Muslim rant[edit]

A large part of this article is a sham, defamatory in nature to the person on whom the article is written. Such untrue allegations, against an honoured person, is unacceptable and out of place here. Irrespective of which highly edited books have such grave untrue stories, such character assassination of one of our revered prophets is intolerable, to me and to fellow Muslims. I am removing the objectionable story-telling from the article. Atif.hussain (talk) 07:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia. We present what can be sourced. In this case a look in the primary source suffices (hence bible verse references should be given). What you find intolerable is no concern of this encyclopedia. · CUSH · 09:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That said, it is notable that a lot of the content here is stated as fact even though it is taken from old books of dubious origin, and that there may be other (equally dubious) old books that say different things. An example is the story of Jacob's death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.62.224.227 (talk) 20:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Especially problematic, in my view, are the etymologies of biblical names offered here. They certainly cannot have the same status as linguistic discussions elsewhere in the encyclopedia, say in an article on Grimm's Law. It is regrettable that these are simply sited as facts. The heel grabbing story could also be an ex post facto attempt to explain the name Jacob, a folk etymology to explain a non-Hebrew name to a Hebrew audience. The claim that "onlookers" created the name is unsubstantiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.62.224.227 (talk) 20:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talmud is no valid reliable source for biblical tales[edit]

The various Talmuds are later interpretations of biblical material. It is a secondary source that features no whatsoever presentation of verifyable evidence. Therefore it is impermissible as a reliable source. In addition to that it should be noted that the tales out of Genesis do not only have significance in Judaism but in its offshoots such as Christianity and Islam as well. If Talmudic material should be worked into the article, it must be done so in a separate section. · CUSH · 09:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)\[reply]


--are you a Karaite? --Teacherbrock (talk) 09:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a valid source for Talmudic tales? Just askin'. Rwflammang (talk) 02:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob's sons vis-a-vis the tribes of Israel[edit]

The article states that the 12 tribes of Israel are named after Jacob's 12 sons, which is not entirely correct. First of all, there are really 13 tribes of Israel (It is common to refer to "The 12 Tribes" due to the fact that the tribe of Levi was separate and distinct from the others and did not receive a land allotment in Canaan.) Of those 13 tribes, 2 of them (Manasseh & Ephraim) are actually Jacob's grandsons. (And N.B. there is no tribe of Joseph.) Strictly speaking, Jacob essentially adopted Manasseh and Ephraim as his own and accounted them as his sons, but the article--as written--still lacks accuracy. (Note, too, the correct handling of the subject in the article on the Israelites http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelites#The_Tribes_of_Israel.)

Will revise, while trying to maintain succinctness. Jpmacd (talk) 14:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old Testament characters[edit]

Abraham - Amenemhet I

Jacob - Yakubher

Moses - Thuthmose III

David - Psusennes I

Solomon - Siamun

WillBildUnion (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See the original research guidelines and the reliable source guidelines. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Im aware of the guidelines, this is not original research, and it's on talk page so it should not be problem. The hyksos were hebrews and hebrews rose in power in Egypt. This is not original research. All this can be backed up by university sources, but at this point I only leave this to the talk page.WillBildUnion (talk) 17:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Putting it on the talk page does not make it "not original research." Provide those sources with proper citations, or else it remains in the realm of original research. Also, the identification between the Hebrews and the Hyksos is not universally accepted among scholars. At most, you would be able to put "John Smith in This is my book on history, believes that..." Ian.thomson (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Behavoral Character[edit]

It is an embellishment to say Dinah was kidnapped, and also to say raped. There is nothing to prove this other than the desire to justify the slaughter of which Jacob does NOT justify it. Further, Judah was born when Nimrod the founder of Babel died at 500 (2256am) 600 years after the Flood, thus Jacob finally blessed Judah as Shiloh (The Christ), but before Joseph was thought to be dead, Jacob had changed his mind for 17 years because like Sarah and Isaac this Joseph was his firstborn son of the first legal wife by promise though married 7 days after the older sister for another 7 years work. As such the coat is significant as christ-king when the fact comes forth that Hamurabi of Babylon had died (1750bc). Jacob had fled Syria in 1761bc when he heard his distant relatives of Mari had been dragged off in 1763bc to Babylon, and the city destroyed in 1762bc. Lastly, blessings were given at 137 years for two reasons, one 137 Julian = 139x 360 days, and two Ishmael revealed longevity was still decreasing by dying at that age, so Isaac blessed at 137 when his sons were 77, as his father Abram had also lost Sarah (127) when he was 137. So Jacob blessed his sons 10 years before he died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.71.174 (talk) 11:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Plain' man?[edit]

I've just reverted an edit about a description of Jacob in the King James as a 'plain man' meaning perfect, as it was unsourced and only showed one side of what seems to be a disagreement among translators. See [1] for instance. Dougweller (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Origins[edit]

The recently added 'Origins' section connects the Genesis story with older Israelite folk-legend. As I am not aware of any ancient Israelite text predating the Thorah, especially one mentioning names like Jacob, Esau and Laban, I'm very curious to where this story is found. I have no access to the provided reference ('Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible'), so maybe someone who does can clarify this? I suppose mentioning the archaeological source for this specific folk-legend would be quite notable for inclusion in the article. Lindert (talk) 07:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the source. The page number given does not even mention Jacob. MCSKY (talk) 01:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that information. The page number must be a mistake then. On Google Books I have found the Dictionary's entries for Jacob and Esau.
I quote here the relevant parts on which the section is apparently based:
Jacob, p. 460:

"In the astro-mythological interpretation, popular by the end of the 19th century, Jacob is said to represent the nocturnal sky, catching the heel ('aqeb) of his predecessor, the Sun. In his capacity as the nightly sky, Jacob has to engage in a vigorous fight against ->Esau, the Red and ->Laban, the White. They are manifestations of the Sun in the morning and in the evening (Goldzieher 1876). Meyer though that these sagas of rivalry reflected ancient mythology adducing the myth of Samemroumos and Ousoos in support of this view (...) Israelite tradition however transformed the mythological figures into genealogical heroes. In his opinion this hero (or deity) Jacob would have been home in Transjordan..."

Esau, p. 306:

"Early critical scholarship surmised behing the saga of Jacob and Esau a mythological tale of twin rivalry (...) Frequent reference has also been made to the culture myth of Samemroumos and Ousoos as narrated by Philo of Byblos."

Reading this, I find several things wrong with the current version:
"In older Israelite folk-legend Jacob represented the night sky, catching the heel of his twin and predecessor, the Sun ..."
As can be deduced from the source above, the view that Jacob and Esau's story was based on ancient mythology is based on speculation, not actual archaeological evidence of such 'older Israelite folk-tale'. Note that the writings of Philo of Byblos date to the second century CE, although allegedly based on older Phoenician legend.
Furthermore it is a view held by 'early critical scholarship', in particular 'the astro-mythological interpretation, popular by the end of the 19th century'. The source does not state or imply that this view is maintained by modern scholars.
Finally, the notion that (this particular story of) Genesis was written in the 5th century is far from established, as there is currently no concensus about the date and authorship of (various parts of) the Torah.
-- In conclusion, noting that this is a speculative viewpoint popular in the late 1800s, I doubt it is notable for inclusion and at the very least it should be properly attributed and more accurately represent the source. Lindert (talk) 07:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: I reworded the paragraph. I won't remove it, but I personally don't think it contains much valuable info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lindert (talk • contribs) 14:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the text. Couldn't find any other sources referring to this interpretation, a brief allusion in a dictionary entry does not appear to warrant inclusion in the page. MCSKY (talk) 02:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biblical longevity template[edit]

This template ought to be deleted outright. It is not of encyclopedic value and is pure trivia. Why is it features so prominently here? Why is it here at all? Why not a template listing Biblical figures by the number of times they are mentioned in the Bible, the number of spouses or children they had, or simply by alphabetical order? The template is WP:UNDUE. Please remove it.Griswaldo (talk) 04:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have deleted this from both Moses and Jacob with the same talk comment and not taken my hint to centralize discussion at the ongoing mediation. Because this issue is relevant to some 80 articles, please continue there. JJB 05:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
That's not a rationale for keeping the template on this page. We are discussing the content of this page, here on the talk page related to that content. Please explain why it should be included here. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 05:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:MULTI, please centralize discussion as above. This template and its sister appear in 82 articles. JJB 05:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Can you please list the articles and provide a link to the main template page? I do not know how to find it. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 13:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The articles are those listed on the templates and the additional ones at that mediation discussion you haven't commented on, to which IMJ is now also inviting you. The template is Template:Biblical longevity (to keep it nondescript I did not use the v-d-e links). I note that your argument has no direct applicability to Jacob, being a carbon-copy of the Moses request. The question is whether comparison of Jacob's age to other Biblical figures is encyclopedic. Sure enough, the question of Esau's age and the conclusion that he reached the same age 147 as Jacob are given in the Talmud. Even the primary source, Genesis, has Jacob inviting this comparison by saying his age (then 130) did not attain to that of his fathers (Isaac 180, Abraham 175, Terah 205). The list of ages of the Biblical patriarchs appears in too many sources for it to be worthwhile to cull out the most reliable ones. If you'd prefer to move down or hide the template, that would be a more reasonable solution to your concerns as stated. JJB 15:17, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

In-universe tag removed[edit]

Just dropped by, saw the "in-universe" tag on this article, and removed it. The tag was placed by an IP editor, and struck me as inappropriate. If anybody would like to discuss the issue, please respond here. TreacherousWays (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There should be at least a brief mention that most modern Biblical scholars do not believe that these stories have any historicity.[edit]

I feel that it is wrong that articles like this just re-tell stories from the Bible as if they were true when Biblical scholarship has for many years questioned the historicity of the narratives of the Patriarchs and now there are very few Biblical scholars who would accept that there ever was such a person as Jacob or that any of these stories have historical value, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_history. There really needs to be at least one sentence along the lines of "Many Biblical scholars doubt that these stories reflect any actual persons or happenings" or something like that as otherwise it is giving the impression that these lengthy stories in the article are true when it is much more likely that they are inventions of a much later era than the one they are supposedly writing about.Smeat75 (talk) 06:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that many scholars doubt the historicity of the patriarchs. Wikipedia's policy is to be bold, so just go ahead and edit the article. -- Lindert (talk) 08:49, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your right, nothing in the Bible actually happened. It is, however, one of the most attested books of history. Portillo (talk) 08:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The books with Harry Potter are very well attested, and their action is imaginary. Tgeorgescu (talk) 08:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Year of birth / death / etc?[edit]

Various individuals (e.g. Usher) have made calculations as to the year of birth / death / etc. of this individual based on the source text and correlating known dates that are also recorded. These dates should be inserted in the article somewhere. The same goes for articles of other related characters. It would be interesting to show how they arrived at the date as well, if that information is well-known or documented. 16:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Old discussion. tahc chat 20:45, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eponymous and NPOV "ancestor"[edit]

Removal was seems to have been a mistake, many sources call him eponymous. Took seconds to find some. And Wikipedia can't call him the ancestor of the Israelites as though it were a fact. Isn't that obvious? Dougweller (talk) 08:44, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted. If anyone needs them, [2], [3], [4] Dougweller (talk) 11:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jacob. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of citations in the Islamic tradition section[edit]

There are absolutely zero citations for the claim that "[i]n Islamic tradition, Jacob had lost his father, Isaac as well as his wife Rachel in the same year, followed by his loss of his favorite son, Joseph"

Shaykh Saaboonee, in his collection safwatul tafaseer (the Cream of the Tafseer) explains that in the dream Yusuf saw showed "11 stars and the sun and the moon I see them all in the condition of prostration for me", that the sun and the moon are Yusuf's parents, Ya'qub and Raheel. So I am completely unaware as to where the person(s) derived this information that Raheel died in the year that Yusuf was thrown in the well, as this goes against a well known tafseer that cites several other tafaseer.

This entire sentence is so poorly substatiated that I am absolutely shocked that Wikipedia has let it stand for so long. It needs to be amended ASAP with proper source(s) to back up its claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.160.93.47 (talk) 17:21, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed someone needs to take away this claim until they are able to back it up with a proper source. Jalil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.153.70 (talk) 02:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

etymology[edit]

Editor Editor2020 reverted my edit with the edit summary ??.

My AWB script is looking for and removing italic markup in and around ((lang)) templates so that the markup may be removed before I re-enable that part of the template's error detection mechanism – it was disabled while many of the ((lang-??)) templates hard-coded italic markup in their calls to ((lang)).

I also hand-tweaked that edit because of stuff like this:

((lang|he| ''Yaʿaqob '' יעקב'' ))

Here we have a mixture of left-to-right (mostly) Latn script followed by right-to-left Hebr script. The purpose of ((lang)) is to add correct html markup so that browsers and screen-readers properly render or speak the non-English text. Mixing two scripts (Latn & Hebr) is not good form. Additionally, that template has malformed italic markup (3 × ''). So I fixed it:

((lang|he-Latn|Yaʿaqob)) ((lang|he|יעקב|rtl=yes)) → Yaʿaqob יעקב

I included -Latn to identify the script as Latn and so that the template automatically renders in italics. I wrapped the Hebr-script text in its own template with |rtl=yes because Hebr-script is read/writteen right-to-left. Direction is not required for he-Latn because all Latn script is read/written left-to-right. I did not use he-Hebr because that language code / script pair is classified as suppressed by IANA.

I have re-edited §Etymology.

There is stuff remaining in the current version of the article text that needs looking into:

  1. some of the Latn-script Hebrew is not wholly written using Latn script; I suspect, but don't know (because I don't read Hebrew) that this isn't correct transliteration. I have marked these instances
  2. the words śarah, śarar, and el are Latn-script Hebrew? If so, they should be marked as such:
    ((lang|he-Latn|śarah)), ((lang|he-Latn|śarar)), and ((lang|he-Latn|el))
    śarah, śarar, and el

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2018[edit]

Dinah was not Jacob's only daughter. She is, however, the only daughter of Jacob mentioned by name in the Bible. 118.92.70.68 (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sam Sailor 21:38, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please change the number of Jacob’s children to 33.
Per Genesis 46:8-25, Jacob had 33 children: 12 sons and 21 daughters. v15
-Zilpah, Leah’s handmaid, had 16 children (almost half of them): 2 sons, Gad and Asher, and 14 daughters.v 18
-Leah had 7: 6 sons (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Isaachar, and Zebulun), and 1 daughter (Dinah) v8-15
-Rachel had 2 sons: Joseph and Benjamin. v19
-Bilhah had 2 sons (Dan and Naphtali, and 5 daughters.
v25 LGTSA (talk) 16:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2020[edit]

Minor edit: Change “inquire of God“ to “enquire of God,” what with ‘inquire’ being a formal investigation, often by an institution or its representative(s), and ‘enquire’ being a polite request by an individual. PhilipBrook (talk) 07:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: See WP:ENGVAR. Aasim 08:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ages of Rachel and Jacob at their marriage.[edit]

Who can even verify these sources that seemingly pull these numbers out of their ass? They're behind paywalls. It's obvious someone is trying to push some bullshit by adding this in there without any explanation whatsoever from the texts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:280:7A:797A:EED8:E020:EA1B (talk) 10:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arithmetic be with you, my son. Olson's paper is freely available at academia.edu . Tgeorgescu (talk) 11:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble is not with that paper's archaeology, biblical scholarship, or math, which for all I know are perfectly sound. The problem is that the whole thing rests on the premise that Genesis is an accurate, literal, account of real events. It's all good and well if you believe that, but it's not an appropriate assumption for a secular encyclopedia. This part of the entry exists to summarize the story as given, not uncritically insert an apologist's interpretation. Therefore, I am going to remove the claims about the characters' ages derived from this source. Nicknimh (talk) 03:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I actually read the source, and I want to apologize for being a hasty idiot. He isn't extrapolating from extra-textual data to arrive at those ages, more discussing how those numbers should be understood. Therefore, I've reverted my overly-hasty edits for the moment. However, I'm still not sure that the text should stand as is. Since the whole point of Olson's article is that the ages should not be taken at face value, I feel that these calculated ages should not be inserted where they are not given in the Bible, because it changes the way the story comes across. It's rather distracting to be confronted with the idea of an octogenarian toiling away in the fields to get married, and that's not something the original story necessarily wanted to convey. It would be a bit like going into the Jonah article and adding a line that said: "The big fish traveled at an average of 55 mph to make it from the Eastern Mediterranean to Ninevah in three days, and was able to survive in both salt and freshwater." Nicknimh (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Age of Rachel[edit]

"Rachel was 14" when Jacob fell in love with her. Any source on this? If not, then this false information should be removed. Rorywatt (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As stated before, the WP:RS is WP:CITEd. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2020[edit]

Change the statement "Rachel was 14, and he loved her immediately" to "He loved her immediately". This article states that Rachel was 14 years old but does not provide a citation. The age of Rachel is never mentioned in the Bible and is therefore unknown. So unless the writer can provide a citation for why he/she came to the conclusion that Rachel was 14, the statement should be deleted outright. Amoschinoz (talk) 13:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Take it to WP:RSN if you think Olson's paper isn't reliable. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, not cited, has to go. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:46, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it was cited, what would be the primary source used? The Book of Genesis offers no specific age for her. Dimadick (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Historicity of Ishmael versus Moses (and Jacob) discussion[edit]

Hi, please see Talk:Ishmael#Historicity of Ishmael versus Moses and Abraham. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 18:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2021[edit]

Change the spelling of "Rebekah", to "Rebecca" in the second sentence under the subheading "Jacob and Esau's birth" 93.189.179.247 (talk) 15:30, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I did that for all instances of "Rebekah", so there's a consistent/standard spelling throughout the whole article. Volteer1 (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2021[edit]

It was not mentioned jacob been circumsized. Sea.eyal (talk) 21:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important to know Sea.eyal (talk) 21:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac got circumsized by abraham but never circumsized jacob. Sea.eyal (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please get consensus for this edit before opening the edit request. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed for non-English translations and transliterations[edit]

Per WP:NOTBLUE, but more importantly per WP:V, we need reliable secondary sources that support the translations and transliterations in non-English languages. Our readers and editors here on enwiki are not expected to know other languages, and there is frequent contention over these terms, particularly in their spelling. Please do not remove maintenance tags until/unless you have fixed the problem indicated. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 04:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the Recent Edit[edit]

This is Very and widely offensive to Over 4 Million Catholics Jews and Muslims all over the world to add the in universe part instead of the normal patriarchal category sorting it is highly offensive and has been done to several other articles and is soap boxing the recent editors beliefs it should be removed and should be changed across these other articles 75.161.237.13 (talk) 16:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2022[edit]

In the last paragraph of the summary, it is claimed that Jacob had twelve children. He had thirteen: twelve sons and one daughter.

 Already done That paragraph also includes He also had a daughter named Dinah.[3] ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2022[edit]

In the last sentence in section "Historicity of the Egyptian Episode" it states "The time of Moses and the expulsion to Palestine..." Moses and the ancient Israelites did not travel to Palestine, they traveled to Israel since Palestine was not established until over one thousand years later. Nowhere in the book does it even mention the words Philistia or Palestine. BojackJimmy (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I expect you'll get pushback because the link to Palestine (region) does encompass the region in question and the name does have a long enough history. But I think a related question is why that weird wording? "Expulsion" is from someplace, not to someplace. Pharaoh expelled the Jews from Egypt, not to anywhere, they traveled of their own volition. Elizium23 (talk) 17:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2022[edit]

I would like to edit the infobox 2601:348:200:A180:343D:A46E:BC46:3A0C (talk) 19:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Khrincan (talk) 19:12, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2023[edit]

change: x= "...is regarded as a patriarch of the Israelites and is an important figure in Abrahamic religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Jacob first appears in the Book of Genesis, where he is described as the son of Isaac and Rebecca, and the grandson of Abraham, Sarah, and Bethuel. " " to:

y="a central patriarchal figure in the Abrahamic faiths including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, has his roots deeply embedded in the lineage of significant Biblical personalities. His narrative begins in the Book of Genesis, where he is delineated as the offspring of Isaac and Rebecca, making him a direct descendant of Abraham and Sarah on his father's side, while through his mother Rebecca, he is a grandson of Bethuel. This dual lineage underscores Jacob's integral role in the spiritual history of the Israelites."

So as to better reflect reality and improve the article. Mr.nazzty (talk) 16:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Xan747 (talk) 00:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob's grandparents[edit]

first para, Jacob is described as "grandson of Abraham, Sarah, and Bethuel". "and Bethuel" is incorrect, as far as I know. 210.187.144.150 (talk) 00:30, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Historicity in lede—edited to correspond to Abraham page[edit]

Edited the lede to precisely correspond to the consensus of the Abraham page with the word Abraham changed to Jacob.

“Most scholars view the patriarchal age, along with the Exodus and the period of the biblical judges, as a late literary construct that does not relate to any particular historical era and after a century of exhaustive archaeological investigation, no evidence has been found for a historical Jacob.” IncandescentBliss (talk) 19:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit unless you establish consensus on the patriarchal age in general at the Abraham page. IncandescentBliss (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JOSEPH is one of the 12 tribes (this was left out)[edit]

Only 11 sons were mentioned and there are 12. Joseph is the most important since Joseph was Jacob's favorite and he was abandoned by his brothers into a pit and he escaped and later led his family into Egypt. 2603:8000:E340:2F6A:94B2:1605:B1D9:9236 (talk) 13:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories