Let me go

By the time we get to Genesis 30, Leah had given birth to six sons and a daughter. Rachel had given birth to Joseph. Jacob must have been working for his father-in-law for a minimum of 14 years. He suddenly had 11 children by Leah, Rachel, and their servants. Now he wanted to go back home. His parents had never seen his children and he wanted to go back to his own country.

When he asked Laban to allow him to leave and take his wives and children with him, Laban asked him to stay by. God had blessed Laban because of Jacob's wise care of the flocks. Apparently, Laban still considered him part of his own household and had not given him anything with which to start his own flocks. This is an important issue, since in Bible time, wealth was reckoned in livestock. It strikes me as a pretty stingy streak Laban had. He was clearly taking advantage of Jacob, even though in those times things were different. Jacob asked for the outcasts of any flock: the speckled and black sheep and goats. No sheep with any marks on it could be used as a sacrifice for sin, so Jacob would have to buy from Laban what he would need for his family. It's interesting also that Jacob stated that he didn't want Laban to think he had stolen anything from him, or that he had gotten his wealth dishonestly. I wonder why he said that--I'd never ask for something from my mother and then clarify what I've asked for so she wouldn't think ill of me. That is strange to me.

Laban turned over his speckled and black lambs and goats, and then put three days distance--or about 30 miles--between the two of them so they wouldn't get their livestock mixed up. Then, Jacob was smart enough to strengthen his herds and to breed only the strong ones of the flock, not the weak ones. Laban bred both strong and weak and thus his herd was not of the same caliber as Jacob's.

In all these things, we get a picture that Jacob worked hard, was smart, and tried to do well for his family. There is nothing to suggest that he had done anything unreasonable in his request to Laban, nor how he managed his own affairs.

In the family social science research literature, a fair number of articles exist about the challenges unique to family businesses. Resentment happens, children who should be growing into the next "boss" of the family are kept under the thumb of a parent with declining energy or capability; a new idea of the offspring is viewed through the lens of his or her "wild oat" behavior years before, and their credibility or ideas are not honored. Children begin to squabble over who will get what when the older generation steps down from leadership, or when they die. In Bible times, children were considered part of the family heritage until they married--if they were men. If they were women, they were a liability and allowed to go quickly to join their husband's family. But at some point, male children were given an inheritance and allowed to move on--as long as it wasn't far from the parents.
Perhaps it was because Jacob wasn't Laban's son that he was expected to serve his uncle. He had been taken in and given refuge. And here he had learned how to have integrity and to move away from his deceptive nature. When he began to advocate for himself and see to his best interests, Laban's true colors appeared.