|New International Version (© 2011)|
That same day he removed all the male goats that were streaked or spotted, and all the speckled or spotted female goats (all that had white on them) and all the dark-colored lambs, and he placed them in the care of his sons.
King James Bible
And he removed that day the he goats that were ringstraked and spotted, and all the she goats that were speckled and spotted, and every one that had some white in it, and all the brown among the sheep, and gave them into the hand of his sons.
American Standard Version
And he removed that day the he-goats that were ringstreaked and spotted, and all the she-goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white in it, and all the black ones among the sheep, and gave them into the hand of his sons;
Young's Literal Translation
and he turneth aside during that day the ring-streaked and the spotted he-goats, and all the speckled and the spotted she-goats, every one that hath white in it, and every brown one among the lambs, and he giveth into the hand of his sons,
Genesis 30:35 Additional TranslationsClarke's Commentary on the Bible
The he-goats that were ring-streaked - התישים העקדים hatteyashim haakuddim, the he-goats that had rings of black or other colored hair around their feet or legs.
It is extremely difficult to find out, from Genesis 30:32 and Genesis 30:35, in what the bargain of Jacob with his father-in-law properly consisted. It appears from Genesis 30:32, that Jacob was to have for his wages all the speckled, spotted, and brown among the sheep and the goats; and of course that all those which were not party-colored should be considered as the property of Laban. But in Genesis 30:35 it appears that Laban separated all the party-colored cattle, delivered them into the hands of his own sons; which seems as if he had taken these for his own property, and left the others to Jacob. It has been conjectured that Laban, for the greater security, when he had separated the party-colored, which by the agreement belonged to Jacob, see Genesis 30:32, put them under the care of his own sons, while Jacob fed the flock of Laban, Genesis 30:36, three days' journey being between the two flocks. If therefore the flocks under the care of Laban's sons brought forth young that were all of one color, these were put to the flocks of Laban under the care of Jacob; and if any of the flocks under Jacob's care brought forth party-colored young, they were put to the flocks belonging to Jacob under the care of Laban's sons. This conjecture is not satisfactory, and the true meaning appears to be this: Jacob had agreed to take all the party-colored for his wages. As he was now only beginning to act upon this agreement, consequently none of the cattle as yet belonged to him; therefore Laban separated from the flock, Genesis 30:35, all such cattle as Jacob might afterwards claim in consequence of his bargain, (for as yet he had no right); therefore Jacob commenced his service to Laban with a flock that did not contain a single animal of the description of those to which he might be entitled; and the others were sent away under the care of Laban's sons, three days' journey from those of which Jacob had the care. The bargain, therefore, seemed to be wholly in favor of Laban; and to turn it to his own advantage, Jacob made use of the stratagems afterwards mentioned. This mode of interpretation removes all the apparent contradiction between Genesis 30:32 and Genesis 30:35, with which commentators in general have been grievously perplexed. From the whole account we learn that Laban acted with great prudence and caution, and Jacob with great judgment. Jacob had already served fourteen years; and had got no patrimony whatever, though he had now a family of twelve children, eleven sons and one daughter, besides his two wives, and their two maids, and several servants. See Genesis 30:43. It was high time that he should get some property for these; and as his father-in-law was excessively parsimonious, and would scarcely allow him to live, he was in some sort obliged to make use of stratagem to get an equivalent for his services. But did he not push this so far as to ruin his father-in-law's flocks, leaving him nothing but the refuse? See Genesis 30:42.
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
he removed. From this it appears, that, as Jacob had agreed to take all the parti-coloured for his wages, and was now only beginning to act upon this agreement, and consequently had as yet no right to any of the cattle, therefore Laban separated from the flock all such cattle as Jacob might afterwards claim in consequence of his bargain, leaving only the black and white with Jacob.
Genesis 31:9 Thus God has taken away the cattle of your father, and given them to me.
Genesis 30:35 Parallel CommentariesBlack Brown Care Dark Female Goats Hand He-Goats Laban Male Ones Removed Ring-Streaked Sheep Speckled Spotted Streaked Striped WhiteBlack Brown Care Dark Female Goats Hand He-Goats Laban Male Ones Removed Ring-Streaked Sheep Speckled Spotted Streaked Striped WhiteTHE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica®.
Genesis 30:35 Mobile Bible
Genesis 30:35 Bible Suite
Genesis 30:35 Biblia Paralela
Genesis 30:35 Chinese Bible
Genesis 30:32 Let me go through all your flocks today and remove from them every speckled or spotted sheep, every dark-colored lamb and every spotted or speckled goat. They will be my wages.
Genesis 30:34 "Agreed," said Laban. "Let it be as you have said."
Genesis 30:36 Then he put a three-day journey between himself and Jacob, while Jacob continued to tend the rest of Laban's flocks.