Who Says When It's Time To Leave?

Was Jacob’s anger aroused because he did not love her or because she did not know God, his God, as she ought (Gen.31:53)?

Why did “the women” believe that the fruit of the womb or lack thereof was a sign of God’s blessing or cursing under conditions and circumstances of the demands on the culture?

Why were “the men” forced to desire many children in order to be “free from other men” in this economic culture (1Cor.7:18-24)?

Why were so many hands required just to fill the table with food for the many mouths that were insured under the tents?

Is this why God “overlooked” the sin of multiple wives with no direct discipline for the sons of His love during this economic age (Acts 17:30)?

Concubine A woman who is conjugally related to man but holds a secondary or inferior status to his primary wife.

Etymology

The Hebrew term “concubine” (פִּלֶ֫גֶשׁ‎, pilegesh) has no clear etymology. It may be derived from the root meaning “divide” (פלג‎, plg). Another argument is that it comes from the Indo-European terms meaning “at, on, toward” (pi-) and “to lie down” (legh-) plus the nominal final š, indicating that a pîlegeš is “someone next to a person” (Görg, “Piggul und pilægæš,” 7–11).1

  Distinction between Wife and Concubine

The distinction between a wife and a concubine in the ancient world is somewhat ambiguous. The Hebrew language has no special term “wife”; rather, a woman is designated as a wife in a genitive construction—”woman of (name of man).” The Hebrew texts often use the same vocabulary to describe taking a wife or a concubine.1

1 Linzie M. Treadway, “Concubine,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).

Why is sin not imputed where there is no law?

Romans 5:12–14 (NKJV)

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because all sinned—13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

What was the earthly wage Jacob was looking for this whole time to risk the suffering of enduring Laban’s treachery while God blesses him beyond what Jacob ever thought to ask for in preparation of knowing the eternal God (Eph.3:18-21; Rom.6:23)?

How do these words further prove “from the beginning” that Laban never had a heart for Jacob’s welfare apart from his “headship” and “ownership” of him (Gen.11:7; 31:47-48)? Why does Jacob have the final “witness” over Laban’s vow (Gen.31:49, 53; 24:47-50, 60)?

Is this an emphasis on God’s work over the work of the flesh, for flesh and blood could not have made this miracle happen for Jacob, the man of flesh and blood because the theological term for “the Adam” is not used here (Gen.30:43)?

Therefore, how is God separating Himself (that is, His righteousness) from “the man” that He made prosperous through the sin of the “others” who made him “the man” that he presently is (Rom.8:28-30)?

Therefore, what is the difference between the prosperity of heaven’s economic glory in Christ and the economic glory of the dust of the earth (1Cor.15:45-50)?

And again, why is it theologically important that we, as believers, recognize God’s distinction between the “the man” of dust and the “the Adam” of the Lord’s redemption of the glory of heaven’s economy through “the Lord from heaven,” who is the heavenly Man of glory, “the Lord Our Righteousness?”

Where does this vow get paid in Jacob’s journey, and to whom (Gen.33:11)? And how is that much different than Abraham and Melchizedek’s interaction concerning a “tithe;” and therefore, why is God satisfied in it being paid to Esau, yet credited to Jacob as righteousness according to faith after all his groanings under Laban’s rod of slavery (Gen.32:30)?

Where does this vow get paid in Jacob’s journey, and to whom (Gen.33:11)? And how is that much different than Abraham and Melchizedek’s interaction concerning a “tithe;” and therefore, why is God satisfied in it being paid to Esau, yet credited to Jacob as righteousness according to faith after all his groanings under Laban’s rod of slavery (Gen.32:30)?

How does Mizpah also reinforce Laban’s “heap of witness” as Galeed (a heap of dung) and a worthless land since Laban’s word clearly cannot be trusted?

Why does Jacob use the “fear” of his father as the reference and standard of His God in contrast to what Laban appealed to as God when he never knew Abraham’s God, which was not the God of Nahor, since God had called him out of his fathers (Ex.3:15)? Why isn’t “Nahor” included with the fathers of Israel?

Therefore, how does this demonstrate the idolatry of Laban’s theology? And how does it demonstrate the faith of Jacob to express Laban’s lack of fear of the true and living God (Lk.20:27-38)? This is a proper expression of faith compared to his weak faith at Bethel.