Genesis 34: Simeon and Levi massacre inhabitants in Shechem

[Ioannes]

I just read this chapter and did a brief search online. I'm trying to understand whether there is any currently valid morale in this story, or if I should just dismiss it as a tale within Genesis that bears no value today.
Of course I'm not reflecting on whether we can avenge the rape of a family member with the slaughter of an entire town's male population, but rather if there's an hidden lesson we should learn.

I read somewhere that Camor and Sichem didn't ask forgiveness for their offence and were thus legitimately cheated. So the lesson in this story could be that no matter what, after committing evil against someone you should seek forgiveness and offer repentance first, rather than trying to make up for your offence by corrupting the other party with material goods.

 

[Tolworth John]

I'm trying to understand whether there is any currently valid morale in this story, or if I should just dismiss it as a tale within Genesis that bears no value today.

The mere fact that it is in the bible mean that it is of value to us.
We have to find the meaning.
I found this site to be interesting, in it examines the story from a jewish view point:-
Who Is the Victim in the Dinah Story? - TheTorah.com

The story shows how women were not people but objects.
That greed, lust and revenge are powerfull motives that need restraint.
That leaders need to be responcibile even when faced by diastar.
That individuals are responcible for their actions

 

[~Anastasia~]

So far I don't find anything in the Church Fathers about a particular lesson.

Considering the whole chapter - it's a history lesson I think.

Yes, the brothers killed the men of the city and despoiled them. Jacob chastised them for what they did to his reputation by doing so. The sons argued for their sister's reputation. They both had a point. God doesn't seem to sanction either the rape or the murders.

He was willing to marry Dinah, but consider - he was the most honorable among his family - yet he still raped a young girl to satisfy his lust. And his plan was to possess everything of her family as well.

There's a lot wrong here.

 

[RDKirk]

So far I don't find anything in the Church Fathers about a particular lesson.

Considering the whole chapter - it's a history lesson I think.

Yes, the brothers killed the men of the city and despoiled them. Jacob chastised them for what they did to his reputation by doing so. The sons argued for their sister's reputation. They both had a point. God doesn't seem to sanction either the rape or the murders.

He was willing to marry Dinah, but consider - he was the most honorable among his family - yet he still raped a young girl to satisfy his lust. And his plan was to possess everything of her family as well.

There's a lot wrong here.

I'd point out that the Mosaic Law prohibits the retribution of Dinah's brothers and prescribes the remediation that Sechem proposed.

I'm not sure what "rape" really means in this context--I'm pretty sure what happened then and there isn't exactly the same image conjured in modern times. Nor am I sure that Dinah's brothers were not culpable.

I compare this to the situation of Ruth, where Ruth was out away from kinfolk. Boaz noted the fact that Ruth was out of the protection of any kin and explicitly brought her under his protection.

So that makes me wonder why Dinah was out there alone and why her oh-so-concerned brothers weren't seeing to her protection...and what did that mean in that social context? Sechem didn't use Dinah and leave her, he brought her into his house--having seen her out by herself without the expected protection of her kin.

As you say, that situation is enveloped by a whole cloud of wrong, and we can see by Jacob's reaction and by God's later law that all the wrong wasn't on Sechem's side.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Another thing - when considering anything in the OT, it's always best to read the Septuagint. Sometimes there is a bit more understanding, or clarity. Sometimes even a corrected form.

Genesis 34 - Apostolic Bible Polyglot Greek-English Interlinear

 

[~Anastasia~]

I'd point out that the Mosaic Law prohibits the retribution of Dinah's brothers and prescribes the remediation that Sechem proposed.

I'm not sure what "rape" really means in this context--I'm pretty sure what happened then and there isn't exactly the same image conjured in modern times. Nor am I sure that Dinah's brothers were not culpable.

I compare this to the situation of Ruth, where Ruth was out away from kinfolk. Boaz noted the fact that Ruth was out of the protection of any kin and explicitly brought her under his protection.

So that makes me wonder why Dinah was out there alone and why her oh-so-concerned brothers weren't seeing to her protection...and what did that mean in that social context? Sechem didn't use Dinah and leave her, he brought her into his house--having seen her out by herself without the expected protection of her kin.

As you say, that situation is enveloped by a whole cloud of wrong, and we can see by Jacob's reaction and by God's later law that all the wrong wasn't on Sechem's side.

There's certainly question about what Dinah was doing, I agree.

We have to remember though that this was before any Mosaic Law. The Law puts forth God's take on justice among fallen humans. But it doesn't "fix" what is essentially wrong among us. (I'm not debating against you, merely mentioning other factors to keep in mind so we don't apply the wrong opinions).

And Jacob was within his rights (or would have been, according to God) to receive payment for the crime and still deny Dinah as wife.

Also - there is even at that time beginning to be a point about "intermingling" ... but Israel is only four generations old at that time, and the first two generations were only one man (Abraham and Isaac) and the third generation only two (Jacob and Esau). So "intermingling" was pretty much essential if they weren't marrying sisters or possibly first cousins, of which there wouldn't be many. That point is kind of puzzling to me. Israel was to become a distinct people for the purposes of God, but this was too early for that to be possible. However ... it enters into the story.

Maybe in fact that is a primary lesson.

 

[~Zao~]

The ending of the story is really in the final chapter of Genises where Joseph's children (one of which is listed in the survivors of Revelation) were in Egypt as second in command. The words given to his children according to Israel. But I can't remember the exact words nor do I have time to look them up. Sianarah

 

[ArmyMatt]

I just read this chapter and did a brief search online. I'm trying to understand whether there is any currently valid morale in this story, or if I should just dismiss it as a tale within Genesis that bears no value today.
Of course I'm not reflecting on whether we can avenge the rape of a family member with the slaughter of an entire town's male population, but rather if there's an hidden lesson we should learn.

I read somewhere that Camor and Sichem didn't ask forgiveness for their offence and were thus legitimately cheated. So the lesson in this story could be that no matter what, after committing evil against someone you should seek forgiveness and offer repentance first, rather than trying to make up for your offence by corrupting the other party with material goods.

theologically, that sounds pretty good. I think we can also say that sin affects everyone, not just those who commit it. and it ultimately leads to death.

 

[Rubricnigel]

Page 45, The start of Verse 34 of the orthodox study bible.
Next page coming up.

 

[Rubricnigel]

For some reason it wont let me.
34:31.. the sons of Jacob repaid evil for evil for they, so to speak, took the law into their own hands. furthermore the punishment did not fit the crime they turned out to be worse sinners then shechem

Orthodox study bible on it

 

[Ioannes]

To sum it up, it seems the main morale is that in that context almost no divinely received Law existed, and the few already recognised were violated here on both sides.

However, God seems to allow sinners to be taught a lesson via the sin of the vengeful offended party. As when Esau disregarded his birthright and sold it away, and although Jacob was deceptive and cheated his brother he's eventually (seemingly) more righteous.

The story here seems similar, in the sense somebody committed a sin so bad that the vengeance acted on them, although still sinful, was partly justified because of the offence.

 

[Ioannes]

For some reason it wont let me.
34:31.. the sons of Jacob repaid evil for evil for they, so to speak, took the law into their own hands. furthermore the punishment did not fit the crime they turned out to be worse sinners then shechem

Orthodox study bible on it

thank you for this. Although isn't it just conjecture? Where do we see Jacob's sons punished or chastised for doing what they did? Or whatever else shows God was actually very displeased with the massacre.

 

[Rubricnigel]

thank you for this. Although isn't it just conjecture? Where do we see Jacob's sons punished or chastised for doing what they did? Or whatever else shows God was actually very displeased with the massacre.

I will let other people with vast knowledge answer your question.
I was just trying to show you what the study bible said.
(Btw, you should get one, best thing ive bought)

God bless, i will enjoy reading all the answers, etc.

 

[RDKirk]

thank you for this. Although isn't it just conjecture? Where do we see Jacob's sons punished or chastised for doing what they did? Or whatever else shows God was actually very displeased with the massacre.

A. Jacob directly criticized it.

B. God later wrote a law that would have prohibited it. God's attitude about the action didn't change when He wrote the law, He simply hadn't yet prohibited it "because your hearts were hard." But that didn't mean it was righteous even if not yet prohibited.

 

[Ioannes]

I think the Nohanic law already prohibited murder, so I made a mistake. God was obviously against what Jacob's sons did, when in Genesis 9 he said what murder would cost to the offender.

 

[icxn]

Dinah translated means "incorruptible judgment:" justice the attribute seated by God, the everlasting virgin. Being the last daughter of Leia, who can be understood symbolically as the Jewish Synagogue – with Rachel of course a type of the Church of the Nations, - she (Dinah) is a symbol of those from the Jews that believed the Gospel, primarily the Apostles. These, Christ (Shechem) saw and loved them wishing to make them His bride. The act of rape can be understood spiritually as the sowing of the seeds of the gospel teaching, which the Jewish leaders (Levi) and those among the people who sided with them (Symeon*), saw as a defilement of their Law. The men who followed Shechem and his father to circumcise themselves and become one people with Jacob (Genesis 34:22) are of course the nations that believed the gospel and received the spiritual circumcision of the heart. These the Jews persecuted and killed as we know from history and the book of Acts, having hamstrung, as in crucify the spiritual ox, Christ (Genesis 49:5-6). (Compiled mostly from St Cyril of Alexandria’s ‘Glaphyra in Pentateuchum’)

The story has also another hidden meaning. Hamon interpreted means ‘ass’ and it represents the body. Shehem his son means ‘back’ or ‘rear,’ he represents the law of sin (or the will of the flesh), which came later, hence rear, when Adam transgressed the commandment. The women of the land, which Dinah (symbolizing the soul) visited are the sensual impressions of this world or even the letter of scripture. The souls who lack spiritual maturity, i.e. are still subject to the law of sin, in bed with Shehem as it were, when they come in contact with the world they conceive passions. The same, when they attempt to interpret the letter of scripture instead of uncovering the hidden spirit, they conceive falsehoods. These souls are taken away from Shehem’s house, i.e. redeemed, when Jacob (the mind) the supplanter of the will of the flesh (Esau), by means of obedience (Symeon) to the law of God (Levi) puts to death the fleshly passions (men of Shehem) and takes all their possessions captive (2 Corinthians 10:5). (Compiled from various texts by St Maximos the Confessor)

_____________
* Symeon interpreted means ‘listening’ or ‘obedience.’

 

[Ioannes]

That is definitely interesting and coming from a respected father. However I somehow prefer more obvious and literal interpretations as we've seen before.
Being, a story of sin against sin and of lawlessness on both parts, and the righteous chastising from Jacob.

 

[icxn]

That is definitely interesting and coming from a respected father. However I somehow prefer more obvious and literal interpretations as we've seen before.
Being, a story of sin against sin and of lawlessness on both parts, and the righteous chastising from Jacob.

You did ask for a hidden lesson and I gave you two, a prophetic foreshadowing and a moral/spiritual instruction. I know they are a ‘little’ heavy on allegory, but most of the Old Testament stories are types of things Christ fulfilled historically and continually fulfills within us. If you want to make sense of just the literal reading of the story, the fact is that God, through the mouth of Jacob, did not approve of what Symeon and Levi did. While this is not clear from reading chapter 34, it is confirmed in chapter 49:

5 Symeon and Levi, brethren, accomplished the injustice of their cutting off. 6 Let not my soul come into their counsel, and let not mine inward parts contend in their conspiracy, for in their wrath they slew men, and in their passion they houghed a bull. 7 Cursed be their wrath, for it was willful, and their anger, for it was cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.​

 

[JohnC2]

The other thing to remember is that The Bible isn’t a series of carefully and thoughtfully constructed moral and ethical fables developed by men for instruction and teaching. It’s not a collection of neat, tidy, and straight forward lessons.... It’s not Jewish Aesop’s fables by any means.

It is an account of what actually happened. And truth be told - if you were going to invent a series of instructive fables and cautionary tales for the purpose of instilling morals and ethics - you would NOT end up with the Bible...

So for example in this case - why would God allow this action? (And it’s pretty amazing that they even pulled this attack off against a walled city. How do 2 guys kill all the men in whole city? Obviously the men in the city knew them and didn’t think they were a danger until it was too late....)

One reason is that if God allowed them to “cleave to” the families of Caanan - they probably would have intermarried and disappeared as a “people”.

Along the same lines - God was enforcing a separation between the people of the land and Israel. The lesson there to the people of the land is “You must keep them at arm’s length”.. We see the same thing happen with Samson - where Samson primarily delivered Israel from themselves by driving a massive wedge of enmity between them and the Phillistines........

 

[icxn]

The other thing to remember is that The Bible isn’t a series of carefully and thoughtfully constructed moral and ethical fables developed by men for instruction and teaching. It’s not a collection of neat, tidy, and straight forward lessons.... It’s not Jewish Aesop’s fables by any means.

It is an account of what actually happened. And truth be told - if you were going to invent a series of instructive fables and cautionary tales for the purpose of instilling morals and ethics - you would NOT end up with the Bible...

John, we certainly don't deny the historic truth, literal meaning of the story. Read my post above. That doesn't exclude other interpretations. God is infinitely wise and has woven multiple meanings behind the letter of scripture.

Prov. 22:

17 Incline thine ear to the words of wise men: hear also my word, and apply thine heart, 18 that thou mayest know that they are good: and if thou lay them to heart, they shall also gladden thee on thy lips. 19 That thy hope may be in the Lord, and he may make thy way known to thee. 20 And do thou too record them thrice for thyself on the table of thine heart, for counsel and knowledge. 21 I therefore teach thee truth, and knowledge good to hear; that thou mayest answer words of truth to them that question thee.​