Genesis 31:20 kjv

And Jacob stole away unawares to Laban the Syrian, in that he told him not that he fled.

Genesis 31:20 nkjv

And Jacob stole away, unknown to Laban the Syrian, in that he did not tell him that he intended to flee.

Genesis 31:20 niv

Moreover, Jacob deceived Laban the Aramean by not telling him he was running away.

Genesis 31:20 esv

And Jacob tricked Laban the Aramean, by not telling him that he intended to flee.

Genesis 31:20 nlt

Jacob outwitted Laban the Aramean, for they set out secretly and never told Laban they were leaving.

Genesis 31 verses

Genesis 31 20 Meaning

Genesis 31:20 describes Jacob's departure from Laban. It states that Jacob "stole away unawares to Laban the Syrian," which means he secretly left without informing Laban of his intentions to flee. This action involved an act of strategic concealment and stealth rather than the physical theft of property, aiming to avoid direct confrontation or interference from his father-in-law.

Genesis 31 20 Context

Genesis chapter 31 finds Jacob in a pivotal moment of transition after twenty years of serving Laban. For the majority of this time, Jacob endured Laban's manipulative practices, including deceit concerning his wives and frequent changes to his wages. Although Jacob accumulated great wealth, it was explicitly due to divine intervention and blessing (Gen 30:31-43). The strained relationship culminated when Jacob perceived Laban's unfavorable countenance and heard his sons' jealousy (Gen 31:1-2). At this point, God directly commanded Jacob to "Return to the land of your fathers and to your kindred" (Gen 31:3, 13).

Jacob, in consultation with his wives Rachel and Leah, recounted Laban's ill-treatment and recognized the Lord's hand in his prosperity and in guiding their return. He feared Laban's probable violent opposition if he attempted to leave openly with all his possessions and family, given Laban's proven unscrupulous nature and sense of entitlement (Gen 31:31). Thus, the clandestine departure was Jacob's strategy to obey God's command while safeguarding his household and newly acquired wealth, believing Laban would forcibly retain his daughters and prevent their departure. This act of "stealing away" highlights the difficult circumstances and relational tension surrounding Jacob's departure, a final maneuver in his complex relationship with his uncle.

Genesis 31 20 Word analysis

• And Jacob (וַיִּגְנֹב יַעֲקֹב, vayyig·nov Ya'akov): "Jacob" (יַעֲקֹב, Ya'akov) meaning "heel-grabber" or "supplanter." This name often foreshadows his actions, which involve cunning or strategic maneuvers, fitting with the "stole away" verb used here. It reflects his consistent character, navigating life through shrewdness, though sometimes divinely guided or utilized.

• stole away (יִּגְנֹב, yig·nov): From the Hebrew root גָּנַב (ganav). While often meaning to "steal" or "kidnap" a physical object or person, in this context, when followed by a term like "the heart of" or an indirect object, it denotes to "deceive," "outwit," "to slip away from unawares," or "to steal someone's mind/knowledge." It implies taking something away secretly, which here is the awareness of Laban. It signifies a secretive and unexpected departure rather than literal theft of possessions, which were rightly Jacob's.

• unawares (לֵב, lev): Literally "heart," here used metonymically to mean "mind," "knowledge," or "attention." The phrase implies that Jacob left without Laban's knowledge or consent, taking Laban's awareness of the event from him. It signifies Jacob deprived Laban of the information about his flight. This phrase explicitly defines the nature of the "stealing" as one of secrecy and withholding information.

• to Laban (לָבָן, Laban): The relationship between Jacob and Laban has been fraught with cunning and deceit on both sides, making this secret departure consistent with their history.

• the Syrian (הָאֲרַמִּי, ha'Arami): Refers to Laban's ethnicity as an Aramean. Arameans were known to inhabit Mesopotamia and Syria. This identifier can carry connotations within biblical narrative of cultural traits, sometimes associated with specific types of dealings or wisdom, possibly implying a connection to Jacob's own "cunning" side or a backdrop against which Laban's specific trickery unfolded. It roots Laban in a particular geo-cultural identity from which Jacob is now escaping.

• in that he told him not (כִּי לֹא הִגִּיד לוֹ, ki lo higgid lo): This clause acts as an explanation or elaboration of "stole away unawares." It reiterates and confirms the meaning, clarifying how Jacob "stole away unawares"—by not informing Laban.

• that he fled (כִּי בֹרֵחַ הוּא, ki boreah hu): From the Hebrew root בָּרַח (barach), meaning "to flee" or "to escape." This signifies the active departure from a place, indicating a swift and deliberate movement away from a perceived danger or oppression. Jacob was literally in flight, motivated by both divine command and personal fear.

• "Jacob stole away unawares to Laban": This phrase encapsulates the core action: Jacob’s intentional and clandestine departure. It highlights his agency and cunning, mirroring his character’s development throughout the narrative, especially in his dealings with Isaac, Esau, and Laban. It suggests a strategic move to preempt Laban’s likely aggressive reaction.

• "he told him not that he fled": This additional phrase serves as a specific explanation for how Jacob "stole away unawares." It underscores the deliberate withholding of information, signifying Jacob's decision that direct communication with Laban about his departure would not be feasible or safe.

Genesis 31 20 Bonus section

• The term "stole away" (גָּנַב, ganav) used for Jacob's departure is a unique narrative echo of the deceptive acts throughout the Book of Genesis. It highlights a common thread in Jacob's life, where he navigates through situations using cleverness, at times leading to direct confrontation (Gen 27), and at other times, a stealthy escape (Gen 31). This linguistic choice subtly reinforces the wrestling matches (literal and metaphorical) that define Jacob's journey.
• While Jacob's method of departure appears morally ambiguous from an external viewpoint, the surrounding narrative clearly frames it as a justified response to Laban's sustained injustice and an act of obedience to God's specific command. The theological emphasis shifts from evaluating Jacob's actions to God's overarching providence that ensured Jacob's return and prosperity, irrespective of the ethical nuances of the escape strategy.
• The Aramean identity of Laban (and through him, Jacob and his family being linked to the Arameans before settling in Canaan) further connects to Deuteronomic and prophetic descriptions (e.g., Deut 26:5: "A wandering Aramean was my father"), indicating a rich historical and cultural backdrop of interactions and intermarriage between peoples, often marked by intricate societal codes and familial dealings.

Genesis 31 20 Commentary

Genesis 31:20 reveals Jacob's method of exiting Laban's sphere of influence: a calculated and secret departure without direct communication. This act, while appearing deceptive, must be understood within its complex biblical context. Jacob was under divine command to return to his homeland (Gen 31:3, 13) after twenty years of service during which Laban repeatedly exploited him (Gen 31:7, 41). Jacob's decision to flee secretly stemmed from a rational fear that Laban would use force to retain his daughters and claim their possessions as his own, depriving Jacob of what God had blessed him with.

This passage is not a moral commendation of deception but an accurate narrative of human behavior in strained circumstances, demonstrating how God's purposes are accomplished even through imperfect human actions and decisions. Jacob, true to his name "supplanter," employs strategic cunning once more. However, unlike earlier deceptions for personal gain (e.g., birthright and blessing), this action is in line with a divine directive to return to his ancestral land, implying a form of "sanctified" necessity rather than pure trickery. The narrative implicitly raises questions about the justification of "white lies" or secretive actions when one is escaping a genuinely oppressive situation or fulfilling a divine mandate under duress. Ultimately, God's protection of Jacob immediately after this event (Gen 31:24, 42) underscores His sovereignty over the outcome, regardless of the precise human methods employed.