And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?
31. Should he deal ] Simeon and Levi regard the incident as one in which the honour of the clan was involved, and as if they had only one course of action to follow with regard to Shechem and Hamor.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 31. Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?] On this outrage alone they vindicated their flagitious conduct. The word harlot first occurs here: the original is not pilegesh, which we render concubine, (see its explanation Ge 22:24), but zonah, which ordinarily signifies one who prostitutes herself to any person for hire. Our word harlot is said to have been derived from a very odd circumstance: Robert, duke of Normandy, seeing a fine – looking country girl dancing with her companions on the green, took her to his bed. She was the daughter of a skinner, and her name was Arlotta; and of her William, surnamed The Conqueror, was born. Hence it is said all such women were from her called harlots, as William himself was usually termed the Bastard. But horelet, the diminutive of whore, is not a less likely derivation.
SOLOMON has very properly said, My son, enter not into the path of the wicked, and go not in the way of evil men; avoid it, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away, Pr 4:14-15. Had not Dinah gone out to see the daughters of the land, and very possibly at one of their idolatrous festivals, she had not suffered the foul disgrace mentioned in this chapter. Not only prudence dictates that young women should keep at home, but God expressly commands it, Tit 2:5. Dinah got among idolaters, and thus partook of their iniquities; and this led to the most base and cruel transaction upon record. How true is the saying, Those who wander out of the way of understanding shall abide in the congregation of the dead! In the case before us blame seems to attach to all parties.
1. It was wrong in Jacob to suffer his daughter, alone and unprotected, to visit the daughters of the land.
2. It was excessively wicked in Shechem to take this advantage of the daughter of a respectable stranger, who had sought his friendship, and came to sojourn among his people, and whose righteous dealing they must have witnessed for at least seven years past. In his behalf we may say, and it would be unjust not to say it, that having done the mischief, and sinned deeply against the laws of hospitality, he wished to make all the reparation in his power; and therefore in the most frank and liberal manner he not only offered, but most pressingly entreated, permission to take Dinah to wife. This was the utmost he could do in such a case. And in this he is a saint of the first order when compared with the noble and ignoble profligates who, while blaspheming the Christian name by continuing to assume it, commit all kinds of breaches on the virtue of simple females, and the peace of respectable families, and not only make no reparation, but glory in their shame.
3. It was diabolical in Jacob’s sons to slay a whole tribe for the offence of one man, and especially as that one had offered to make all the restitution in his power. They required that Hamor, Shechem, and all their subjects should be circumcised before they could conscientiously consent to give their sister to Shechem in marriage. This required conformity was made the cloak of the most base and infamous designs. The simple unsuspecting Shechemites agreed to the proposal; and when rendered by this religious rite incapable of defending themselves, they were basely murdered by Simeon and Levi, and their city destroyed. Jacob, to his great honour, remonstrated against this barbarous and bloody act, committed apparently under the sanction of religion; and God showed his abhorrence of it by directing the patriarch, in his dying moments, to proscribe them from the blessings of the covenant, so that they barely retained a name among the tribes of Israel, being in general small, and ever disreputable, except merely in the service of the sanctuary, in which Levi was employed. How often since, notwithstanding this solemn warning, has the pure and benevolent religion of God been made, by wicked and designing men, a political stalking-horse to serve the basest purposes, and a covert to the worst of crimes! But shall we find fault with the holy religion of the blessed God because wicked men have abused it? God forbid! Were it not so good as it really is, it would be incapable of such abuse. An evil cannot be abused, a good may; and the greater and the more acknowledged the good, the more liable to abuse. As every good is so capable of being abused, does he act wisely who argues against the use of the thing on this account? Shall we say that various kinds of grain, fruits, and aliments are a curse, because wicked men abuse them to the purposes of drunkenness and gluttony? This would argue an utter perversion of all reason: and is it not on such a pretext as this that many persons have ventured to call in question even the truths of Christianity?
Whatever such men may be determined to think on the subject of this chapter, with the unprejudiced reader the ample and detailed relation which we have here of this barbarous transaction will appear an additional proof of the veracity and impartiality of the sacred historian.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Shall we express no more resentment of this abominable abuse of our sister, than if she had been some common harlot, whose abuse no man either regardeth or revengeth? Thus they excuse one fault by committing another, and defend themselves by accusing their father of stupidity, and insensibleness of so great an indignity and injury.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And they said,…. Simeon and Levi, in a very pert and unseemly manner:
should he deal with our sister as with an harlot? make a whore of her, and then keep her in his house as such? is this to be borne with? or should we take no more notice of his behaviour to our sister, or show no more regard to her than if she was a common prostitute, whom no man will defend or protect? so say the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem,
“nor let Shechem the son of Hamor mock at us, or boast and say, as an harlot whom no man seeks after, or no man seeks to avenge her; so it is done by Dinah the daughter of Jacob:”
they tacitly insinuate as if Jacob had not that regard for the honour of his daughter and family, and showed his resentment at the wicked behaviour of Shechem, as he ought to have done. It is observed that there is a letter in the word for “harlot” greater than usual, which may either denote the greatness of the sin of Shechem in dealing with Dinah as an harlot, or the great impudence and boldness of Jacob’s sons, in their answer to him, and their audaciousness in justifying such baseness and cruelty they had been guilty of. The whole of this history, as related in this chapter, is given by Polyhistor out of Theodotus the poet q.
q Apud Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 22. p. 427, &c.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
‘And they said, “Should he deal with our sister as with a common prostitute?” ’
They are justifiably indignant. It is they who have been wronged. What else could they do and retain their honour? Their sister had been treated like a common prostitute, available for men whenever they desired. The tribe had been insulted and violated. The covenant had been besmirched. We may decry what they did, but men in their day would have fully understood its necessity.
We may pause to consider that sometimes the way of compromise is necessary, but when deep sin is involved such compromise is unacceptable. In the terms of their day Simeon and Levi were justified in what they did. And by it, although it was not their motive, they protected the ongoing of the covenant and preserved the purity of the tribe. As ever God moves in mysterious ways in the bringing about of His purposes.
(It would in fact be a mistake to assume that the patriarchs never killed anyone. It was sadly a normal part of life when people were wealthy and vulnerable. We certainly know that Abraham would have done so in rescuing Lot and all the patriarchs had riches and herds to defend and we can be sure that attacks on them were many. Their men were trained to fight for that very reason. Bloody fights would have been fairly commonplace. The difference here is that a whole town (but very small by our standards) was involved. But as we have seen the circumstances were very special.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
DISCOURSE: 49
SLAUGHTER OF THE SHECHEMITES
Gen 34:31. And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?
THE life of man is continually exposed to trouble; and not unfrequently waves follow waves with little intermission. It was thus in Jacobs case, who, from the time that he fled from the face of Esau, met with a continued series of difficulties and distresses. Having terminated his hard service under Laban, and miraculously escaped the vindictive assaults both of Laban and of Esau, he seemed to have obtained a respite. But his peace was of very short duration; for his own children, to whom he looked for comfort in his declining years, became to him a source of the most poignant sorrows. It appears indeed, from various circumstances in this short history, that he did not maintain sufficient authority over his own house. Had he taken the direction of matters into his own hands, instead of waiting to consult his young, inexperienced, and headstrong sons, he had prevented those horrible crimes which they perpetrated without fear, and vindicated without remorse.
In considering the petulant answer which they made to his reproofs, we shall be led to notice,
I.
The provocation they had received
We apprehend that Leah herself was in part accessory to the evils that befell her daughter
[Dinah, like other young people, wished to see, and be seen; and on some festive occasion went to visit the daughters of the land of Canaan. She would probably have been displeased, if her mother had imposed restraints upon her. But it was her parents duty to consult, not so much her inclination, as her safety: and it was highly blamable in Leah to suffer her daughter, scarcely fifteen years of age, to go into scenes of gaiety and dissipation unprotected and unwatched.
Perhaps by this calamity Leah herself was punished for the prostitution of herself (for what else can it be called?) in compliance with her fathers wishes. Personating her sister Rachel, she had yielded to what might be justly termed, an incestuous commerce: and now she lives to see the humiliation and defilement of her only daughter.]
But, whatever degree of blame attached either to Dinah or her mother, the provocation given by Shechem was doubtless exceeding great
[To take advantage of a thoughtless unprotected female was exceedingly base: and the distress brought by it upon her whole family was most deplorable. Ah! little do the gay and dissipated think, what sacrifices they require for the gratification of their lusts. Here was the happiness, not of an individual only, but of a whole family, destroyed. That her seducer endeavoured afterwards to repair the injury, is true: and in this he differed from the generality, who, as soon as they have accomplished their vile purposes, have their love turned into indifference or aversion: but the injury was absolutely irreparable; and therefore we do not wonder that it excited a deep resentment in the breasts of her dishonoured relatives.]
But though her brothers were justly indignant at the treatment she had received, they were by no means justified in,
II.
The manner in which they resented it
Shechem, though a prince among the Hivites, instantly made application to Dinahs father to give her to him in marriage. Though he had humbled her, he did not wish to perpetuate her disgrace, but sought, as much as possible, to obliterate it for ever. The terms he proposed were dictated not only by a sense of honour, but by the most tender affection. Happy would it have been if Jacobs sons had been actuated by principles equally honourable and praiseworthy! But they, alas! intent only on revenge, contrived a plot as wicked and diabolical as ever entered into the heart of man. They formed a design to murder, not only the person who had given them the offence, but all the men of his city together with him. In the execution of their purpose they employed,
1.
Hypocrisy
[They pretended to have scruples of conscience about connecting themselves with persons who were uncircumcised. We may admit for a moment, that this did really operate on their minds as an objection to the projected union; and that this objection was sufficient to weigh down every other consideration: still what regard had they for conscience when they could deliberately contrive a plan for murdering the whole city? This was indeed to strain at a gnat, and to swallow a camel.]
2.
Profaneness
[They knew that both the prince and his people were altogether ignorant of Jehovah, and destitute of the smallest wish to be interested in the Covenant which God had made with Abraham: and yet they proposed that all the males should receive the seal of Gods covenant in circumcision; and that too, not in order to obtain any spiritual benefit, but solely with a view to carnal gratification. What a profanation was this of Gods holy ordinance! and what impiety was there in recommending to them such a method of attaining their ends!]
3.
Cruelty
[One would scarcely have conceived that such cruelty could have existed in the human heart. That a spirit of revenge should excite in the minds of these men the thought of murdering the person who was more immediately implicated in the offence, was possible enough: but that it should prompt them to involve a multitude of innocent persons in the same ruin; and at a time when those persons were making very great sacrifices in order to conciliate their favour; and that it should induce them to make use of religion as a cloak for the more easy accomplishment of their execrable purpose; this almost exceeds belief: yet such was their inhuman plot, which too successfully they carried into effect. And though their brethren did not join them in destroying the lives of any, yet they so far participated in the crime, as to take captive the defenceless women, and to seize upon all the cattle and property for a prey.]
There is nothing so iniquitous, but the perpetrators of it will justify it. This appears from,
III.
Their vindication of their conduct
In their answer to their fathers reproof we behold nothing but,
1.
Offended pride
[They would not have felt any displeasure against Shechem, if he had dealt with any other female, or any number of them, as harlots; but that he should offer such an indignity to their sister this was the offence, an offence that could not be expiated by any thing less than the blood of all that were even in the most distant way connected with him. We are surprised and shocked at the relation of this event: and yet is it very similar to what occurs continually before our eyes. Is an injury done, or an affront offered to us? we feel ourselves called upon by a regard for our own honour to seek the life of the offender. Is a slight encroachment made on the rights of a nation? it is deemed a just cause of war; and the lives of thousands are sacrificed in order to avenge it. But Jacob formed a just estimate of his childrens conduct, when he said, Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel.]
2.
Invincible obduracy
[We might well expect that, after a moments reflection, these bloody murderers should relent, and be filled with remorse. But all sense of guilt, yea, and all regard for their own and their fathers safety, seemed to be totally banished from their minds. Instead of regretting that they had acted so treacherous and cruel a part, they vindicate themselves without hesitation, and even tacitly condemn their father, as manifesting less concern for his daughter than they had shewn for their sister. We can scarcely conceive a more awful instance than this of the power of sin to blind the understanding and to harden the heart. But daily experience shews, that, when once the conscience is seared, there is no evil which we will not palliate, no iniquity which we will not justify.]
Infer,
1.
How astonishingly may the judgment of men be warped by partiality and self-love!
[These men could see evil in the conduct of Shechem, and yet justify their own; though theirs was beyond all comparison more vile and horrible than his. And is it not thus with us? If the world behold any thing amiss in the conduct of a person professing religion, with what severity will they condemn it, even though they themselves are living in the unrestrained commission of ten thousand sins! And even professors of religion too are apt to be officious in pulling out a mote from their Brothers eye, while they are inattentive to the beam that is in their own eye. But let us learn rather to exercise forbearance towards the faults of others, and severity towards our own.]
2.
How certainly will there be a day of future retribution!
[Here we behold a whole city of innocent men put to death, and their murderers going away unpunished. But let us not on this account arraign the dispensations of Providence. In the last day all these apparent inequalities will be rectified. It will then infallibly go well with the righteous, and ill with the wicked. The excuses which men now make, will be of no avail: but every transaction shall appear in its proper colours; and every man receive according to what he has done in the body, whether it be good or evil.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
REFLECTIONS
How dreadful the effect of unbridled passions! What sad events have been induced by their indulgence in all ages. And what is the whole history of mankind since the fall, but the same distressing page of suffering and sorrow, by reason of iniquity and sin. Blessed Jesus! how endearing here again is the recollection of thy merciful character, in that thou earnest to take away sin by the sacrifice of thyself.
I think that this chapter affords a very interesting lesson to young women. Female modesty is so truly graceful and becoming, that too much care can never be taken of it. Like the fine bloom of the purple plumb it cannot be touched without injury. Had the daughter of Jacob been less exposed, her chastity would not have been violated. Hence among the precepts of the apostle to young women, which he gives in charge to his beloved Titus, to teach the church, he particularly dwells on this, that they be chaste and keepers at home: as if wandering abroad tended, most likely, to the loss of their chastity.
And while this lesson is read to daughters, and especially to the daughters of gracious parents, from this chapter; let not an exercised soul among parents that are gracious, forget to derive this instruction also from it, that a godly father may have ungodly children. Grace is not by descent. It runs not in the blood. Jacob was dear to his God: but Jacob’s children were very often a source of sorrow to him. Many afflicting providences were in his family. David also, though the man after God’s own heart, yet concerning his children he might well cry out, as he did in one of his Psalms, Lord, remember David and all his afflictions! Reader! if God in his providence should have called you to the interesting character of a parent, and in his wisdom should see fit to exercise you with such distresses, where will you find resources to bear you up under the heavy pressure? There is but one that can give relief, and that one the holy men of old possessed. And that is a comfortable and well-grounded assurance of an interest in the covenant righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ. This acts like an anchor to the soul in a dark and stormy night. David fled to this, in his troubles, and found that he rid by it safely through the tempest. Although my house (says he) be not so with God, yet hath he made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure. For this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 34:31 And they said, Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?
Ver. 31. Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot? ] Why, no: but should you therefore speak so boldly to your father, and deal so cruelly with your confederates; whom you first cheated into a covenant, and then basely butchered, when not able to help themselves? But anger is outrageous, and forethinks not what will follow hereafter, or becomes a man for present. Bridle it therefore. The word harlot is written with a great letter in the original , to show with what a courage they spake it. Hebrew Text Note
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Should he … ? Figure of speech. Erotesis. App-6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Gen 34:13, Gen 49:7, Pro 6:34
Reciprocal: Gen 34:27 – they Gen 38:24 – played the harlot Gen 49:5 – instruments Ecc 7:9 – anger Joh 4:18 – is not 1Co 6:16 – an harlot
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 34:31. Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot? No, he should not; but, if he do, must they be their own avengers? and nothing less than so many lives, and the ruin of a whole city, serve to atone for the abuse?