The seven years that Jacob had worked for Laban for Rachel’s hand in marriage had gone off without a hitch. This devotional reading looks at how the morning after the wedding ceremony fell apart.
Nuggets
- Jacob receives compensation for his seven years of labor for Laban, but it wasn’t the wife on which he agreed.
- Leah was gaining a husband but not a real marriage.
- We have to be asking ourselves by this point, where in the world was Rachel?
- Finally, Rachel was given by Laban to Jacob as his wife.
The moment Jacob has been waiting for for seven long years was finally here. But it sure didn’t turn out as he planned!
Let's Put It into Context
To read devotions in the Creating Everything theme, click the button below.
Devotions in the Jacob the Patriarch series
Let's Put It into Context #2
What was an Ancient Near East wedding ceremony like?
It started with a public feast. That means witnesses — possibly a lot of them if we are talking whole village.
There was a formal transfer of the bride from her father to the groom. This would have been done in the evening.
There was nothing like we would see in even first-century Israel. Jacob’s ceremony would have had no rabbi, no chuppah, no standardized liturgy, no ring ceremony, and no glass breaking.
It would have had a feast (probably for several days), a procession to the groom’s house, the transfer, and the consummation.
Laban’s Deception
“Finally, the time came for him to marry her. ‘I have fulfilled my agreement,’ Jacob said to Laban. ‘Now give me my wife so I can sleep with her.’ So Laban invited everyone in the neighborhood and prepared a wedding feast. But that night, when it was dark, Laban took Leah to Jacob, and he slept with her. (Laban had given Leah a servant, Zilpah, to be her maid.)” (Gen. 29: 21-24 NLT)
Jacob receives compensation for his seven years of labor for Laban, but it wasn’t the wife on which he agreed.
Now, we get to see a dysfunctional family at its finest. Yes, Jacob was probably saying déjà vu, but each of the characters in this play wanted something they didn’t have.
They weren’t as easy to herd as the sheep.
Too bad the Law hadn’t been given yet. “While your wife is living, do not marry her sister and have sexual relations with her, for they would be rivals (Lev. 18: 18 NLT).
But then, what happened really wasn’t Jacob’s choice, was it?
Jacob just wanted a wife — and he wanted that wife to be Rachel.
How come in verse 21, Jacob said, “… give me my wife …” (Gen. 19: 21 NLT)? Why didn’t he name Rachel? Probably, Jacob assumed that wife was not dangling but that it was referring back to the agreement.
The deceiver had done everything by the book — at least we aren’t told he did anything differently (and I think we would have been). This was the love of his life that he was working for — he wouldn’t screw it up.
But look at it this way. Jacob had pretended to be the older brother, too. Granted, he was the covenant son.
Still, the firstborn held special status in the Ancient Near East. That included the women as well as the men.
We don’t know if Laban always intended to switch Leah for Rachel (or switch her if she hadn’t found a husband by then). Since it was the custom that the older be married first, he conveniently left that out of the agreement. Plus, wouldn’t Jacob know that?
That Laban knew but didn’t say anything about it when entering into the agreement with Jacob makes it easy to assume the switch was always the plan.
Whatever his intent and purpose, Laban’s words did not match his actions. He let Jacob think for seven years that he was working for Rachel.
Look at when the daughter is finally identified. “But that night, when it was dark, Laban took Leah to Jacob, and he slept with her” (Gen. 29: 23 NLT). This was the point of no return. The sun had probably been down a long time, and the oil lamps would have been lit.
This was definitely Laban’s choice. He took Leah to Joseph instead of Rachel.
Leah’s Deception
“But when Jacob woke up in the morning — it was Leah! ‘What have you done to me?’ Jacob raged at Laban. ‘I worked seven years for Rachel! Why have you tricked me?’ ‘It’s not our custom here to marry off a younger daughter ahead of the firstborn,’ Laban replied” (Gen. 29: 25-26 NLT)
Leah was gaining a husband but not a real marriage.
Growing up, I just heard about Jacob and Laban. But think about it. Leah and Rachel had to be in on the conspiracy. Let’s take Leah first.
Leah probably had always had the expectation to be married first. It probably was the custom that the oldest marry first, sometimes delaying a younger daughter’s marriage. Archeological evidence proves that was the preference in the region.
But look at Laban’s wording. He never said never or forbidden. He just said custom.
True, family honor was tied up in marriage negotiations. But Laban came off as a deceiver since he didn’t bring up the custom until after the deception.
It doesn’t seem like Leah had any prospects. Remember, though, that the midrash states that Leah was supposed to marry Esau. That was supposedly the reason behind her weak, soft eyes.
Huh. Maybe that is why Laban did the switch. He must have thought that Isaac reneged on the deal since Esau was happily married.
In a way, that makes sense to me. If all her other suitors were turned away or didn’t show up in the first place because she was promised, Laban may have thought her chances were slim to none after he realized that negotiation fell through and Rachel had a fish on the line.
Still, that doesn’t excuse Laban’s action. Deception is deception regardless of motivation. Or as we say, two wrongs don’t make it right.
Anyway, Leah must have been in on the conspiracy.
Leah had to have had strict orders not to open her mouth and give away who she was. The heavy veiling helped the deception.
I know. We don’t know when the switch occurred. It is easy to think she was switched right before the consummation time.
I don’t see Laban allowing the wedding night before the transfer.
But what about the feast? Was Leah veiled then and have to keep her mouth shut for 10 hours maybe? Probably six at the screaming outside. It depended on how long the feast took place.
The key legal moment was when Laban handed Leah to Jacob for the transfer into the groom’s household. That would have been in the evening, heavily veiled and after the fruit of the vine had flowed freely.
Instead of getting a husband who loved her, Leah got a husband who didn’t trust her — and it was her fault. She had gone along with the deception.
Could Jacob have refused Leah? (All he said basically was, “What’s up?) Well, yes and no.
The bride-price had been paid. It was paid through labor, not money that could just be given back.
The feast had occurred, as had the transfer and the wedding night. It would have been very catastrophic for Leah if Jacob would have said, “No deal.”
Don’t forget location. Jacob was around 500 miles on his own. It would have taken anywhere from three to five and a half weeks to make the journey back to Beersheba — one way.
Double that if he called for reinforcements. And wouldn’t that have gone over like a lead balloon?
But back to the wedding night. Ancient Near East law — like Hammurabi’s Code composed during 1755–1751 BC — said after transfer and consummation (not the “I do’s” as we know it), it as legally binding.
The reason for that was it would shame the bride and disgrace the father. (I think that is, in this case, a bit absurd. Shouldn’t both have felt shame for their deception?)
Jacob said nothing about annulling it. He didn’t reject Leah and give her back.
So, Jacob and Leah were married. But Leah was used by her father, married to a man who didn’t want or love her, and — in case they weren’t before — became a rival with her sister.
Put this into context with what happened to Jacob. Isaac was blind, where this took place in the dark. Leah was heavily veiled, where Jacob had props of goat skins covering his smooth skin. Leah passed herself off as Rachel, where Jacob had passed himself off as Esau. The marriage, just like the blessing, was irreversible.
Rachel’s Deception
“But wait until the bridal week is over; then we’ll give you Rachel, too — provided you promise to work another seven years for me” (Gen. 29: 25-27 NLT)
We have to be asking ourselves by this point, where in the world was Rachel?
God’s Word is glaringly silent on where Rachel was and what she was thinking and feeling.
Let’s look at some of the options Rachel had. She had a choice between obeying or disobeying her father. I know, integrity says disobey.
Was that really an option? In that culture, she would not have gotten any support to do that.
In that culture, daughters were valued within the household, partly because of economic significance. The big reason was she was under the authority of her father until marriage — when guardianship was transferred to the husband. That is why daughters could be used for family alliance-building.
We know Rebekah had a voice as to when she was leaving (Gen. 24: 57) to go to Hebron or Beersheba (wherever Abraham was). But she didn’t have a say whether she was willing to be married.
A daughter having a voice was very limited in that culture. But just as Leah was silent, Rachel was silent.
Did this make Rachel complicit or pressured?
There is nothing in the Scriptures that says Rachel felt any differently about Jacob than he did for her. So, here is the love of Rachel’s life marrying her sister. Her sister is getting the wedding she always dreamed of having (because it doesn’t say they threw a second big party the next week when Rachel and Jacob finally got to get married).
Rachel may have known that Laban eventually was going to give her as a wife to Jacob. But she wouldn’t get a feast of her own — and she couldn’t go to the wedding feast they had.
Think about it. They were having a seven-day wedding celebration — and we know it did go on for seven days. “But wait until the bridal week is over; then we’ll give you Rachel, too …” (Gen. 29: 27 NLT).
If Leah was veiled, and Rachel showed up, the deception would have been revealed. Oh, wouldn’t that have been priceless?
Rachel slides up to her cousin Levi and says, “How is it going?” He’s doing this dramatic double take. “Aren’t you supposed to be over there in the wedding party?” So, no. Rachel must have been in seclusion.
But we never see where Jacob even considered Rachel’s complicity in the deception. He may have thought her hands were tied.
Rachel could have made it know that she wasn’t the one going into the tent with him. But she kept silent.
Since the feast did go on a week, it would have been expensive. The community probably couldn’t come to a two-week feast. Besides, they may have considered a second week an extension of the first.
Yes, all in all, Rachel came out okay. Leah may have gotten the wedding, but Rachel got the honeymoon.
Seven More Years
“So Jacob agreed to work seven more years. A week after Jacob had married Leah, Laban gave him Rachel, too. (Laban gave Rachel a servant, Bilhah, to be her maid.) So Jacob slept with Rachel, too, and he loved her much more than Leah. He then stayed and worked for Laban the additional seven years” (Gen. 29: 28-30 NLT)
Finally, Rachel was given by Laban to Jacob as his wife.
Kalisch made an interesting observation we might discount at first glance. He said that Laban’ deception destroyed the practice of monogamy within the patriarchs.
Resource
I see you jumping up and down over there. No, I am not forgetting Hagar and Keturah.
Remember, both Hagar and Keturah were concubines. Sarah was first wife.
Legally, Leah was first wife, and Rachel was second wife. But Leah and Rachel were on equal footing. Rachel wasn’t a concubine.
How do we know Rachel wasn’t a concubine?
- Laban gave Rachel to Jacob as his wife.
- Jacob paid the mohar by seven more years of service.
- Rachel was called isha, not pilegesh.
Rachel may have been the intended bride and was the beloved wife, but she was not the first wife except in emotion priority.
Jacob may have felt there was no issue loving one wife more than the other. After all, he had grown up in a family where Isaac had Esau as his favorite while Rebekah had Jacob as her favorite.
How would wives be much different!
Making the Connections #1
We have to talk about the God factor.
Does it say that Jacob asked Jehovah who his wife should be? No.
Is that definite proof that Jacob didn’t? No.
What is evident throughout the story is that Jehovah was in control.
Let’s look at it from this way. Jehovah was wanting to build a nation. He had picked Abraham. He had picked Isaac. Now, He had picked Jacob.
Yes, Jehovah picked Rachel, too. But for reasons only He knows, He decided that she would only have two kids. Yes, Abraham had Isaac, Ishmael, and the five sons of Keturah; and Isaac had Jacob and Esau.
Still, the nation wasn’t getting anywhere fast on those low numbers — especially when we remember six of Abraham’s sons were not Hebrews.
Jehovah wanted a big population boost here. He knew that Jacob would only and always see Rachel as his soul mate.
Jehovah wanted to get the party started.
No, I don’t know why Jehovah had to go and choose sisters. This is especially true when He later outlawed it (Lev 18: 18).
And then to add two more concubines on top of that. (Laban gave servants to each of the girls, who became concubines in the baby war.)
Yes, Jehovah had to do something. Jacob would have been content with just Rachel.
Jehovah used the situation to further His kingdom by making sure Jacob would have 12 children.
Making the Connections #2
Meyer said that marriage should only be “in the Lord.” He gave two verses to illustrate what he meant.
Resource
- “You must not intermarry with them. Do not let your daughters and sons marry their sons and daughters” (Deut. 7: 3 NLT).
- “A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but only if he loves the Lord” (I Cor. 7: 39 NLT).
What are we to glean from these two verses?
- Believers should not intermarry with non-believers.
- The bond of marriage is for life. It can only be broken by the death of a spouse.
Making the Connections #3
So, did Laban consider his daughters as property? Maybe. Maybe not.
As father, Laban was, according to Mendelsohn, the baal — or owner — of his wives and children. He had complete say as to his daughters’ future.
Resource
But women were important members of the household. They shared part of the labor, resources, and responsibilities for the wellbeing of the family.
The family was more of an economic and social unit. This is probably due to the multigenerational nature of the household.
That doesn’t mean that Laban didn’t love his daughters. We know that “Laban got up early the next morning, and he kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. Then he left and returned home” (Gen. 31: 55 NLT emphasis added).
Kalisch had a good observation about the bride-price. He noted that some may think that, if the bride-price included money, the groom was basically buying his wife as a slave.
Resource
Vital to his happiness. Worth more than money. A treasure. Most valuable asset.
Not slave. Not even servant.
I think it would be more of a slap in the face if the loss of a valued member if the family was ignored back in those days.
Many of the fathers of the Ancient Near East funneled a part of the mōhar to the daughter. It was to ensure her future security.
Unfortunately, Laban did not forward the money to either daughter. He kept it all for himself.
Making the Connections #4
We may think lying has no consequences. We would be wrong. We find out what the consequences feel like when the deception is pulled on us.
Pain is generally associated with being lied to — the severity of it depends on the who, what, when, why, and where. But the hurt from the lie can be devastating.
The degree of anger is probably in correlation to the degree of pain. Sometimes, it is not even a conscious reaction. We just react.
That says nothing about the fallout from the deception. Even if there is no physical consequences — like lost wages, lost time, etc. — there can be some variation of lost relationship. Are we really doing to trust that person again?
Jacob now knew how it felt.
Is that to say that Jacob hadn’t been on the receiving end of a lie before? Oh, no.
That means nothing had been more important to him than this.
And now he knows.
Making the Connections #5
We aren’t told how old Leah and Rachel are. But let’s look at the timeline.
1723 BC – Jacob cheated Esau (both age 77) out of the birthright blessing given by Isaac age 137). He flees Canaan to Paddan-aran to Rebekah’s family. He agrees to work seven years to earn the right to marry Rachel (Gen. 29: 1-20)
1716 BC – Jacob, 84, was tricked into marrying Leah. He agrees to work seven more years for Rachel
1709 BC – Jacob, 91, finished working seven years for Rachel and agreed to continuing working for Laban to build up his personal wealth.
1703 BC – Jacob, 97, and his family left to return to Canaan (Gen. 31: 3)
Based on Timeline from
If we go on usual ages, Rachel would have probably been 15 to 17. Leah was older, so she could have been — at a minimum — 16 to 18.
Jacob could have had been 70 years older than the girls.
How Do We Apply This?
- Confessed our sins to God and forgive
- Obey God’s Word.
- Make sure our actions do follow our words.
- Be people of integrity and honesty.
- Ensure that our actions follow our words.
Father Good. We can be so deceptive at times. But You take all our choices and work the into Your plan. Thank You. Amen.
If you don’t understand something and would like further clarification, please contact me.
If you have not signed up for the email providing the link to the devotions and the newsletter, do so below.
If God has used this devotion to speak with you, consider sharing it on social media.