Gospel Light Christian Church Thru-The-Bible Series (22.1)

The Book of Genesis

Genesis Chapter 34 - Read this Bible passage once through before referring to the notes below.

Dinah’s Defilement: The Folly of Withholding Leadership in Times of Crisis

v.1 Jacob’s residence at Shechem, rather than being another time of blessing, resulted in one of the greatest tragedies recorded in the book of Genesis.  A high price of rape, treachery, and massacre resulted from the unequal partnership with the Canaanite community of purchasing part of a field near the city of Shechem.  Dinah, who was raped by a Canaanite, became the center of the conflict between the sons of Jacob and the inhabitants of Canaan.  And God's purpose in setting apart the descendants of Abraham comes into jeopardy with the proposal of marriage between Dinah and Shechem.  Due to Dinah’s interest in the “daughters of the land,” she made a solitary excursion into their circles that loosened the stone of her defilement for the slide into violent retaliation.  Jacob had made a commercial connection with Shechem and it laid the basis for social communication, which was a step towards serious complications.

v.2-4 The sequence of Shechem’s defilement of Dinah (v.2, “saw,” “took,” “lay,” and “defiled”) recalls the same sequence in the account of the Fall (cf. 3:6).  First comes the desire, then the action where lust is not checked, and death or defilement results.  The natural sexual desires of a man are not sinful in themselves but the unchecked fulfillment of them through illicit means (i.e. lust) is what brings defilement – and that is wickedness (see Lev. 18:1-30; 20:10-21).

The irony here, however, was that Shechem was very attracted to the girl (“his soul clave unto Dinah”) and “he loved the damsel” (v.3).  After his humbling affliction of Dinah, he now wanted to marry her (v.4).  This is a strange inversion of the moral teaching on marriage in 2:24 – “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”  By this rape, Shechem had forced the intimacy before marriage (i.e. he become “one flesh” with Dinah before he left his parents and “clave unto Dinah”), which is a clear violation of all moral law.  The final statement that he “spake kindly unto the damsel” attempts to soften the grimness of the crime, as if to say that Shechem acted out of wild consuming love.  This expression, which occurs 10 times in the Old Testament (cf. Jud 19:3) is used always in less than ideal situations, where one tries to persuade another of his feelings.

v.5 It is difficult to understand Jacob’s lack of action and leadership during this time of crisis in his family.  This initial inactivity (“and Jacob held his peace until they were come”) seems to indicate a general indecisiveness.  And the fact that Jacob is not heard from again until he protested the violence (cf. v. 30) reveals that he was withholding his patriarchal leadership – he did not attempt to seek redress for the physical and emotional trauma inflicted on his daughter and the dishonour brought upon his family.

v.6-12 When Hamor, the father of Shechem, came to ask for the hand of Dinah in marriage (v.6), the sons of Jacob, who truly cared for Dinah and realised the magnitude of the crime, were “grieved, and …very wroth” (v.7), as one might expect Jacob to be, when they heard of the matter.  In describing the defilement as “folly in Israel,” the tragedy was revealed as a godless act that polluted the family because a sexual crime is a desecration ruinous to the whole community (“which thing ought not to be done”).  The words of the sons put the crime in its true light for the children of Israel could in no way tolerate such blatant violations of God’s moral law.

The Canaanites’ response was a proposal of intermarriage in an attempt to make the best of a situation that could escalate into a crisis.  Hamor was shrewd in his diplomatic speech.  He pointed to the deep affections of his son for Dinah (v.8) and focuses on the economic advantages of an agreement to intermarry (v.10-11).  Truly, “The land shall be before [them],” but God would give it to them, not Hamor.  Shechem was blunt in his request for Dinah and declared that he would pay any price for her (v.11-12).  But this attempt to pay her price only signaled to the brothers that he was treating their sister like a prostitute (cf. v.30).  This proposal represents a typical pagan’s effort, when in crisis, to attempt to buy their way, ignoring the fact of an offence committed, emphasising positive economic gains without any considerations for the moral law and divine purposes of God.

v.13-17 In the absence of leadership from the head of the family, the brothers took matters into their own hands and set in motion a major deception (v.13), which they justified on the reason that Shechem “had defiled Dinah their sister”.  Raising the issue that the Shechemites were not circumcised (v.14), they stated the condition that only if “every male of you be circumcised” (v.15), would it be possible for them to intermarry, and they can “become one people” (v.16).  The rigidity of this demand leave the Canaanite with no choice but to comply if they wish to intermarry (v.17).

James 1:20 warns “For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.”  In the absence of mature and balanced leadership at times of crisis, it is easy for the righteous indignation of believers, motivated by uncontrolled wrath (Eph. 4:26), to slide into sin.  The use of deception in the working out of God’s purpose is never justifiable, and to use the sign of circumcision in deception is to bring further shame to God’s name.  For the Shechemites, it was sacrilegious as well because it represented no turning to the covenant God in faith.

v.18-24 The deception worked.  The Canaanites’ response to the proposal was positive (v.18) and immediate (v.19).  Shechem had the right and ability to urge this circumcision because of his stature in the community – “he was more honourable than all the house of his father”.  Shechem may be held in high honour by his townsfolk but in the eyes of Dinah’s brothers, he had done everything that is the opposite of honourable.

In Hamor’s and Shechem’s address to the town council (v.20), there is not a word about Shechem’s violation of Dinah, his passion for her, and the real reason for the circumcision.  Once again, the focus is exclusively on the material gains of an intermarriage for the people of the city.  There are two cycles of deception going on at the same time – Hamor and Shechem are deceiving their own people (v.21-22), and the city is attempting to deceive Israel (v.23) but the brothers of Dinah are deceiving all of them as well.

The important point in verse 24 is that all the able-bodied men in the city (“all that went out of the gate of his city”) agreed to be circumcised.  These are the individuals who would be counted on to defend the city and launch a counter-offensive in an attack.  The deception of Jacob’s son has worked with deadly effectiveness.

v.25-29 The “third day” (v.25) after circumcision is the day on which the pain from the operation would be most intense.  The fever that would develop as a result of the operation would only make the condition of the recently circumcised more intolerable.  Hence, the entire city of Shechem is now defenseless.  Along with “all the males” (v.25) of the city, the chief perpetrators of the crime were slain and Dinah was rescued from their house (v.26).  Then, the two brothers, Simeon and Levi, proceeded to plundered the city for its property, wealth, women, and children as well (v.27-29).  Once again, the massacre in cold blood and pillage in retribution was justified on the basis that “they had defiled their sister”.  All these “punitive” measures went far beyond the call of justice for the crime.  In the absence of the restraining hand of mature and balanced leadership, believers performed these excessive acts of vengeance, which brings shame to the faith of the covenant community.

v.30-31 Finally, the voice of Jacob is heard (v.30).  Not in protest of his son’s deception or against their excessive violence did Jacob speak.  But his main concerns were that his reputation would become a stench in the land (“make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land”) and that there might be retaliation from other tribes (“they shall gather themselves together against me”).  Jacob’s statement was hardly a forceful or accurate rebuke of the errors of his sons’ actions and he was effectively silenced by his sons’ reply – “Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?”  The fact was Jacob’s son dealt with the disgrace and dishonour to the family, albeit with excessive and cruel retribution through deception, but Jacob did nothing in response to the defilement of Dinah.  Jacob knew that the way his sons acted was wrong (cf. 49:5-8) but when he withheld his leadership in the time of crisis, he also forfeited a measure of his authority to correct the error of his sons’ deeds.