to Dinah reflects the era of the Judges, pointing forward, and the violence of the sons of God, pointing backwards. Shechem saw (ראה) and took (לקח) Dinah (Gen 34:2), just like the sons of God saw (ראה) and took (לקח) whatever wives they wanted (Gen 6:2). The error of the garden is reflected here, too. Adam and Eve saw and took (Gen 3:6), as well. That motif — seeing, taking, breaking — led quickly to the escalated violence of Genesis 4–6. This threat is present in Genesis 34, as well.

Threat

How are these things a “threat”? I keep using that word because Dinah’s story is situated between Genesis 33 and 35, passages that explicitly state Jacob’s newfound allegiance to the God of his fathers. It’s no devotional gloss to speak about Dinah’s rape as a true threat to Jacob’s faithfulness, especially in light of the aspects in the story highlighted above. Will Jacob and his family walk through “the wilderness” of personal tragedy faithfully, trusting Yahweh and his presence with them, or will they be like other nations, wreaking havoc and violence, doing whatever is right in their own eyes? We know the answer is both. There’s snaky threats within Jacob’s family, too.

Conclusion

Jacob makes Yahweh his God in Genesis 33, but as soon as he does he walks into a multifaceted threat to his faithfulness. In Genesis 34, the reader can see the deception and cunning of the snake and Pharaoh, the violence of Cain, the sons of God, and the people of Judges, and the compromise of Esau and Solomon. They’re all present. What will Jacob’s family do? Simeon and Levi vent their violence, but Jacob scolds them for it, both here (Gen 34:30) and in the first major poem of the Torah in Genesis 49:5–7. God reaffirms his covenant with Jacob (Gen 35), highlighting again his new name, Israel. Jacob indeed wrestled with God and men. His story is so messy, much like mine. It’s so easy to identify with him. The promises of Abraham will carry forward through Jacob/Israel, but the story will move forward with the ever-present threat we all face. God and his presence is truly with his people (“Bethel,” Gen 35:14–15), but walking through the wilderness is not optional, not even for the Messiah (Matt 4).

☩ Lord, have mercy. Christ, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.

Footnote

1. More on the idea of Pharaoh’s snakiness here. ↩