Did Jacob own any territory to rule?

Marcialou

We are stardust
Messages
174
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Jane, I just did a search. Apparently you are correct about what the Bible says about inheritance rights. Never-the-less, I have a different answer in the case of Isaac and his sons, although it's just a hypothesis.

I'll wait to give others a chance to pipe in before I give my own response. Then I hope we can have a lively discussion. To repeat, the question is, who inherited Isaac's flock and other property?

Oy, I just reread what I wrote and I'm afraid I'm making this sound like a test and I don't mean to. I'm no Bible scholar and no one else has to be one either to offer an opinion.

http://www.gotquestions.org/double-portion.html#ixzz39Nni6rog

Six times in the Bible*, specific reference is made to a “double portion.” When someone receives a double portion, he gets a gift twice as much as that given to others.

The concept of the double portion is first mentioned in the Law of Moses: “But he shall acknowledge the firstborn . . . by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the firstfruits of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his” (
Deuteronomy 21:17). A firstborn son was entitled to receive twice the inheritance of that of a father’s other sons, in addition to the right of succession.

*Includes New Testament
 

paarsurrey

Active Member
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Points
6
Thinking about this thread a few weeks ago a question occurred to me: Who inherited Isaac's flock and the rest of his "estate" after he died? It surprised me that I never wondered about this before as I learned the story as a child and read Genesis more than a few times since.

The answer also occurred to me but I'm not going to say, as I'm curious as to how others think. Has anyone else wondered about this? It's not anything I ever heard come up before.

The question of the inheritance of the flock has to be taken from Abraham. How much it was and how it was divided in inheritance to the off-spring?

I don't agree that Isaac was the first born. Ishmael was the first born.

Jacob and all of his son shifted to Egypt to live with Joseph; without any flocks.

I don't think Jacob was prosperous.

In Egypt; the off-spring of Joseph slowly became slaves of Pharaoh.

Anybody with any thoughts on any of these points.

Regards
 

Marcialou

We are stardust
Messages
174
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Paarsurrey,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that Isaac, as second born, would have received nothing from Abraham and therefore had nothing to bequeath to either of his sons. So your answer to the inheritance question appears to be that nobody inherited anything from Isaac because he, himself, had inherited nothing. Am I right?
 

paarsurrey

Active Member
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Points
6
Paarsurrey,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that Isaac, as second born, would have received nothing from Abraham and therefore had nothing to bequeath to either of his sons. So your answer to the inheritance question appears to be that nobody inherited anything from Isaac because he, himself, had inherited nothing. Am I right?

I think you understand me correctly.

The Prophets of G-d leave inheritance in ethics,morals and spirituality; if their off-spring hold on to these things; other things they are provided for by G-d. If they indulge in evil things, they inherit nothing.

Regards
 

Marcialou

We are stardust
Messages
174
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Thanks Jane and Paarsurrey. As you’ll see, we have 3 answers among us to the question, “Who inherited Isaac's flock and the rest of his ‘estate’ after he died?” Jane says Jacob received 2/3 inheritance; Paarsurrey says there was no inheritance to inherit by anyone. Here are my thoughts.

First, as to the existence of an inheritance, it seems that Isaac did own quite a bit. When Rebecca conspires with Jacob to trick Isaac she says, “Go to the flock and get me two choice kids.” (Genesis 27:10). Isaac also had servants and herders. There’s a reference to them in (Genesis 26:20-21). So according to the Hebrew Bible, Isaac did own a flock large enough that he hired workers. Paarsurrey, are you using the Koran as your reference? That might explain why we see things differently.

As to the double portion rule, my guess is that it didn’t exist in the ancient Israel of Isaac’s time. Double portion is first mentioned in Deuteronomy, which discusses the laws of Moses, and Moses didn’t appear until much later. Also, when Isaac and Esau realize Jacob’s deception, Isaac doesn’t say, “at least you’ll get 1/3.” Instead he says “I have already made him your lord, and I have given him all his brothers as servants…What then can I do for you my son?” (Genesis 27:37) So this indicates that Jacob was entitled to everything.

However…

However nothing. I was all set to make the case that Esau ended up inheriting everything but as I was checking my facts and gathering my chapters and verses, I discovered that the chronology of events I was assuming was, in fact, not true. Too bad. It was going to make for such an interesting discussion.

Never-the-less I will still conjecture that although Jacob was entitled to everything he didn’t receive everything. Consider how scared Jacob was some 20 or so years later when he and Esau briefly reunited. He was tripping over himself trying to give him gifts and calling himself “your servant.”

After Isaac died and the two brothers buried him, I don’t think Jacob was going to risk taking the inheritance and angering Esau again. I imagine he would have said, “You take it. It was really meant for you.” And Esau would have said, “You take it. You’re the one who received the blessing.” Neither of them would have really meant it. They both would have been posturing for what could have been their eventual agreement. They split it 50/50.

But that’s just fanciful conjecture.
 

paarsurrey

Active Member
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Points
6
Thanks Jane and Paarsurrey. As you’ll see, we have 3 answers among us to the question, “Who inherited Isaac's flock and the rest of his ‘estate’ after he died?” Jane says Jacob received 2/3 inheritance; Paarsurrey says there was no inheritance to inherit by anyone. Here are my thoughts.

First, as to the existence of an inheritance, it seems that Isaac did own quite a bit. When Rebecca conspires with Jacob to trick Isaac she says, “Go to the flock and get me two choice kids.” (Genesis 27:10). Isaac also had servants and herders. There’s a reference to them in (Genesis 26:20-21). So according to the Hebrew Bible, Isaac did own a flock large enough that he hired workers. Paarsurrey, are you using the Koran as your reference? That might explain why we see things differently.

As to the double portion rule, my guess is that it didn’t exist in the ancient Israel of Isaac’s time. Double portion is first mentioned in Deuteronomy, which discusses the laws of Moses, and Moses didn’t appear until much later. Also, when Isaac and Esau realize Jacob’s deception, Isaac doesn’t say, “at least you’ll get 1/3.” Instead he says “I have already made him your lord, and I have given him all his brothers as servants…What then can I do for you my son?” (Genesis 27:37) So this indicates that Jacob was entitled to everything.

However…

However nothing. I was all set to make the case that Esau ended up inheriting everything but as I was checking my facts and gathering my chapters and verses, I discovered that the chronology of events I was assuming was, in fact, not true. Too bad. It was going to make for such an interesting discussion.

Never-the-less I will still conjecture that although Jacob was entitled to everything he didn’t receive everything. Consider how scared Jacob was some 20 or so years later when he and Esau briefly reunited. He was tripping over himself trying to give him gifts and calling himself “your servant.”

After Isaac died and the two brothers buried him, I don’t think Jacob was going to risk taking the inheritance and angering Esau again. I imagine he would have said, “You take it. It was really meant for you.” And Esau would have said, “You take it. You’re the one who received the blessing.” Neither of them would have really meant it. They both would have been posturing for what could have been their eventual agreement. They split it 50/50.

But that’s just fanciful conjecture.

Quran has an elaborate system of inheritance for material wealth ; with no favor granted to the first-born.The spirituality of a prophet has got nothing to do with inheritance; that has to be acquired individually; and does not go to the wrong-doers.

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Active Member
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Points
6
Quran has an elaborate system of inheritance for material wealth ; with no favor granted to the first-born. The spirituality of a prophet has got nothing to do with inheritance; that has to be acquired individually; and does not go to the wrong-doers.
Anything occurred to somebody and or anybody during all these years, please. Right?

Regards
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Messages
172
Reaction score
9
Points
18
God may have given the land to Abraham and his descendants but the facts on the ground were probably a little different. It wasn't really theirs in anyone else's eyes until many years later when they waged war for it.

Jacob kept a flock of sheep which he probably herded over long distances. He didn't own land in the way a farmer might but it's possible he had a large grazing territory that he considered his. But when the famine came and he and his family left for greener pastures in Egypt, all that would have been lost to him. The only "treasures" he could bequeath to his sons were his flock, his servants/slaves, and whatever other possessions he had. That may have been no small potatoes for that time and place.

When Moses led the Israelites to Canaan 400 years later, they had to rest the land from the Canaanites. It was only then that the descendants of each of Jacob's sons, i.e., the 12 tribes, divided the land amongst themselves.

The Israelites were only in Egypt for 215 years. The Hebrew Bible and the OT both erroneously have 430 years, but both are incorrect, as one was translated from the other.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Messages
172
Reaction score
9
Points
18
Jacob owned no land; so there was nothing to be divided among his children.
Was there any? Please

Regards

Genesis 33; 18; On his return from Mesopotamia Jacob arrived safely at the city of Shechem in the land of Canaan and set up his camp in a field near the city. He bought that part of the field from the descendants of Hamor father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of silver.

Joseph's mummified remains were returned from Egypt and buried in Shechem.
 
Last edited:
Top