[Deborah]

"And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree, and pilled white strakes in them; and made the white appear which was in the rods. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled and spotted." (Genesis 30:37-39)

Can someone explain how the rods actually worked?

[Fortigurn]

They didn't work. Jacob was just being superstitious and demonstrating a lack of faith in God.

[Sammo]

Deborah, on May 24 2005, 12:44 AM, said:

Can someone explain how the rods actually worked? 

I can't, but at my brother's graduation last year one of the PhD students seemed to have done their thesis on exactly this, and got the same results as Jacob! I'm afraid that's about as much as I can tell you though.

I don't know whether they were aware of Genesis 30 or not.

[Fortigurn]

If the rods worked, then God was not responsible for the cattle breeding as they did. But He says He was. So who is telling the truth here - the rods or God?

[Sammo]

Here we go - this is the person I was after:

Eileen McWilliam's thesis,
http://www.country-w...ticle/2611.html
http://www.country-w...ticle/2198.html

Isn't that interesting!

[Fortigurn]

Sammo, on May 24 2005, 10:24 AM, said:

Here we go - this is the person I was after:

Eileen McWilliam's thesis,
http://www.country-w...ticle/2611.html
http://www.country-w...ticle/2198.html

Isn't that interesting!

It is interesting, but it's not what Genesis is talking about.

In this article, we have:

• Sheep being fed 'cut branches from willow and poplar' - about 1.4kg every day for 70 days during mating (Jacob didn't feed the cattle his rods)
  
  
• An increase in fertility, not plain sheep giving birth to speckled sheep, or vice versa

Then there's the fact that God claims that He was responsible for Jacob's cattle bearing as they did, not Jacob's rods.

[Deborah]

Maybe Jacob was influenced by Rachel (eg. the mandrakes)?

This post has been edited by Deborah: 24 May 2005 - 05:19 AM

[Sammo]

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 02:42 AM, said:

It is interesting, but it's not what Genesis is talking about.

Oops - I misread v35. Laban wasn't a very nice man.

But who knows - there may have been something in the sap that made Jacob's strong animals stronger, even if that had no bearing on their colour.

[Fortigurn]

Sammo, on May 24 2005, 02:21 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 02:42 AM, said:

It is interesting, but it's not what Genesis is talking about.

Oops - I misread v35. Laban wasn't a very nice man.

But who knows - there may have been something in the sap that made Jacob's strong animals stronger, even if that had no bearing on their colour.

Sammo mate, I'll say it again. No, I'll let the Bible say it:

Quote

Genesis 31:
9 In this way God has snatched away your father’s livestock and given them to me.

31:10 “Once during breeding season I saw in a dream that the male goats mating with the flock were streaked, speckled, and spotted.
11 In the dream the angel of God said to me, ‘Jacob!’ ‘Here I am!’ I replied.
12 Then he said, ‘Observe that all the male goats mating with the flock are streaked, speckled, or spotted, for I have observed all that Laban has done to you.

The rods did nothing. God did everything. The entire chapter (chapter 30), is about Jacob trying to gain riches by his own strength, and God prospering him instead.

[Asyncritus]

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 06:37 AM, said:

Sammo, on May 24 2005, 02:21 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 02:42 AM, said:

It is interesting, but it's not what Genesis is talking about.

Oops - I misread v35. Laban wasn't a very nice man.

But who knows - there may have been something in the sap that made Jacob's strong animals stronger, even if that had no bearing on their colour.

Sammo mate, I'll say it again. No, I'll let the Bible say it:

Quote

Genesis 31:
9 In this way God has snatched away your father’s livestock and given them to me.

31:10 “Once during breeding season I saw in a dream that the male goats mating with the flock were streaked, speckled, and spotted.
11 In the dream the angel of God said to me, ‘Jacob!’ ‘Here I am!’ I replied.
12 Then he said, ‘Observe that all the male goats mating with the flock are streaked, speckled, or spotted, for I have observed all that Laban has done to you.

The rods did nothing. God did everything. The entire chapter (chapter 30), is about Jacob trying to gain riches by his own strength, and God prospering him instead.

Yes, it's all God's doing, and Jacob acknowledges it from the word go right to the end. A bit of careful reading shows this:

38 And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

THE flocks means all of them: Laban's as well as his own, since in v36 we have...

... and Jacob fed the rest of Laban’s flocks.

The intention in his mind is that ALL the flocks would conceive and benefit: both his own AND Laban's. The rods he obviously thought to be some kind of sheepy aphrodisiac: the white stripes to encourage Laban's white rams, and the dark stripes to encourage his own.

God took a hand in it, because Laban was being Laban and had robbed him, and was trying to rob him:

41 Thus have I been twenty years in thy house; I served thee fourteen years for thy two daughters, and six years for thy cattle: and thou hast changed my wages ten times.
42 Except the God of my father, the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac, had been with me, surely thou hadst sent me away now empty. God hath seen mine affliction and the labour of my hands, and rebuked thee yesternight.

6 And ye know that with all my power I have served your father.
7 And your father hath deceived me, and changed my wages ten times; but God suffered him not to hurt me.8 If he said thus, The speckled shall be thy wages; then all the cattle bare speckled: and if he said thus, The ringstraked shall be thy hire; then bare all the cattle ringstraked.
9 Thus God hath taken away the cattle of your father, and given them to me.
10 And it came to pass at the time that the cattle conceived, that I lifted up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the rams which leaped upon the cattle were ringstraked, speckled, and grisled.
11 And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I.
12 And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee.

So from the very start Jacob knew that God was taking a hand in sorting Laban out: because God spoke to him right from the start of the implementation of the deal, which, please note, was entirely in Laban's favour: he had the best ones and Jacob deliberately chose the rubbish.

This post has been edited by Asyncritus: 24 May 2005 - 12:06 PM

[Asyncritus]

Sammo, on May 24 2005, 02:24 AM, said:

Here we go - this is the person I was after:

Eileen McWilliam's thesis,
http://www.country-w...ticle/2611.html
http://www.country-w...ticle/2198.html

Isn't that interesting!

That is interesting!

The sheep farmers of Jacob's day had obviously tried all sorts of things including this!

Perhaps somebody should write a thesis on the sheep-rearing practices of the Mesopotamian region in BC however much it was!

This post has been edited by Asyncritus: 24 May 2005 - 03:16 PM

[Flappie]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 01:51 PM, said:

The intention in his mind is that ALL the flocks would conceive and benefit: both his own AND Laban's. The rods he obviously thought to be some kind of sheepy aphrodisiac: the white stripes to encourage Laban's white rams, and the dark stripes to encourage his own.

No.

Genesis 30:39-42
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted. And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban’s cattle. And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: so the feebler were Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

He put the rods there so that the sheep would have ringstraked, speckled and spotted offspring, so he could have them. He does this only with the strong sheep, so the strong lambs go to him, and the weak lambs, because the weak sheep didn't have the rods go to Laban.

He didn't think the rods were a sheepy aphrodisiac, he thought that if he put them there, they would get ringstaked, speckled and spotted lambs. He put them there so he would get the strong sheep, and Laban the weak. Purely for his own benefit, not Laban's.

[Fortigurn]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 07:51 PM, said:

Yes, it's all God's doing, and Jacob acknowledges it from the word go right to the end. A bit of careful reading shows this:

38  And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

THE flocks means all of them: Laban's as well as his own, since in v36 we have...

... and Jacob fed the rest of Laban’s flocks.

They were all Laban's flocks. Laban just said that whichever of the flock were born speckled or ringstraked, Jacob could keep (or plain, or whichever they decided on).

And so, in order to try and get as many of the flock coming out a way which would be advantageous to him, Jacob put the rods in when the cattle were breeding.

He also took careful steps to attempt to ensure that the stronger cattle would be his, and the weaker cattle Laban's:

Quote

Genesis 30:
41 When the stronger females were in heat, Jacob would set up the branches in the troughs in front of the flock, so they would mate near the branches.
42 But if the animals were weaker, he did not set the branches there. So the weaker animals ended up belonging to Laban and the stronger animals to Jacob.
43 In this way Jacob became extremely prosperous. He owned large flocks, male and female servants, camels, and donkeys.

He was looking out for himself, and no mistake.

Quote

The intention in his mind is that ALL the flocks would conceive and benefit: both his own AND Laban's.

Not on your life - look at verses 41-42.

Quote

The rods he obviously thought to be some kind of sheepy aphrodisiac: the white stripes to encourage Laban's white rams, and the dark stripes to encourage his own.

No, the rods he thought would produced speckled or ringstraked sheep, which is precisely why he put them in when he was being paid in speckled and ringstraked sheep.

Quote

God took a hand in it, because Laban was being Laban and had robbed him, and was trying to rob him:

41  Thus have I been twenty years in thy house; I served thee fourteen years for thy two daughters, and six years for thy cattle: and thou hast changed my wages ten times.
42  Except the God of my father, the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac, had been with me, surely thou hadst sent me away now empty. God hath seen mine affliction and the labour of my hands, and rebuked thee yesternight.

Well yes, God took a hand in it right from the start - but Jacob didn't realise this until afterwards. He was busy putting his own hand in it, thinking that he was getting rich in his own strength. God showed him otherwise.

Quote

So from the very start Jacob knew that God was taking a hand in sorting Laban out...

No he didn't - he put those rods up specifically because he thought he was doing it himself.

Quote

...because God spoke to him right from the start of the implementation of the deal...

The text does not say that. It says God spoke to him later.

[Fortigurn]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 07:56 PM, said:

Sammo, on May 24 2005, 02:24 AM, said:

Here we go - this is the person I was after:

Eileen McWilliam's thesis,
http://www.country-w...ticle/2611.html
http://www.country-w...ticle/2198.html

Isn't that interesting!

Isn't that interesting!

The sheep farmers of Jacob's day had obviously tried all sorts of things including this!

Perhaps somebody should write a thesis on the sheep-rearing practices of the Mesopotamian region in BC however much it was!

No they didn't try this - read the article and you'll find that this guy fed bits of tree to the sheep, he didn't put rods of them up in front of the sheep while they were breeding.

[Asyncritus]

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 12:12 PM, said:

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 01:51 PM, said:

The intention in his mind is that ALL the flocks would conceive and benefit: both his own AND Laban's. The rods he obviously thought to be some kind of sheepy aphrodisiac: the white stripes to encourage Laban's white rams, and the dark stripes to encourage his own.

No.

Genesis 30:39-42
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted. And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban’s cattle. And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: so the feebler were Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

He put the rods there so that the sheep would have ringstraked, speckled and spotted offspring, so he could have them. He does this only with the strong sheep, so the strong lambs go to him, and the weak lambs, because the weak sheep didn't have the rods go to Laban.

He didn't think the rods were a sheepy aphrodisiac, he thought that if he put them there, they would get ringstaked, speckled and spotted lambs. He put them there so he would get the strong sheep, and Laban the weak. Purely for his own benefit, not Laban's.

I simply don't understand what you people are objecting to.

If a farmer puts fertiliser on his fields, is he

a. cheating

b. conniving

c. declaring that he is not dependent on God

d. or what?

As I said, Jacob obviously thought these rods were a good idea: sheepy aphrodisiac / or fertiliser or not. For ALL the flocks. GOD had shown him in a vision which ones to choose: it wasn't his bright idea. Thus:

10 And it came to pass at the time that the cattle conceived, that I lifted up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the rams which leaped upon the cattle were ringstraked, speckled, and grisled.
11 And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I.
12 And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee.

When did this dream take place? Plainly AT THE START of the deal's implementation. No rods yet.

Therefore God showed him which ones to choose, and he did so. Laban on the other hand thought he was getting the better deal, because he was getting the more desirable animals. Tough on Laban, but he had cheated Jacob badly over Rachel, and God was visiting this on his head now: "I have seen all that Laban DOETH unto thee - present tense - " protecting and blessing His great servant. Else why does God do this? He did so for Abraham on many occasions, and Abraham was a great servant of God.

37 ¶ And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.

38 And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

[He has put the rods IN the watering troughs, with the bark partly removed and stripped off, SO THAT THE CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES IN THE WOOD WOULD DISSOLVE IN THE WATER. I think Sammo's author has done something similar but not identical].

39 And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

[This is not the rods' doing. It is God's doing, as He had showed Jacob, and Jacob knew perfectly well). And it is THE flocks at the start of the deal's implementation, ALL OF THEM, Laban's included]

The first generation is now produced:

40 And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces [I'm not clear what this means] of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban’s cattle.[Just as you or I would do with our own property].

He understands clearly that if the white animals (with probably the dominant genes?) mated with his inferior stock (with the recessive brown etc genes), then they would produce white animals which went automatically to Laban.

The second and third generations are now produced. By this time Laban, who was no fool, is busy changing the terms of the agreement, though this fact is not mentioned. When he sees the coloured ones multiplying faster, he says I'll have those. OK says God, produce white animals. So he sees the white ones multiplying and says: I'll have those. To no avail. Ten times, Jacob said later.

41 And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle [white or coloured, whichever the current deal was, after Laban had reneged on the terms] did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. [Since the animals weren't particularly choosy, and drank the water with whatever chemicals were dissolved in it, they would, if that experiment is anything to go by, breed more prolifically].

42 But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: [this is standard animal breeding practice. You breed from your strongest and best animals. God's finger is very much in this pie, and Laban loses out. God is 'cursing him that curseth thee'] so the feebler were Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

I take that to mean that whichever way Laban turned, God out-thought him. When the white animals were more prolific, and that batch of whites belonged to Jacob, Laban said I'll have the white ones in the next generation now.

The white animals thereupon produced ringstraked etc in greater quantities, which were Jacob's. So Laban said, I'll have those now. Whereupon they produced large numbers of white ones. And so it went on. 10 times. All God's doing, and fully acknowledged to be such by Jacob:

NET: 31:6 You know that I’ve worked for your father as hard as I could, 31:7 but your father has humiliated me and changed my wages ten times. But God has not permitted him to do me any harm. 31:8 If he said, ‘The speckled animals will be your wage,’ then the entire flock gave birth to speckled offspring. But if he said, ‘The streaked animals will be your wage,’ then the entire flock gave birth to streaked offspring. 31:9 In this way God has snatched away your father’s livestock and given them to me.

[Flappie]

Read again this verse:
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The difference between rods or no rods is not how fertile the sheep will be, but what sort of lambs they will have.

Rods: Ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs.
No rods: Plain brown lambs.


What Jacob tried to ensure was that all the strong sheep got ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs, and all the weak sheep got plain brown lambs. This would get him all the strong lambs, and Laban all the weak lambs, as the ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs went to Jacob, and the plain brown ones went to Laban.

This post has been edited by Flappie: 24 May 2005 - 03:55 PM

[Asyncritus]

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Read again this verse:
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The difference between rods or no rods is not how fertile the sheep will be, but what sort of lambs they will have.

Rods: Ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs.
No rods: Plain brown lambs.


What Jacob tried to ensure was that all the strong sheep got ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs, and all the weak sheep got plain brown lambs. This would get him all the strong lambs, and Laban all the weak lambs, as the ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs went to Jacob, and the plain brown ones went to Laban.

Jacob didn't ensure anything.

God did.

4.11 says you need to answer the opening question.

[CaptainCutshaw]

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 01:14 PM, said:

Quote

...because God spoke to him right from the start of the implementation of the deal...

The text does not say that. It says God spoke to him later.

This is the crux of the matter, I think. If God's revelation came early then Jacob could have responded to it. God reveals something to him, and Jacob acts in faith.

If the revelation came late, then Jacob acted in ignorance and superstition -- but God worked through it, and eventually revealed His actions to Jacob.

The passage where Jacob tells his wives that he had received the vision does not tell us when he received it:

Quote

31:10 Once during breeding season I saw in a dream that the male goats mating with17 the flock were streaked, speckled, and spotted.

All we know is that it happened during breeding season. But was it before, after or during the events of 30:29-42? I can't find anywhere that scripture tells us.

Perhaps we don't know enough to judge Jacob's motives in this. Was he faithfully responding to God's revelation? Or was he acting in ignorance?

This would be a useful enough lesson to draw -- be careful to judge motives for good or for bad. Only God knows for sure, and He sometimes keeps that knowledge to Himself.

Edit: by the way, there are some details in what Asy's saying that I disagree with. I certainly don't think Jacob was interested in improving Laban's flock. God and Jacob were both working to ensure that Jacob did well out of this, and Laban did not. The question in my mind is whether Jacob was co-operating with God, or going against Him

This post has been edited by CaptainCutshaw: 24 May 2005 - 05:19 PM

[Flappie]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 06:02 PM, said:

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Read again this verse:
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The difference between rods or no rods is not how fertile the sheep will be, but what sort of lambs they will have.

Rods: Ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs.
No rods: Plain brown lambs.


What Jacob tried to ensure was that all the strong sheep got ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs, and all the weak sheep got plain brown lambs. This would get him all the strong lambs, and Laban all the weak lambs, as the ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs went to Jacob, and the plain brown ones went to Laban.

Jacob didn't ensure anything.

God did.

4.11 says you need to answer the opening question.

This is why I said "tried to ensure", it was his intention.

[Asyncritus]

CaptainCutshaw, on May 24 2005, 04:39 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 01:14 PM, said:

Quote

...because God spoke to him right from the start of the implementation of the deal...

The text does not say that. It says God spoke to him later.

This is the crux of the matter, I think. If God's revelation came early then Jacob could have responded to it. God reveals something to him, and Jacob acts in faith.

If the revelation came late, then Jacob acted in ignorance and superstition -- but God worked through it, and eventually revealed His actions to Jacob.

The passage where Jacob tells his wives that he had received the vision does not tell us when he received it:

Quote

31:10 Once during breeding season I saw in a dream that the male goats mating with17 the flock were streaked, speckled, and spotted.

All we know is that it happened during breeding season. But was it before, after or during the events of 30:29-42? I can't find anywhere that scripture tells us.

Perhaps we don't know enough to judge Jacob's motives in this. Was he faithfully responding to God's revelation? Or was he acting in ignorance?

This would be a useful enough lesson to draw -- be careful to judge motives for good or for bad. Only God knows for sure, and He sometimes keeps that knowledge to Himself.

Hi CC. Glad to have you back in one piece!

True, God doesn't say when the dream was given. But balance the probabilities with me.

Why was the vision given at all? A. To inform him about the course of action he should take. Why? Because he didn't know what to do.

Is it likely to be at the end of all this? Highly improbable. Therefore either at the start or in the middle.

When is it likely that information about a certain course of action would be given? At the start, or in the middle of the course of action?

At the start.

On the strength of the information in the vision, Jacob marches forward in faith, and accepts the rubbish. Which turns out to be a great blessing from God, precisely because he acted in faith, and not graspingly, and arguing about the general lousiness of the deal.

Like Abraham and Lot, really. You take the best bit, says Abraham, and we know what happened. Same here.

[Asyncritus]

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 04:57 PM, said:

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 06:02 PM, said:

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Read again this verse:
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The difference between rods or no rods is not how fertile the sheep will be, but what sort of lambs they will have.

Rods: Ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs.
No rods: Plain brown lambs.


What Jacob tried to ensure was that all the strong sheep got ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs, and all the weak sheep got plain brown lambs. This would get him all the strong lambs, and Laban all the weak lambs, as the ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs went to Jacob, and the plain brown ones went to Laban.

Jacob didn't ensure anything.

God did.

4.11 says you need to answer the opening question.

This is why I said "tried to ensure", it was his intention.

4.11 Opening question please.

Fort is quite right, the rods have no effect at all on the colour etc. Environmental factors don't affect the genes - well, you know what I mean. Rods don't make a difference to the coat colour of the animals. God is doing this FOR Jacob.

And then we have:

43 The man got richer and richer, acquiring huge flocks, lots and lots of servants, not to mention camels and donkeys. MESSAGE

How do you think that happened? Rods, or no rods?

[Fortigurn]

Asyncritus, please answer this.

[Fortigurn]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 11:05 PM, said:

I simply don't understand what you people are objecting to.

If a farmer puts fertiliser on his fields, is he

a. cheating

b. conniving

c. declaring that he is not dependent on God

d. or what?

No. But he would be if he didn't acknowledge God in all this.

What Jacob did was to connive with some kind of superstition, in order to try and ensure personal gain for himself. He thought that he could control everything by putting these rods in front of the animals, with the idea that striped rods would produce striped sheep.

Quote

As I said, Jacob obviously thought these rods were a good idea: sheepy aphrodisiac / or fertiliser or not. For ALL the flocks.

No, Jacob did not use them for all the flocks. He only put them in front of the stronger of the flock. The idea went like this:

• Laban has promised that the striped and speckled sheep will be my wages
  
  
  
  
• I will ensure that more striped and speckled sheep will be born if I put striped rods in front of the sheep when they are breeding
  
  
  
  
• I will only put the rods in front of the stronger sheep when they are breeding, so that the sheep I get are strong ones
  
  
  
  
• When the weaker sheep are breeding, I will not put the rods in front of them, and they will continue to bear plain sheep which are weak - they will be given to Laban

That's the entire scheme. It's a kind of con which Jacob thought he was pulling on Laban.

Quote

GOD had shown him in a vision which ones to choose: it wasn't his bright idea. Thus:

10  And it came to pass at the time that the cattle conceived, that I lifted up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the rams which leaped upon the cattle were ringstraked, speckled, and grisled.
11  And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I.
12  And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee.

There is not a word here about any rods, or 'which ones to choose'. It was Laban who had told Jacob that the striped and speckled sheep would be his wages, not God.

When the animals were breeding, there were no striped or speckled rams, only plain ones. This is precisely why Jacob put his rods in. But God was showing him that He, God, was ensuring that the sheep were breeding to Jacob's advantage, not the rods.

The rams which Jacob saw in the vision didn't literally exist - the miracle was that plain sheep were producing striped and speckled sheep. Jacob thought that he was doing it with his rods, but in reality God was doing it.

Quote

When did this dream take place? Plainly AT THE START of the deal's implementation. No rods yet.

Where does it say that?

Quote

Therefore God showed him which ones to choose, and he did so.

The text says no such thing. It says that Jacob made the choice.

Quote

Laban on the other hand thought he was getting the better deal, because he was getting the more desirable animals.

But he wasn't getting the more desirable animals - he was getting the weaker ones. Jacob was making sure of this.

Quote

Tough on Laban, but he had cheated Jacob badly over Rachel, and God was visiting this on his head now...

Yes, Jacob and Laban were as bad as each other, both trying to doublecross and get the better of the other guy.

Quote

..."I have seen all that Laban DOETH unto thee - present tense - " protecting and blessing His great servant. Else why does God do this? He did so for Abraham on many occasions, and Abraham was a great servant of God.

God blessed Jacob for the sake of the promise He had made.

Quote

37 ¶  And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.

38  And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.

[He has put the rods IN the watering troughs, with the bark partly removed and stripped off, SO THAT THE CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES IN THE WOOD WOULD DISSOLVE IN THE WATER.

Where does it say anything like that? The text says nothing about the animals drinking chemically enhanced water, it says that the whole point was to have them conceive in front of striped rods.

Quote

I think Sammo's author has done something similar but not identical].

Sammo's author did something completey different - willow branches, fed over a duration of seventy days at a rate of 1.4kg a day, which is a huge amount. It makes any 'chemicals' in this water look like a drop in a bucket, literally.

And Sammo's author was looking at improving fertility rates, not trying to breed sheep of a certain colour or pattern.

Quote

39  And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

[This is not the rods' doing. It is God's doing, as He had showed Jacob, and Jacob knew perfectly well).

If Jacob had known perfectly well that this was God's doing, he wouldn't have bothered with the rods in the first place. God said nothing whatever about these rods, they were entirely Jacob's idea.

God doesn't need funny sticks in the water to make sheep come out the way He wants.

Quote

And it is THE flocks at the start of the deal's implementation, ALL OF THEM, Laban's included]

No, not all of them, look at what the text says - Jacob carefully took them away when the weaker sheep were breeding.

Quote

39  And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The first generation is now produced:

40  And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces [I'm not clear what this means] of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban’s cattle.[Just as you or I would do with our own property].

He understands clearly that if the white animals (with probably the dominant genes?) mated with his inferior stock (with the recessive brown etc genes), then they would produce white animals which went automatically to Laban.

Firstly, his stock were not inferior - the text says that they were the stronger, not the weaker.

Secondly, he separates his own strong sheep from Laban's so that they won't mate with Laban's cattle and give him the benefit of a strong bloodline.

Quote

The second and third generations are now produced. By this time Laban, who was no fool, is busy changing the terms of the agreement, though this fact is not mentioned. When he sees the coloured ones multiplying faster, he says I'll have those. OK says God, produce white animals. So he sees the white ones multiplying and says: I'll have those. To no avail. Ten times, Jacob said later.

Yes, Laban changes the agreement every time he sees the cattle are breeding one colour or another. He is trying to manipulate the deal, but Jacob has the whip hand and is the real manipulator.

Quote

41  And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle [white or coloured, whichever the current deal was, after Laban had reneged on the terms] did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. [Since the animals weren't particularly choosy, and drank the water with whatever chemicals were dissolved in it, they would, if that experiment is anything to go by, breed more prolifically].

The text says nothing like this. Jacob put the rods in when the stronger cattle were breeding, so that the cattle born to him would be stronger cattle.

Quote

42  But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: [this is standard animal breeding practice. You breed from your strongest and best animals.

You're missing the point - the whole reason why he didn't put them in when the weaker animals were breeding, was so that the weaker animals would be Laban's, because (as Jacob thought), without the rods the cattle would come out plain not speckled.

Quote

God's finger is very much in this pie, and Laban loses out. God is 'cursing him that curseth thee'] so the feebler were Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

God's finger is in this very much so, as He shows Jacob. But it's not the way Jacob thinks.

Quote

I take that to mean that whichever way Laban turned, God out-thought him. When the white animals were more prolific, and that batch of whites belonged to Jacob, Laban said I'll have the white ones in the next generation now.

Laban tried to con Jacob, and Jacob tried to con Laban - but in reality it was God who was in control.

Quote

The white animals thereupon produced ringstraked etc in greater quantities, which were Jacob's. So Laban said, I'll have those now. Whereupon they produced large numbers of white ones. And so it went on. 10 times. All God's doing, and fully acknowledged to be such by Jacob:

NET: 31:6 You know that I’ve worked for your father as hard as I could, 31:7 but your father has humiliated me and changed my wages ten times. But God has not permitted him to do me any harm. 31:8 If he said, ‘The speckled animals will be your wage,’ then the entire flock gave birth to speckled offspring. But if he said, ‘The streaked animals will be your wage,’ then the entire flock gave birth to streaked offspring. 31:9 In this way God has snatched away your father’s livestock and given them to me.

Yes, at long last Jacob came to recognise that God had enriched him, not his own feeble human powers.

It took a long time to beat the guile out of Jacob, but making him serve Laban (a man after his own heart), was the best treatment God could have devised.

[CaptainCutshaw]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 06:05 PM, said:

Why was the vision given at all? A. To inform him about the course of action he should take. Why? Because he didn't know what to do.

That's supposition. The revelation could have been given later to show that God was working behind the scenes while Jacob messed about with speckled rods.

Having said that, we are told that the revelation came at breeding season. This suggests that God was giving Jacob information that he could use to breed the sheep in the way that he wanted.

Throughout Jacob's life we're left questioning whether or not he was acting in faith. We often simply cannot tell. In this case, I think the theory Sammo's putting forward has a fair bit of credibility (I have heard it before several years ago) but is certainly not the only way to read the text.

[Flappie]

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 07:14 PM, said:

4.11 Opening question please.

I answered this, (d. or what) Jacob wasn't using the rods to improve fertility, but so he could choose what colour they were.

Quote

Fort is quite right, the rods have no effect at all on the colour etc. Environmental factors don't affect the genes - well, you know what I mean. Rods don't make a difference to the coat colour of the animals. God is doing this FOR Jacob.

Obviously, but Jacob's reason for using the rods was because he thought his rods were responsible for the colour. Till God tells him that it was Him.

Quote

And then we have:

43  The man got richer and richer, acquiring huge flocks, lots and lots of servants, not to mention camels and donkeys. MESSAGE

How do you think that happened? Rods, or no rods?

God obviously, but Jacob (before God told him otherwise) thought his rods were doing this.

[Fortigurn]

Asyncritus, on May 25 2005, 01:14 AM, said:

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 04:57 PM, said:

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 06:02 PM, said:

Flappie, on May 24 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Read again this verse:
And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.

The difference between rods or no rods is not how fertile the sheep will be, but what sort of lambs they will have.

Rods: Ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs.
No rods: Plain brown lambs.


What Jacob tried to ensure was that all the strong sheep got ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs, and all the weak sheep got plain brown lambs. This would get him all the strong lambs, and Laban all the weak lambs, as the ringstraked, speckled, and spotted lambs went to Jacob, and the plain brown ones went to Laban.

Jacob didn't ensure anything.

God did.

4.11 says you need to answer the opening question.

This is why I said "tried to ensure", it was his intention.

4.11 Opening question please.

Fort is quite right, the rods have no effect at all on the colour etc. Environmental factors don't affect the genes - well, you know what I mean. Rods don't make a difference to the coat colour of the animals. God is doing this FOR Jacob.

Exactly. But Jacob didn't realise this, because he thought he was doing it all on his own, with his silly rods.

Quote

And then we have:

43  The man got richer and richer, acquiring huge flocks, lots and lots of servants, not to mention camels and donkeys. MESSAGE

How do you think that happened? Rods, or no rods?

God did it. Not Jacob with his rods.

[CaptainCutshaw]

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 06:38 PM, said:

What Jacob did was to connive with some kind of superstition, in order to try and ensure personal gain for himself. He thought that he could control everything by putting these rods in front of the animals, with the idea that striped rods would produce striped sheep.

Fort, where do you get your evidence for this? We are simply not told what Jacob believed/thought throughout this episode. The only mention of superstition is Laban's claim that he had discovered something by divination.

[Fortigurn]

CaptainCutshaw, on May 25 2005, 01:38 AM, said:

Asyncritus, on May 24 2005, 06:05 PM, said:

Why was the vision given at all? A. To inform him about the course of action he should take. Why? Because he didn't know what to do.

That's supposition. The revelation could have been given later to show that God was working behind the scenes while Jacob messed about with speckled rods.

Having said that, we are told that the revelation came at breeding season. This suggests that God was giving Jacob information that he could use to breed the sheep in the way that he wanted.

Of course it came at breeding season, to show Jacob that his silly ideas were up the creek. We already know that Jacob had by this time been fooling around with rods thinking he was making a difference.

Quote

Throughout Jacob's life we're left questioning whether or not he was acting in faith. We often simply cannot tell.

Sure we can.

Quote

In this case, I think the theory Sammo's putting forward has a fair bit of credibility (I have heard it before several years ago) but is certainly not the only way to read the text.

You have to be kidding me. This means that God wasn't doing anything - Jacob's rods were getting him rich.

How can you reconcile that with the text?

[Asyncritus]

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 05:15 PM, said:

Asyncritus, please answer this.

Er, what? That's a whole pageful, some of which is mine.

[Fortigurn]

CaptainCutshaw, on May 25 2005, 01:41 AM, said:

Fortigurn, on May 24 2005, 06:38 PM, said:

What Jacob did was to connive with some kind of superstition, in order to try and ensure personal gain for himself.  He thought that he could control everything by putting these rods in front of the animals, with the idea that striped rods would produce striped sheep.

Fort, where do you get your evidence for this? We are simply not told what Jacob believed/thought throughout this episode. The only mention of superstition is Laban's claim that he had discovered something by divination.

It's pretty simple CC. When Jacob wanted striped cattle to be produced, he put striped rods in front of the sheep during breeding season. When he wanted plain cattle to be produced, he took the striped rods away.

What does this suggest to you?

It was a common superstition (and remained so for a long time), that the environment in which animals (or people for that matter), were conceived, would affect how they turned out when they were born.