Genesis 34.1-4-Shechem, Son of Hamor Rapes Jacob's Daughter Dinah
Wednesday September 20, 2006
Genesis: Genesis 34:1-4-Shechem, Son of Hamor Rapes Jacob’s Daughter Dinah
Lesson # 208
Please turn in your Bibles to Genesis 33:18.
This evening we will study Genesis 34:1-4, which gives us the record of Shechem, son of Hamor raping Jacob’s daughter by Leah, namely, Dinah.
Last evening we studied Genesis 33:18-20, which presents to us the record of Jacob moving from Succoth, crossing the Jordan River and returning to the land of Canaan and settling in Shechem.
Genesis 33:18, “Now Jacob came safely to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Paddan-aram, and camped before the city.”
Genesis 33:19, “He bought the piece of land where he had pitched his tent from the hand of the sons of Hamor, Shechem's father, for one hundred pieces of money.”
Genesis 33:20, “Then he erected there an altar and called it El-Elohe-Israel.”
In Genesis 33:19 we saw Jacob buying a tract of land from Hamor who was a Hivite and the Hivites were called “Canaanites.”
The Canaanites were under a curse according to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 and thus Jacob’s family could not intermarry with the Canaanites.
If you recall, Abraham prohibited Eliezer his servant from getting Isaac his son a Canaanite woman and Isaac issued the same prohibition to Jacob.
By allowing Jacob, now Israel to buy land and settle among them, the Canaanites and specifically, the Hivites were hoping to intermarry with Jacob’s family and this we have seen was prohibited by the Lord as stipulated in the prophecy of Noah.
This intermarriage would mean that the Canaanites would absorb Jacob’s clan, making them a part of their culture and people, both of which were decadent.
Remember, the Lord has made Jacob extremely wealthy and so he would be appealing to the Canaanites to intermarry with.
Therefore, Jacob has made a bad decision by purchasing this tract of land belonging to the Canaanites.
The consequences of this decision are keenly felt in Genesis 34, which records the rape of Jacob’s daughter Dinah by Shechem, the son of Hamor.
Now, we must understand that the purchase of the land by Jacob and the building of the altar were done by him in faith and were a testimony to the faith of Jacob in the Lord’s promise to give him the land of Canaan.
However, Jacob’s decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked discernment in the sense that he could not perceive clearly and understand the dangerous situation he put himself in since the Canaanites sold him the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his family, which he was prohibited from doing.
His decision to purchase land from the Canaanites lacked acuteness of judgment and understanding of the consequences of such a purchase since the Canaanites sold Jacob the land in the hopes of intermarrying with his family, which he was prohibited from doing according to the prophecy of Noah.
Discernment stresses accuracy in reading character or motives and so Jacob’s decision to purchase land from Hamor lacked discernment since Jacob did not accurately read the character and motive of Hamor in selling him the tract of land.
Jacob’s decision was lacking in discernment since it was not God’s will that he build the altar at Shechem but at Bethel since he had made a vow to the Lord over twenty years before to build an altar at Bethel and worship the Lord there (See Genesis 28:20-21).
Although Jacob returned to the land of Canaan, he was wrong to settle at Shechem since he made a vow to the Lord to Bethel to return there and build an altar to worship the Lord in thanksgiving for prospering, and protecting him while in exile and fulfilling His promise to return him safely to the land of Canaan.
Once he departed from Succoth, he should have kept right on going to Bethel.
There was no reason for Jacob to stop just twenty miles to the west at Shechem.
So it appears that Jacob was getting passive and lazy and procrastinating.
He had just experienced a great victory spiritually with Esau but it appears he got complacent and lazy and procrastinated.
Throughout his life, Jacob demonstrates tremendous passivity as in the case of letting his mother Rebekah manipulate him until the age of forty and his inability to confront Laban for twenty years for cheating him of his wages.
His passivity was demonstrated also with his wives, where he let them order him around and treated him as a stud for hire.
Jacob’s lack of discernment resulting in his failure to go to Bethel and fulfill his vow to the Lord there resulted in the rape of Dinah since if he went to Bethel as he should have, the rape of Dinah would never have taken place.
Genesis 34:1, “Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land.”
Dinah is the seventh child that Leah bore to Jacob and only girl and her birth is recorded in Genesis 30:21.
Jacob did not have other daughters besides Dinah (cf. 37:35 and 46:7).
In Genesis 46:7-19, the term “daughters” is used with reference to Jacob’s “granddaughters” and not to other daughters besides Dinah since Dinah is singled out as being his only daughter and the daughters of Jacob’s son are listed.
The term for “daughters” in the Hebrew can be used to describe a “granddaughter” and not just a “daughter.”
The name “Dinah” (hn*yD!) (dee-naw) means, “judgment” since the name is the feminine form of the word din (/yD!) (deen) meaning “judgment.”
The long definition of Dinah’s relationship to her parents is unusual indicating that Dinah did not receive the love and affection that she should have from her father Jacob because she was the daughter of Leah who Jacob did not love as much as Rachel.
It implies that Jacob was indifferent towards Dinah because he loved Rachel more than her mother Leah.
Her brothers Simeon and Levi were also affected by Jacob’s indifference since they take the law into their own hands as the result of their father’s indifference to their sister’s rape.
Bruce K. Waltke, “The narrator’s continual identification of the father-daughter relationship exposes the shame of Jacob’s passivity in the events that follow” (Genesis, A Commentary, page 461).
The noun na`arah (hr*u&n^), “her” in Genesis 34:3 indicates that Dinah was of marriageable age meaning she was approximately thirteen or fourteen years of age.
Also indicating that Dinah was approximately thirteen or fourteen years of age at this point in the narrative is that in Genesis 34:4 the noun yaladh (hD*l!y^), which means, “young girl” is used to describe her.
Dinah’s decision to leave her family’s encampment to enter a Canaanite city without a chaperone was improper since in the ancient world girls of a marriageable age would not leave a rural encampment to go unchaperoned into an alien city.
It was also a poor decision because Jacob’s family who were Shemites as we have noted were not to have relationships with the Canaanite because of their godless and immoral lifestyle.
However, Dinah’s bad decision to associate with the Canaanite women is directly related to her father’s poor example when he purchased land from Hamor who was a Canaanite.
So Dinah’s decision to associate with the Canaanite women was a case of “like father, like daughter.”
As we have noted, the Canaanites sold Jacob the land because they wished to intermarry with him because he was very wealthy.
Dinah’s rape came about because Jacob failed to exhibit appropriate distancing from the Canaanites and as a result exposes her to sexual defilement from the Canaanites who were notoriously sexually immoral.
Therefore, the rape of Dinah is the result of poor leadership and passivity of Jacob her father.
Genesis 34:2, “When Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he took her and lay with her by force.”
Genesis 34:2 records that “Hamor” was a Hivite, which is significant.
The Hivites settled in the land of Canaan and were displaced by Israel under Joshua (Ex. 3:8, 17; 13:5; 23:23; 33:2; 34:11; Deut. 7:1; Josh. 9:1).
At times the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, were called “Canaanites” but strictly speaking the nations who dwelt on the coasts or river lowlands were called “Canaanite” (Nm. 13:29).
Therefore, “Hamor” was a Canaanite and the Canaanites were under a curse according to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 and thus Jacob’s family could not intermarry with the Canaanites.
As we noted earlier, Abraham prohibited Eliezer his servant from getting Isaac his son a Canaanite woman and Isaac issued the same prohibition to Jacob.
In fact, in Genesis 26:35, Esau’s Hittite wives who were also Canaanites brought grief to his parents, Isaac and Rebekah because their godless lifestyle was repulsive to his parents who possessed a covenant relationship with the Lord.
Not only did Abraham seek a wife for Isaac among the Arameans rather than the Canaanites but also Isaac did as well for Jacob.
The reason for this is that Abraham and Isaac and the Arameans were descendants of Shem (i.e. Semitic) who according to the prophecy of Noah recorded in Genesis 9:24-27 were in the line of Christ.
Unlike the Canaanites, Aramean women embraced the faith of their husbands, unlike the Canaanite women who seduce their husbands to join their lifestyles (See Genesis 24:4; 26:34-35; 31:50).
The Canaanites were idolatrous (Deut. 29:17), involved in the occult (Deut. 18:9-10) and gross immorality (Lev. 18), which archaeology confirms.
The Lord used the nation of Israel under Joshua to pour out His judgment upon the Canaanites for their immoral degeneracy (Gen. 15:16; 19:5; Lev. 18; 20; Deut. 12:31).
The Canaanites were defeated on the battlefield, destroyed, or integrated with other nations or enslaved to Israel (Gen. 14:1-16; 15:18-21; Ex. 3:7-10; Deut. 1-3; Josh. 10-19).
Shechem’s father was Hamor who was the leader of the Hivites who Jacob purchased property from just outside the city.
Notice that Genesis 34:2 describes Hamor as the prince of the land and not the city “because the city-state of Shechem in pre-Israelite times extended its control over a vast area that at one time included the central hill country as far as the borders of Jerusalem and Gezer to the south and Megiddo to the north, a domain of about 1,000 square miles. Egyptian and Akkadian texts reflect this situation” (The JPS Torah Commentary, The Jewish Publication Society, page 233).
Hamor is described as a “prince” and not with the usual designation for the head of a Canaanite city-state.
His unusual title indicates that as ruler of Shechem he had dominion over rural territory as well as the urban center.
This title does “not” mean that he had absolute power however and in fact Genesis 34:20-23 reveals that he does not act as a king in this situation with Dinah since he calls a town meeting in order to present his plans before the citizens and obtains approval by means of persuasive argument rather than by a royal decree.
“Took” is the verb laqach (jq^l*), which means that Shechem sent messengers to “fetch, retrieve, summon” Dinah in order to add her to his harem.
“Lay” is the verb shakhav (bk^v*) (shaw-kahv), which is used as a euphemism for sex and is never used for loving marital intercourse in Genesis but only for illicit or forced sex such as Lot’s daughters with Lot (19:32-35); the Philistines with Rebekah (26:10); Shechem with Dinah (34:2, 7); Reuben with Bilhah (35:22); Potiphar’s wife with Joseph (39:7, 10, 12, 14).
“By force” is the verb `anah (hnu), which is in the piel (intensive) stem indicates that Shechem “raped” Dinah.
Under the Mosaic Law, which was not yet given to the nation of Israel at this point in history, Shechem would have been compelled to marry Dinah and pay fifty shekels, which was an unusually large present (“bride-price”) to her father.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29, “If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.”
Genesis 34:3, “He was deeply attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the girl and spoke tenderly to her.”
The statement “He (Shechem) was deeply attracted to Dinah” literally means in the Hebrew that his “soul clung” to Dinah’s soul.
“Was deeply attracted” is the verb davaq (qb^D*), which denotes the passionate aspect of personal love for the opposite sex, though it is not used of sexual intimacy but rather conveys the sense of loyalty, fidelity, commitment and affection for someone.
“Loved” is the verb ‘ahev (bh@a*) (aw-haiv), which denotes Shechem’s sexual attraction for Dinah, which the Greeks called eros.
This same verb is used of Jacob’s love for Rachel in Genesis 29:18.
As we noted in our studies of Genesis 30, the Greek’s used four different verbs to denote the concept of “love”: (1) Erao (e)ravw) (verb), (2) Stergo (stergwv) (verb), (3) Phileo (filevw) (verb), (4) Agapao (a)gapavw) (verb).
The verb erao (e)ravw) and the noun eros denote a “possessive” love between a man and a woman, which involves longing, craving, and sexual desire.
Stergo means, “to feel affection” and is used especially of the mutual love of parents and children and can also be used of the love of a people for their ruler, the love of tutelary god for the people and even of dogs for their master.
The verb phileo denotes the affection and attraction of people towards one another who are close together both inside and outside the family and it includes concern, care and hospitality, also love for things in the sense of being fond of.
The verb agapao is often used in the classical Greek to denote friendship between equals, or sometimes sympathy and sometimes agapao took on the meaning of “to prefer, to set one good or aim above another, to prioritize, to esteem one person more highly than another.”
The noun eros was a general love of the world seeking to satisfy itself wherever it can thus making no distinctions and
Eros is determined by a more or less indefinite impulsion towards its object and was a self-serving love.
In Genesis 34:4, the verb davaq expresses Shechem’s phileo love for Dinah whereas ‘ahev denotes his eros love towards her.
The statement He “spoke tenderly to her” in the Hebrew literally means that Shechem “spoke to the heart of the young woman who is of the age to be married.”
This statement reveals that after the rape Shechem attempted to comfort Dinah and assured her that he loved her and would do right by her and marry her.
In fact, to demonstrate that he was a man of his word, he took her into his own house according to Genesis 34:26.
These three verbs in Genesis 34:4 express Shechem’s tender love and affection for Dinah and commitment to marry her and offset the three verbs in Genesis 34:3 that express his sexual aggression and lack of self-control.
Genesis 34:4, “So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, ‘Get me this young girl for a wife.’”
Since marriages were arranged in the days of the patriarchs we see Shechem ordering his father to negotiate with Dinah’s family so that he can marry her.
Shechem’s command “Get me this young girl for a wife” reveals at least three things about his personality and character.
First of all, it reveals that he is a spoiled little rich boy who gets whatever he wants since he is the son of top of politician in the town and is impolite and never says “please.”
Secondly, it reveals the depth of his physical and emotional attraction to Dinah in that he must have her as his wife.
Thirdly, it reveals Shechem’s desire to do right by Dinah after taking her by force and raping her.
As we noted earlier, Deuteronomy 22:28-29 does not prescribe death for the rape of an unmarried or unengaged woman but marriage with a heavy monetary penalty and without possibility of divorce if the father consents (cf. Exodus 22:16-17; 2 Samuel 13:16).
The picture given to us in Genesis 34:2-4 is that Shechem’s aggressive sexual behavior towards Dinah has turned to personal love, affection and care and concern for Dinah to the extent that he is willing to commit to her and marry her.
The fact that Hamor never rebukes his son Shechem for raping Dinah and Shechem never apologizes to Dinah for his conduct reveals that the Shechemite or Canaanite culture was immoral and decadent and raping a woman was a common occurrence in Canaanite towns.