Genealogy of Jesus

Continuing a Bible study of the Gospels:

(Luke 3:25) Who was of Mattathias, who was of Amos, who was of Nahum, who was of Esli, who was of Naggai,

The genealogy of Jesus through Mary's ancestors began in the last post.  Verse 23 said that it was Joseph who was the son of Eli, but he was actually the son-in-law, with Mary being Eli's daughter.  Eli was the son of Matthat, who was the son of Levi, son of Melchi, son of Janna, son of Joseph, who was the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai.

(26) Who was of Maath, who was of Mattathias, who was of Semei, who was of Joseph, who was of Judah, (27) Who was of Joannas, who was of Rhesa, who was of Zerubbabel, who was of Shealtiel, who was of Neri, (28) Who was of Melchi, who was of Addi, who was of Cosam, who was of Elmodam, who was of Er,

Naggai was the son of Maath, and so the ancestor list of Jesus goes through Er, where I have to stop because Blogger only allows twenty tags per post.  As I feel anyone in Jesus's genealogy deserves a noteworthy tag, I will continue the genealogy in the next post.

Census of Israel in the Plains of Moab, Part 3

Because Blogger limits the number of labels per post, I've had to separate this chapter into many short posts in order to note all the important names.  There is a census being taken in this chapter of all the able-bodied men of war from twenty years and older.  It began here:

Census of Israel in the Plains of Moab, Part 1

Census of Israel in the Plains of Moab, Part 2

Now on with part 3:

(Numbers 26:19) The sons of Judah were Er and Onan; and Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan.

Next were counted the men of the tribe of Judah.  Judah's first two sons, Er and Onan, died because of their sins in the land of Canaan where they were born, and had no descendants to be counted.

(20) And the sons of Judah after their families were: of Shelah, the family of the Shelanites; of Pharez, the family of the Pharzites; of Zerah, the family of the Zarhites.

The sons of Judah who did have families to count were Shelah, Pharez, and Zerah.

(21) And the sons of Pharez were: of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Hamul, the family of the Hamulites.

The Pharzites from the family of Pharez were divided into two families from Pharez's two sons:  from his son Hezron came the Hezronites, and from his son Hamul, the Hamulites.

(22) These are the families of Judah according to those who were numbered of them, seventy-six thousand five hundred.

The tribe of Judah numbered 76,500 able-bodied men of war twenty years and older.  Their numbers had increased 1900 since the first census 38 years prior to this time.

(23) The sons of Issachar after their families: Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Pua, the family of the Punites; (24) Of Jashub, the family of the Jashubites; of Shimron, the family of the Shimronites. (25) These are the families of Issachar according to those who were numbered of them, sixty-four thousand three hundred.

The sons of Issachar and their families who were counted were Tola, Pua, Jashub, and Shimron.  They numbered 64,300, an increase of 9900 since the census 38 years prior to this one.

(26) The sons of Zebulun after their families: of Sered, the family of the Sardites; of Elon, the family of the Elonites; of Jahleel, the family of the Jahleelites. (27) These are the families of the Zebulunites according to those who were numbered of them, sixty thousand five hundred.

From the tribe of Zebulun, the families of his sons Sered, Elon, and Jahleel, were counted and totaled 60,500, which was an increase of 3100 since the first census.

That ends this short post because Blogger limits the number of labels per post.  To continue the census count:

Census of Israel in the Plains of Moab, Part 4

The Fascinating Line of Judah That Produced the Lion of Judah

I am going to take an ever-so-slight detour from the chronologically ordered Bible study I have been doing by Skip Andrews.  Mr. Andrews placed the first six verses in Genesis 39 here, and then continued the rest of Genesis 39 after what is written here.  It may have been Mr. Andrews's purpose to show that at the same time Joseph began captivity in Egypt, these events with Judah's sons were happening, but I see no real reason to separate the story of Joseph, so I will study Judah's sons here and will then return to Joseph.

(Genesis 38:6) And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar.

Previously in this chronological reading, it was reported that Judah had taken a Canaanite wife, and she had borne him three sons, Er, Onan, and Shelah.  Now Judah's son Er had grown and it appears that Judah chose the wife for Er.

(7) And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD killed him.

Judah's son Er was a wicked man.  We are not told exactly what he did, but it was bad enough that the Lord took him out.  Judah started his family on the wrong foot.  He left his brothers' companionship and made friends among the Canaanites and married a Canaanite woman.  He continued friendships with the Canaanites as shown in the next few verses.  At the very least, his children were not brought up in a God-fearing home.

(8) And Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and marry her, and raise up seed to your brother."

After Er died, Judah told his second son to marry Er's widow, as was apparently the custom, so that the firstborn son would have descendants.  Indeed it became a law in Deuteronomy 25:5.  Biblical historians point out that the word used for "marry" here is not the one most commonly used; the verb "yabam" is the same word as the noun that means "brother-in-law", although it may be pronounced a little differently than the noun "yabam".

(9) And Onan knew that the seed would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. (10) And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also.

From what I read, only the firstborn would have been considered his brother's child; after that, all the other children would have been considered Onan's.  However, it appears that Onan wouldn't even give his brother that.  Onan defied custom that would have honored his brother, and although his brother may not have deserved honor, he apparently did it for selfish reasons.  The act was a sin against the divine institution of marriage and the object of that marriage, the bringing forth of children.  That act greatly displeased the Lord and Onan also was killed by Him.

(11) Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, "Remain a widow at your father's house till my son Shelah is grown." For he said, "Lest he also die like his brothers." And Tamar went and dwelt in her father's house.

Judah told Tamar to go live at her father's house until his youngest son, Shelah, was grown and able to marry her.  That is what he said, but that is not what he intended, for he reasoned within his heart that it was so that his youngest son would not also die like his brothers.  Tamar did as she was asked and went to live at her father's house.

(12) And in the process of time the daughter of Shua, Judah's wife, died; and Judah was comforted, and went up to his sheepshearers at Timnah, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite.

After some time Judah's wife died.  The original words transcribed as "in the process of time" give a sense of a multiplied time, even a multitude of years.  It was probably several years after Judah sent Tamar back to her father's house with the pretense that she was only waiting for Shelah to mature, and it was obvious the youngest son was never going to marry her.  Judah was comforted, indicating he had gone through his period of mourning, and now went to Timnah where his sheep shearers were.  He took along his Canaanite friend, Hirah, and they were evidently going for enjoyment after his time of mourning.

(13) And it was told Tamar, saying, "Look, your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to shear his sheep." (14) And she took off her widow's garments, and covered herself with a veil and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place which was on the way to Timnah, for she saw that Shelah was grown and she was not given to him as a wife.

It may have been told to Tamar in passing that her father-in-law would be passing through, but it is apparent that Tamar is deliberate in her actions because she was never given to Shelah as wife as was the custom.  She took off her widow's clothes, and whether she meant to look like a harlot or just meant to hide her identity, or both, she wrapped and veiled herself and sat in an open visible place on the road to Timnah.

(15) When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot, because she had covered her face.

Judah did indeed mistake Tamar for a harlot.  I don't believe it was because a veil meant she was a harlot, but because she sat in an open place and since she did have the veil, he didn't recognize her, and assumed she was a harlot.

(16) And he turned to her by the way, and said, "Come now, please, let me come in to you," (for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law). And she said, "What will you give me, that you may come in to me?"

While it was true that Judah did not know this was his daughter-in-law, he was still guilty of fornication with a woman who was not his wife.  Tamar asked what Judah would give her.  This may have been so that she behaved like a harlot requiring payment for her hire or so that she would have something of Judah's to be used later, or again, maybe a little of both.  While I have already found Judah guilty, I am reserving judgment on Tamar.  I haven't decided if she is sinfully deceitful or just sly like a fox.  While she was deceiving Judah, I don't see that she has lied.  She did what was asked of her when she went back to her father's house after her husbands died, and she did not marry anyone else when Shelah did not marry her.  She now put herself visibly in the path of Judah, but had he not been willing to take a harlot, this thing would not have gone any further.

(17) And he said, "I will send a kid from the flock." And she said, "Will you give me a pledge till you send it?"

Judah offered to pay her a kid from his flock, but she wanted something of Judah's as a pledge until he sent it; I believe a possession of Judah's is something she wanted all along.

(18) And he said, "What pledge shall I give you?" And she said, "Your signet and your bracelets, and your staff that is in your hand." And he gave them to her, and went in to her, and she conceived by him. (19) And she arose and went away, and laid aside her veil and put on the garments of her widowhood.

Tamar was the one who determined what personal possessions Judah gave as a pledge and he agreed to it.  He gave her what she asked for and went in to her.  It is said that she conceived as a result of it.  Afterward, Tamar went away, took off her veils, and put back on her widow's clothing.

(20) And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand, but he did not find her. (21) Then he asked the men of that place, saying, "Where is the harlot who was openly by the roadside?" And they said, "There was no harlot in this place." (22) And he returned to Judah and said, "I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said there was no harlot in this place." (23) And Judah said, "Let her take them for herself, lest we be shamed; behold, I sent this kid and you have not found her."

Judah sent the kid he had promised in payment by his friend, the Adullamite, probably Hirah, but he could not find the her.  He was, of course, looking for a harlot who sat openly by the roadside, but he didn't find one.  When he asked where she was, the men of the place said they knew of no such harlot.  He went back and reported all this to Judah, who decided they should leave well enough alone and let her keep the pledge things so that they not be embarrassed.  Judah realized his act was a shameful one, or maybe not.  Maybe he would just be embarrassed when other men realized he let a harlot trick him out of his signet, bracelets, and staff.  I'm not sure why both of them would be shamed; maybe because his friend helped him.  Perhaps it feels better to include his friend in his shame.  Judah appears to justify himself by stating that they did indeed try to pay the woman, but could not find her.

(24) And it came to pass, about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, "Tamar your daughter-in-law has played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, "Bring her forth, and let her be burned."

After about three months, it became obvious that Tamar was with child.  Since she was not married to Shelah, who should have been her only rightful husband at the time, it may have been assumed she must have "played the harlot".  Judah certainly seems to have taken it to be adultery and an affront to his family to want her to be burned for her act.

(25) When she was brought forth, she sent to her father-in-law, saying, "By the man to whom these belong, I am with child," and she said, "Please determine whose these are, the signet, the bracelets, and staff." (26) And Judah acknowledged them and said, "She has been more righteous than I, because I did not give her to Shelah my son." And he never knew her again.

As she had planned all along, when she was found out and brought to her father-in-law, she produced Judah's personal belongings, and of course, Judah recognized them.  He declared Tamar to be more righteous than he was because he did not give her to his son Shelah as he promised.  I agree with Judah, but it was interesting to read some of the earlier commentaries that made Tamar out to be the guiltier one, but there were just as many or maybe more who saw Judah as the guilty one, and excused Tamar.  Dr. John Gill wrote that Tamar was "the greatest criminal" because she sat in the way and purposely deceived him, knowing who he was and yet purposely had an incestual relationship with him, whereas Judah knew nothing but "simple fornication".  Wow!  That certainly was a sexist opinion if there ever was one!  I realize that in Biblical times, a woman's father-in-law became her father, and that would be seen as incestual.  However, in reality, it would seem no more incestual than a brother, which the custom encouraged.  I believe that in Judah's purposely withholding Shelah from Tamar, he would have kept her unnecessarily in widowhood for the rest of her life.  She could have played the harlot with any man, but she didn't.  She purposely sought the same bloodline of her late husband.  She probably wanted a child; I'm sure she didn't want to remain a childless widow all her life.  I believe she was more righteous than Judah in that she didn't play the harlot with just anyone.  And she never lied.  Yes, it could be said she deceived, and perhaps she was guilty of incest, but so was Judah, and he wouldn't have been if he had not himself jumped in bed with whom he thought to be a prostitute.  Therefore, weighing the two "crimes" as equal, Tamar's motives appeared purer, and Judah agreed she was more righteous than he was.  Scripture says that he never had relations with her again after this.

(27) And it came to pass, in the time of her giving birth, that behold, twins were in her womb. (28) And it came to pass, when she was giving birth, that one put out his hand; and the midwife took and bound on his hand a scarlet thread, saying, "This one came out first." (29) And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out; and she said, "How have you broken forth? This breach be upon you." Therefore his name was called Pharez.

Tamar gave birth to twins.  As she was giving birth, when one baby pushed forth his hand, the midwife tied a scarlet thread on it so they would know which was the firstborn.  So greatly desired were the privileges of the firstborn that it was important to know which baby that was.  However, when that first baby's hand withdrew, out came his brother.  It seems this was astonishing to the midwife.  I'm not sure what "this breach be upon you" really means, other than "you will be remembered for that breach or bursting forth".  In that case, it might make sense that this was Tamar speaking.  Sometimes there were confusing pronouns in the Bible when there were more than one person.  Perhaps Tamar was saying the name of that memory would be upon him, as she called him Phares, which literally meant "breach" or "breaking forth".

Pharez was a direct ancestor of the Messiah.  I am recalling how an earlier ancestor, Jacob, Pharez's grandfather, also scrambled to try to get out of the womb first.  Isn't it interesting that these events are even recorded?  It's as if the spirits of these babies knew what was at stake and they wanted to be the firstborn in this important lineage.  I am reminded of another marvelous passage in the first chapter of Luke where Mary was pregnant with Jesus and came to see her cousin, Elizabeth, who was pregnant with John the Baptist.  Luke 1:41-44 says that when Elizabeth first heard Mary, the baby inside of her leaped for joy and she was filled with the Holy Spirit and knew Mary was carrying her Lord.  Why did God go to such great lengths to tell us what babies in the womb did?  Was it to remind us that even in the womb they are precious human beings created by God, endowed by the Creator with the unalienable right to life?  An unalienable right, one given by God that cannot be taken away, and yet that is what we do everyday, by abortion.  How dare we take the life of another human being created by God and obviously endowed with His spirit?  We know it's wrong to take a life outside of the womb.  Isn't it interesting that Kermit Gosnell was recently found guilty of murder when he killed babies right after they were born outside of the womb because he failed to kill them "legally" inside the womb, where he would not have been found guilty of murder?  While the testimony in this trial was horrifying, I couldn't help but understand Gosnell when he was bewildered as to why what he did would be considered murder.  After all, he had been paid to kill an unwanted baby.  When he failed to do it inside the womb, wasn't it still an unwanted baby that needed to be disposed of?  Was it only outside of the womb that it became a living, breathing, feeling creation of God who deserved life that it was not only a minute before?  How absurd!  As chilling as the Gosnell testimonies were, it's the practice of abortion itself that is the most chilling.  The fact that Gosnell did not value the life of the babies he murdered had already been demonstrated by the fact he was a late-term abortion "doctor".  In Jeremiah 1:5, God told Jeremiah that He knew him BEFORE He even formed him in his mother's belly and that before he came out of the womb He had sanctified him and ordained him a prophet.  God knew that baby in the womb and even before; He must grieve terribly for the babies who never get a chance to fellowship with Him and do His will on earth.

One more thought on the genealogy of Jesus:  Tamar was also a direct ancestor of the Messiah!  She could have very easily had no descendants at all, if Judah had his way, but she is privileged to have a place in history in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:3).  The line of Judah could have been stopped here, but for the actions of Tamar.  I don't know at this point in my study if Shelah had other children.  What interesting people we have in the ancestry of Christ!  Jacob, Judah, and Tamar, a few very interesting ones so far.  This is one of those times when I think of skeptics of the Bible who try to negate the Bible because of the killing and lying and cheating and whores, but those are the kinds of things, and these are the kinds of people, who make it very real!  If people were going to make up a fiction and call it the Word of God, I believe they would have used more righteous-appearing folks to be ancestors of the Messiah!

(30) And afterward his brother came out, who had the scarlet thread on his hand; and his name was called Zarah.

Then the son with the scarlet thread, who would have been the firstborn, came out, and he is forevermore in scripture named second behind his brother in genealogies.  He was called Zarah which literally meant "dawning, shining, rising".  He did dawn first, but Pharez broke forth first and was forever listed first whenever the names of Judah's and/or Tamar's sons were listed.

(1 Chronicles 2:4) And Tamar, his daughter-in-law, bore him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five.

Getting Back on the Right Track

Continuing my chronological Bible study:

(Genesis 35:1) And God said to Jacob, "Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there; and make an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you fled from the face of Esau your brother."

In the last chapter, Jacob's sons Simeon and Levi had just deceived and killed Shechem and his father Hamor and all the men in their city because of Shechem's rape of their sister, Dinah.  Once again, Jacob found himself in a place where he was not safe where someone might want to kill him, so God told him to go to Bethel.  God reminded Jacob that that is where He appeared to Jacob when he fled for his life from Esau.  In sending Jacob back there, God was sending Jacob back to the place where he made a vow to God; God was reminding Jacob of his vow from Genesis 28:20-22, that if God was with him, protected him, gave his provisions, and allowed him to go back to his father's land in peace, then Jacob would recognize that the Lord was his God and he would tithe a tenth to him.  Jacob had declared that the pillar he had set at Bethel would be God's house.  God had certainly done His part in protecting and blessing Jacob; now it was time for Jacob to return to God and remember his vow.

(2) Then Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, "Put away the strange gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments. (3) And let us arise and go up to Bethel, and I will make there an altar to God, who answered me in the day of my distress and was with me in the way which I went."

After God spoke to him, Jacob then told his wives and children and all the servants and those of his household to put away all their strange gods and cleanse and purify themselves.  The word translated as "strange" is as a stranger or a foreigner, so should be thought of as "foreign" gods.  His family had obviously picked up foreign idols living in this pagan land.  Rachel herself had stolen gods from her father's house if she still had them at this time.  Dinah had wanted to be worldly and see what those other young women experienced and may have picked up some of their idols.  It could be the servants who had the strange gods, Cannanite servants who came into service later, like the ones Jacob's family acquired through the plundering of Shechem's city.  Jacob announced that it was now time to put away all those foreign idols and get cleansed and go to Bethel where Jacob would make an altar to God, and he stressed that this is the God who has been with him when he was in distress and wherever he went.

(4) And they gave Jacob all the foreign gods which were in their hands, and all their earrings which were in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

All of the household of Jacob did indeed give up their foreign gods.  The earrings they handed over were surely not regular jewelry worn by women but were the kind that were worn as amulets or charms decorated with magical characters and images of some pagan god, as was the practice back then.  When you think about it that way, Dinah could have easily picked up that fashion statement when she went out into the world to see what the other young women were doing.  Think about how many bad symbols and images and customs a young girl could pick up in our present culture!  These earrings were symbols of pagan gods and had no place in Jacob's family.  I'm not sure why he hid them in a particular place.  I am assuming he buried them to hide them from anyone who might return to retrieve them, and he purposely left them in (or by) Shechem and away from his household and Bethel and their altar to God.

(5) And they journeyed, and the terror of God was upon the cities that were all around them, and they did not pursue after the sons of Jacob.

Despite Jacob's fear that what his sons had done to the Shechemites would make him despised by the other Canaanite cities and make his family easy prey to their enemies, God protected Jacob and his company as they traveled.  For whatever reason God projected to them, the people of these cities greatly feared what Jacob and his God might do to them, and they let his family be.

(6) So Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, that is, Bethel, he and all the people who were with him.

The place was formerly called Luz, but Jacob had named it Bethel.  He and his family and all who were with him came safely to Bethel.

(7) And he built an altar there and called the place El Bethel, because there God appeared to him when he fled from the face of his brother.

As instructed by God, there Jacob built an altar in the place where God had appeared to him when he had fled from Esau.  He now called the place El Bethel, which meant "God of Bethel" or "the God of the House of God".

(8) But Deborah Rebekah's nurse died, and she was buried beneath Bethel under an oak, and the name of it was called Allon Bachuth.

There is much speculation among Biblical scholars as to how Rebekah's nurse came to be with Jacob and his family, but the passage doesn't say that the nurse was specifically with them when she died.  I believe this may have been merely an explanation of another name by which this place was also known, something the early reader would have understood better than we do now.  Because a beloved nurse also died and was buried at Bethel, the place was also known as Allon Bachuth, which literally meant "oak of weeping".

(9) And God appeared to Jacob again, when he came out of Padan Aram, and blessed him. (10) And God said to him, "Your name is Jacob; your name shall not be called Jacob anymore, but Israel shall be your name." And He called his name Israel.

It seems to me that verse 9 is a continuation of the thought started in verse 7--Jacob built the altar because that is where God appeared to him when he fled from Esau and he also appeared to him when he came out of Padan Aram, and that is when He told him he would be called Israel.  It seems to me that this is a retelling of how Jacob first came to call this place Bethel.  God had brought Jacob back to this place so that Jacob would remember all that God had done for him.

(11) And God said to him, "I am God Almighty; be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be from you, and kings shall come out of your loins. (12) And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and to your descendants after you will I give the land." (13) And God went up from him in the place where He talked with him. (14) And Jacob set up a pillar in the place where He talked with him, a pillar of stone, and he poured a drink offering on it, and he poured oil on it. (15) And Jacob called the name of the place where God spoke with him, Bethel.

I still believe this is a retelling of the original meeting with God when he named this place Bethel, which meant "House of God".  However, most of the Biblical scholars I have read believe God is renewing His covenant with Jacob.  It is certain that God wanted Jacob to return here so that he would remember his vow to God, and to remember God's promise to him, even if He did not speak to him again, but He probably did; who am I to argue with those scholars?  It doesn't change the essence of this passage; God either told Jacob again or made sure it was all clear in his mind and his heart again.  He renewed the Abrahamic covenant and promised Jacob that he and his descendants would inherit this land and that nations and kings would come from him.

As I am following a chronological Bible study designed by Skip Andrews, I am now going to Genesis 38:

(Genesis 38:1) And it came to pass at that time that Judah departed from his brothers, and visited a certain Adullamite whose name was Hirah.

There is some discrepancy among Biblical scholars as to when Judah started his own family, but it is of Mr. Andrews's opinion that it happened after, or maybe about the time of the rape of Dinah, and before the birth of Benjamin.  As I am already in the midst of this chronological order, I don't want to change now and risk missing anything, so I will continue with this assumption.  As Dinah wanted to go explore the customs of the other young women in the world, so it looks as if Judah desired to meet and make friends with new people--he departed from his brothers.

(2) And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shuah, and he took her, and went in to her.

Shuah was the name of the Canaanite, not the daughter.  It appears that Judah took the daughter of Shuah to be his wife, with hers and her father's consent, and not by force, but we can be sure that Judah did not consult his father, as the marriage to a Canaanite woman would have been greatly discouraged.

(3) And she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Er.

Judah's firstborn son was Er, a name that literally meant "watchful". 

(4) And she conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan.

The daughter of Shuah bore Judah another son, and called his name Onan, which literally meant "strong".  I don't know if there is any significance to this, but the scripture said that Er was named by his father Judah, and Onan was named by his mother.

(5) And she conceived yet again and bore a son, and called his name Shelah, and he was at Chezib when she bore him.

Judah's wife bore him a third son, and his name was called Shelah, which literally meant "request" or "petition", according to my sources, Strong's and Brown-Driver-Briggs.  However, Dr. John Gill, in his commentary, said it signified "tranquil, quiet, peaceable and prosperous, and is a word that comes from the same root as Shiloh, that famous son of Judah that should spring from him".  I saw that Albert Barnes wrote that it meant either "request" or "rest".  I then did a little more digging and saw that there is another word "shelah", perhaps pronounced a little differently, but spelled the same way, which did mean "at rest" or "at ease".  I really don't know which meaning was meant by the parents of Shelah, other than Dr. Gill's opinion, but at least I know why there could have been such discrepancy in the meaning of the name.  Shelah was born at Chezib, which I read in one old commentary, would have been important to the early reader and descendants of Shelah.  The birthplace of the other two sons was not mentioned because they did not have any children. 

In my chronological study, it is assumed that Judah married a Canaanite woman and had children about the same time as the rape of Dinah, and may be one of the reasons that Jacob saw "sin in the camp" and recognized his family's need to return to Bethel and remember their Lord.  Now the study returns to Jacob and his family leaving Bethel.

(Genesis 35:16) And they journeyed from Bethel; and there was but a little way to go to Ephrath, and Rachel labored in childbirth, and she had hard labor.

Jacob and his family now left Bethel after they had returned for Jacob to build an altar and remember his vow to the Lord.  There was just a little way to go to Ephrath, which we learn in a later verse is the same as Bethlehem.  I will reflect on the meaning of the name when it is mentioned again in that verse.  Meanwhile, they were almost to Ephrath, or Bethlehem, when Rachel went into hard labor.

(17) And it came to pass, when she was in hard labour, that the midwife said to her, "Do not fear; you will have this son also."

The midwife may have just been trying to comfort Rachel with these words, but she was surely aware of Rachel's words at the birth of Joseph, that "the Lord shall add to me another son", especially since the meaning of the name Joseph was "Jehovah has added" or "let Him add".  Now the midwife comforted Rachel with the words that she would indeed have another son.

(18) And it came to pass, as her soul was departing (for she died), that she called his name Ben-Oni, but his father called him Benjamin.

Rachel died in childbirth, but she did give birth to another son she called Ben-Oni, which literally meant "son of my sorrow".  She probably named him this because of the pain and sorrow with which she brought him into the world, or maybe because of her sorrow when she realized she was going to leave him and this world as she was dying.  I can't help but think of how Rachel had so desperately wanted children that she had told Jacob to give her children or else she would die (Gen. 30:1), and now she died giving birth to one.  I can certainly understand why Jacob would rename the child, so that the name was not a constant reminder of the pain and sorrow with which the boy's mother died.  He renamed the child Benjamin which literally meant "son of the right hand", which meant someone very dear and much loved.  The child would be as his right hand or maybe he literally meant the child was the son of his right hand, the son of someone very dear to him.

There is something else, something rather amazing when I think about it, in this scripture.  The verse did not merely say that Rachel died; it said her soul "was departing".  The soul departed from the body "for she died".  Her body obviously didn't depart or go anywhere, but her soul is said to have departed.  Is this not beautiful proof that there is an immortal spirit in man that exists separately from the body?  Indeed Ecclesiastes 12:7 says, "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was; and the spirit shall return to God who gave it."

(19) And Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath, that is, Bethlehem.

So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath, a name which literally meant "fruitfulness".  Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions defines it as "ash-heap: place of fruitfulness".  I don't know whether the name of the place was always Ephrath, or if Jacob called it that because out of the ash heap of pain and sorrow came fruitfulness, but it came to be better known as Bethlehem, which literally meant "house of bread", and it was the birthplace of our savior, Jesus Christ, the bread of life.

My chronological study now takes me to Genesis 48:

(Genesis 48:7) And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan on the way, when there was but a little way to go to Ephrath; and I buried her there on the way to Ephrath, that is, Bethlehem.

This was Jacob's retelling of the event of Rachel's death to his son Joseph when he was an adult with children of his own.  I do find it interesting that Jacob recalled the time as "when I came from Padan", even though he had already left Padan, journeyed to Succoth where he built a house and booths (though this must have been a brief stay), went to Shalem, a city of Shechem, where he bought land and had to have lived for awhile before the rape of Dinah because she couldn't have been more than a little girl when they first left Padan.  I had read that Demetrius the Chronographer, a chronicler of Jewish history who lived in the third century B.C., seemed to have written with preciseness as he gave the date of every incident in Jacob's life, even giving a birth month and year for each of his children.  He reported that Jacob had lived with Rachel for 23 years when she died.  Jacob worked the second seven years for Rachel after she became his wife and then worked an additional six years for Laban for the speckled cattle; therefore it was ten years after he left Padan Aram that Rachel died.  I guess a little 10-year detour away from where God would have him is unimportant at the end of Jacob's life.  However, if this is the way that this time is thought of, as when Jacob "came from Padan", then I can see why scholars believe that God appeared to Jacob "again, when he came out of Padan Aram" (Genesis 35:9), and renewed his covenant with him.

Now back to Genesis 35:

(Genesis 35:20) And Jacob set a pillar on her grave, which is the pillar of Rachel's grave to this day.

The monument or pillar on Rachel's grave continued to stand to the day of the writing of this book in Genesis, and it is mentioned even later as a landmark in the book of 1 Samuel, the tenth chapter.

(21) And Israel journeyed and spread his tent beyond the tower of Edar.

After he buried Rachel, Jacob, or Israel, as he was now called by God, moved on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Edar, the name which literally means "tower of the flock", and was said to be a shepherd's watchtower about a mile from Bethlehem.  Some scholars have written that this was the place where the angel came to the shepherds and reported the birth of Christ.

(22a) And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine; and Israel heard about it.

During the time Jacob dwelled in that land, his oldest son Reuben lay with Rachel's maid, Bilhah, who had become Jacob's concubine and the mother of some of his children.  I purposely divided this one verse into two parts because it is said that there was a great blank pause here in the original text.  I don't know why it would have been transcribed as one verse.  The early commentaries look at the pause as there was nothing else that could be said about this despicable act.  Jacob heard about it and surely received the news with great grief of heart and was not able to speak of it.  However, he did remember the incident when he blessed his sons when he was old (Gen. 49:4).  The 1599 Geneva Bible Translation Notes points out that this shows "that the fathers were not chosen for their merits, but only by God's mercies, whose election was not changed by their faults."

(22b) Now the sons of Jacob were twelve: (23) The sons of Leah were Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, and Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun; (24) The sons of Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin; (25) And the sons of Bilhah, Rachel's maidservant, were Dan and Naphtali; (26) And the sons of Zilpah, Leah's maidservant, were Gad and Asher; these were the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Padan Aram.

The twelve sons of Jacob, who became the twelve patriarchs, heads of twelve tribes, are named.  A general statement is made that they were all born in Padan Aram, but of course, we know that Benjamin was born on the road, thought of as "on the way" when Jacob "came from Padan" (Gen. 48:7).

(27) And Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, to the city of Arbah, which is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac sojourned.

Finally Jacob made it "from Padan Aram" back to his father's land.  Most scholars assume he must have surely visited his father before this time as he had been in the land for ten years, and he was now returning, either because of the death of his mother or because his father was getting very old.  However, as this is the first mention in scripture, and the fact I have found the whole ten-year trip "from Padan Aram" sort of suspect, I am taking scripture literally here and assuming he is just now getting back "from Padan Aram" and to the land of his father.  It certainly appears that Jacob thought of it that way when he referred back to it (Genesis 48:7).  Mamre was a plain that belonged to a man probably of the same name as gathered from another scripture (Gen. 13:18), and where we were told that Abraham once lived.  The plain was near the city called Kirjath Arba (Gen. 23:2) or just Arbah here, and the city was also called Hebron.

I haven't seen any indication that the early scholars saw this as I did.  Oh sure, they all saw that Jacob had seen his need to get back to God and remember his vow to Him, but I see a little more.  I believe that perhaps Jacob was lax and took his time in getting back to his father's land which was what God had told him to do.  That may be why he had so many problems with his children in the land--Dinah going off to see the other girls in the land and subsequently being raped, Judah associating with the Canaanites and marrying a Canaanite woman, and Reuben sleeping with his concubine--all these things occurring before Jacob finally made it to his father in Mamre.  Perhaps if Jacob had just gone straight back to his father as God had told him to do and when He said He would be with him (Gen. 31:3), maybe none of these things would have happened.  Perhaps they dawdled in the Canaanite land too long.  Not only did Jacob need to remember his vow to God, but he had to be reminded to do as God had told him.  He needed to remember what God had done for him and of God's promise to be with him and of his promise to make God his Lord.  God did His part and was always with Jacob, but Jacob had forgotten his vow and let his family get involved with foreign gods and they had to be spiritually cleansed.  I believe the point of this chapter is that Jacob sort of got off track for about ten years.  I believe that he saw it that way and that is why when he spoke of this time later in life, it was just a detour on the way from Padan Aram back to the land of his father.  It must be pointed out that God was still with Jacob during that ten years and protected him from being killed by the Canaanites after the Shechem ordeal, just as God may help us through some stupid mistakes.  God is still with us, but things would be easier and a lot less messy if we would just do it His way the first time.  And thankfully, God will mercifully remind us of that fact and prompt us to get back to Him!