Genesis 37
1. HAVING disposed, in
the preceding section, of the line of Esau by a
brief sketch of its historical development during the two and a
half
centuries intervening between the founding of the Edomite empire by
Esau’s withdrawing to Mount Seir,
and the days of Moses, the narrative
reverts to the
fortunes of the house of Jacob, the story
of which, after
having suffered a temporary interruption, it likewise carries
forward to the
same point of rest, viz., to the period of the sojourn in
with a glance at the inner family life of the patriarch at Mamre in the vale
of
himself beside his aged and bedridden father Isaac, it
recites the tragic
incidents connected with the sale of Joseph by his
brethren, after which,
first rehearsing the further wickedness of Jacob’s sons in
the matter of
Tamar, it pursues his eventful career from the moment of
his entering
fine linen and decorated with a golden necklace, he rode in
the second state
chariot as Pharaoh’s prime minister and ruler over all the
land. Then,
detailing the various circumstances arising from the famine
which led to his
discovery of his brethren, it ends by describing the
descent of Jacob and his
sons into
delivering his last prophetic blessing to his sons, and
finally the decease of
Joseph himself at the age of 110 years, when, as we learn
from the
subsequent narrative in Exodus, having lost their protector
at the Court,
and
a dynastic change having taken place upon the throne, of Pharaoh, the
sons of
2. By those who
repudiate the Mosaic authorship of Genesis the present
section is variously distributed among the alleged
candidates for the honor
of its composition. Beyond the ascription of ch. 38., to the Jehovist,
there is the most complete absence of unanimity among partitionists as to
whom the different portions are to be assigned. Here, vs. 2-36, which
Tuch declares to be the work of the Elohist,
Bleek affirms to have been
tampered with by the Jehovist,
while Davidson divides it between a
younger Elohist, the Jehovist,
and a subsequent redactor. Ch. 39, is,
according to Davidson, almost exclusively the composition
of the Jehovist;
while, according to Bleek, it has
proceeded nearly entire from the pen of
the Elohist, and Tuch divides it pretty evenly between the two. Tuch again
thinks that chapters 40-50, have been supplied by the fundamental
document, and Bleek recognizes
alterations by the hand of the
supplementer; but Davidson apportions most of them to the Jehovist,
giving the fragments that remain to the younger Elohist and the late
redactor. The insufficient character of the grounds on
which such
assignments are made will be noted in the opposition; in the mean time
the
remark is pertinent that their very diversity is one of the
strongest indirect
proofs of the Mosaic authorship of the entire composition.
1 “And Jacob dwelt in the
land wherein his father was a
stranger (literally, in
the land of the sojournings of his father), in
the
Kalisch, Lange, &c.), but the concluding sentence of the
present, section,
the adversative particle ו,, corresponding to the δε of
the Septuagint,
introducing a contrast between Esau, who dwelt in
who dwelt in the
next division of the book with the customary formula, “These
are the
generations” (Septuagint,
some manuscripts, Quarry, p. 523). Rosenmüller less
happily connects the present verse with ch.
35:29; the Vulgate begins the
next section with v. 3. A similar division of verses to
that proposed will
be found in ch. 25:11.
2 “These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen years old,
was feeding the flock with his brethren; and
the lad was with the sons of
Bilhah, and with the sons of Zilpah,
his father's wives: and Joseph brought
unto his father their evil report.” These are the generations of Jacob. The
opening of a new section as ch. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27; 25:12;
25:19; 36:1). Joseph, the son of Rachel, and born in Padan-aram (ch. 30:24) –
being seventeen years old, - literally, a son of seventeen years, thus making
Jacob 108 - was feeding the flock with his brethren; - literally, was shepherding;
not his brethren (Bush), but with
his brethren, in, or among, the flock - and
the
lad was - literally, and he a lad, aetate, moribus et innocentia (Lyra), non
tantum aetate
sed et ministerio (
as a note of his age. Pererius, following the Vulgate, connects the clause with
what precedes; Calvin, Dathius, Lange, Murphy, Kalisch, and others conjoin
it with the words that follow; the Septuagint, Willet, Rosenmüller, Keil,
Ainsworth, Bush, &c. regard it as a parenthetical statement - with - not in the
capacity of a servant (Vatablus) or of a ward (Kalisch), but of a companion –
the sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of Zilpah, his father's wives. With these
rather than the sons of Leah, as being less supercilious and haughty than the
children of the first wife (Lawson), or as being less opposed to him than they
(Lange), or more probably as being nearer to his own age than they (Keil),
or perhaps as having been brought more into contact with the handmaids'
children, and in particular with those of Bilhah, Rachel's maid, who may have
been to him as a mother after
Rachel's death (Rosenmüller). And
Joseph
brought unto his (rather, their) father
their evil report. Not accusavit fratres
suos apud
patrem crimine pessimo (Vulgate), or κατὴνεγκαν ψόλον
πονηρὸν
προς Ισραὴλ
τὸν πατέρα αὐτῶν – kataenegkan psolon ponaeron pros
ton patera auton – brought an
evil report of them to
as if Joseph drew down upon himself their calumnious reports, but carried to his
father an evil report concerning them (Kalisch); not informed him of what he
himself saw of their evil deeds (Lawson), though this need not be excluded,
but repeated the דִּבָּה, or fama, always of a bad character (Rosenmüller),
which was circulating in the
district respecting them - tunics rumores qui
subinde de iis spargebantur (Dathius); - the noun being derived from an
onomatopoetic root, דָּבַב,
signifying to go slowly, or to creep about.
3 “Now
son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many
colors.”
Now (literally, and)
because he was the son of his old age - literally, a son of old age (was) he to him;
not a son possessing the wisdom of advanced years (Onkelos), but a son born in
his old age (Rosenmüller, Keil, Kalisch, et alii), which was literally true of Joseph,
since he was born in his father's ninety-first year. Yet as Joseph was only a year or
two younger than the children of Bilhah and Zilpah, and as Benjamin was still later
born than he, the application of this epithet to Joseph has been explained on the
ground that Benjamin was at this time little more than a child (Keil), and had not
much come into notice (Murphy), or perhaps was not born when this portion
of the narrative was originally written ('Speaker's Commentary); or that Joseph
had obtained the name before Benjamin's birth, and that it had clung to him
after that event (Inglis). Josephus ('
Jacob's partiality which is not inconsistent with the statement in the text, viz.,
the beauty of his person and the
virtue of his mind, διὰ τε τὴν τοῦ σώματος
εὐγένειαν καὶ
διά ψυχῆς
ἀρετής – dia te taen
tou somatos eugeneian kai
dia psuchaes aretaes. And he made him a coat of many colors - literally,
a coat (kithoneth, from kathan, to cover; see ch. 3:21) of ends (Keil, Lange),
i.e. a tunic reaching to the ankles, and with sleeves reaching to the wrists,
and commonly worn by boys and girls
of the upper ranks (Josephus, '
7:08, 9; II Samuel 13:18), or a coat of pieces (Kalisch, T. Lewis, Wordsworth);
hence a variegated garment, χιτὼν ποικίλος
– chiton poikilos – many
colors
(Septuagint), tunica polymita (Vulgate), a coat of many colors (Murphy, 'Speaker's
Commentary'). "Such garments
are represented on some of the monuments of
At Beni-Hassan, for example, there is a magnificent excavation forming the tomb
of Pihrai,
a military officer of
appears, who are supposed to be Jebusites, an inscription over one person in the
group reading, "The Chief of the Land of the Jebusites. 'The whole of the captives
are clad in parti-colored garments, and the tunic of this individual in particular
may be called "a coat of many colors" (Thornlcy Smith, 'Joseph and his Times,'
p. 12). It has been supposed that Jacob's object in conferring this distinction
on Joseph was to mark him out as the heir to whom the forfeited birthright
of Reuben (I Chronicles 5:1) was to be transferred (Kurtz, Lange, Gerlach,
Bush, Wordsworth, 'Speaker's Commentary,' &c.); but the historian only
mentions it as a token of affection, such as was customary in those times
for princes to bestow upon their subjects, and parents on their children
(see Thornley Smith, 'Joseph and his Times,' p. 11). Roberts says the same
thing is still done among the Hindus, crimson, purple, and other colors being
often tastefully sewed together for beautiful or favored children (see 'Oriental
Illustrations,' p. 43).
4 “And when his
brethren saw that their father loved him more than all
his brethren, they hated him, and could not
speak peaceably unto him.”
And when (literally, and) his brethren saw that their father loved him more
than all his brethren, they (literally, and they) hated him, - as Esau hated
Jacob (ch. 27:41; compare ch. 49:23) - and could not speak peaceably unto him –
literally, they were not able to speak of him for peace, L e. they could not address
him in such a way as to wish him well; they could not offer him the customary
salutation of Shalom, or Peace.
4 “And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it
his brethren: and they hated
him yet the more.” And Joseph dreamed a dream (in which, though, as the sequel
shows, intended as a Divine communication, there was nothing to distinguish it
from an ordinary product of the mind), and he told it to his brethren: - not in pride,
since there is no reason to suppose that Joseph as yet understood the celestial origin
of his dream but in the simplicity of his heart (Kalisch, Murphy), though in doing so
he was also guided, unconsciously
it may be, but still really, by an overruling
providence, who made use of this very telling of the dream as a step
towards
its fulfillment (Lawson) - and they hated him yet the more - literally, and they
added again to hate him.
Joseph at Home (vs. 2-4)
“Joseph,
being seventeen years old.”
Picturesque scene is the
encampment of Jacob. How well the dark camel-hair tents harmonize
with
the
general character of the spots in which they are pitched. Peace and
purity should dwell there. Ten men of the tribe of Jacob are most
depraved,
but
their characters only threw into brighter prominence that of Joseph. It
is
probable that Jacob gave greater attention to the training of Joseph than
to
that of his brethren. He showed favoritism also. His act of giving him a
garb of varied color may not altogether have been so foolish and weak as
sometimes it has been supposed to be. It was simply an ordinary
Eastern
way
of indicating that Joseph was to be the future leader and sheik of the
encampment. Think of Joseph’s home life, and learn:
PREPARE FOR FUTURE LIFE. Doubtless Jacob would tell Joseph of the
promises of God to Abraham, of the tradition of the Deluge and the
Fall;
probably also of his own fleeing from home, and his dream in the
desert,
when he saw “the great altar-stair sloping through darkness up
to God,”
and the angels ascending and descending. Joseph always
afterwards has
great faith in dreams. No book had he. The Bible was not
written.
Traditions and oral teaching
formed his mental training.
EMPLOYMENT. His
father loved him too dearly to allow him to grow up
in habits of idleness. He learned to handle the crook and to
become a
faithful messenger. No work is to be despised, for all may be a
preparation
for future usefulness.
WRONGDOING. The
lives of Joseph’s brethren were sinful, and their
doings deceitful. Some things
he is obliged to know about of which it is
dangerous to keep silence. The
welfare of the whole tribe was being risked
by the elder brothers,
and Joseph, fearing that, tells his father, or seeks
counsel that he may be strengthened to resist evil influence.
FUTURE. The
two dreams concerning the sheaves, and the sun and moon
and stars, brought hate from his brethren, but they had an
influence on
Joseph’s after life. They were
remarkably fulfilled. We all have some such
visions. We build “castles in the air.” The stern realities of
life tone down
our dreams. It is well to have some such dreams. Without them
few make
any advance in life. We are not to be like mere senseless
stones, but
growing plants. Better is it to bear fruit than to wait to become
only the
sport of circumstances.
6 “And he said unto them, Hear, I pray you, this dream
which I have dreamed:”
Though Joseph did not certainly know that his dream was supernatural, he may
have thought that it was, the more so as dreams were in those times commonly
regarded as mediums of Divine communication; and in this case it was clearly
his duty to impart it to the household, and all the more that the subject of it
seemed to be for them a matter of peculiar importance. In the absence of
information to the contrary, we are warranted in believing that there was nothing
either sinful or offensive in Joseph s spirit or manner in making known his dreams.
That which appears to have
excited the hostility of his brethren was not the mode
of their communication, but the character of their contents.
7 “For, behold, we were binding sheaves in
the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose,
and also stood upright; and, behold, your
sheaves stood round about, and
made obeisance to my sheaf.” For (literally,
and), behold, we were binding
sheaves - literally, binding things bound, i.e. sheaves, alumim, from alam, to bi9 nd;
the order of the words and the participial form of the verb indicating that the
speaker describes the vision as it appeared to his mind - in the field, - literally,
in the middle of the field; from which it would appear that Jacob was not a mere
nomad, but carried on agricultural operations like his father Isaac (ch. 26:12) –
and, lo, - "the הֵנּה, as repeated in his narration, shows that he had a presentiment
of something great" (Lange) - my sheaf arose, and also stood upright (literally,
stood, i.e. placed itself upright, and remained so); and, behold, your sheaves stood
round about, and made obeisance - i.e. bowed themselves down (compare ch. 23:7,
Abraham bowing to the Hethites)
- to my sheaf.
The
fulfillment of this dream
occurred in
8 “And his brethren said to him, Shalt
thou indeed reign over us? or shalt
thou indeed have dominion over us? And they
hated him yet the more for
his dreams, and for his words.” And his brethren (who had no difficulty in
interpreting the symbol's
significance) said to him (with mingled indignation
and contempt), Shalt thou indeed reign over us? - literally,
reigning, wilt thou
reign? i.e. wilt thou actually reign over us? the emphasis resting on the action
of the verb - or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us? The form of expression
is the same as that of the preceding clause. And they hated him yet the more
(literally and
they added again to hate him) for (i.e.
on account of) his dreams,
and for (or, on account of) his
words.
9 “And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his
brethren, and said,
Behold, I have
dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon
and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. And he dreamed yet another dream, -
the doubling of the dream was designed to indicate its certainty (compare ch. 41:32) –
and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and,
behold, the sun (הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ, the minister, from Chaldee root שְׁמַשׁ, the pael of which
occurs in Daniel 7:10) and the moon - הַיּרֵחַ, probably, if the word be not a primitive,
the circuit-maker, from the unused root יָרַח, = אָרַח, to go about (Furst); or the
yellow one, from יָרַח = יָרַק, to be yellow, ח and ק being interchanged (Gesenius) –
and the eleven stars - rather, eleven stars, כּוכָבִים, globes, or bails, from כָּבַב,
to roll up in a ball (see ch. 1:10) - made obeisance to me -
literally, bowing
themselves to me, the participles being employed ut supra, v. 7. It is apparent
that Joseph understood this second dream, even more plainly than the first,
to foreshadow, in some way unexplained, his future supremacy over his brethren,
who were unmistakably pointed out by the eleven stars of the vision; and this
remarkable coincidence between the number of the stars and the number of his
brethren would facilitate the inference that his parents were referred to under the
other symbols of the sun and moon. In the most ancient symbology, Oriental and
Grecian as well as Biblical (Numbers 24:17), it was customary to speak of noble
personages, princes, etc., under such figures; and the employment of such terminology
by a nomadic people like the Hebrew patriarchs, who constantly lived beneath the
open sky, may almost be regarded as a water-mark attesting the historic credibility
of this page at least of the sacred record.
10 “And he told it to his father, and to his
brethren: and his father rebuked
him, and said unto him, What is this
dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I
and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to
bow down ourselves to thee
to the earth? And he told it to his father, and to his brethren - whom it manifestly
concerned, as, for the like reason, he had reported the first dream only to his brethren.
That he does not tell it to his mother may be an indication that Rachel was by this
time dead. And his father rebuked him, - either to avoid irritating his brethren
(Calvin), or to repress an appearance of pride in Joseph (Lange, Murphy, Inglis),
or to express his own surprise (Candlish) or irritation (Keil), or sense of the absurdity
of the dream (Lawson), which he
further demonstrated when he added - and said
unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed! Shall I and thy mother -
(1)
"Rachel, who was neither forgotten nor lost" (Keil),
who may possibly have
been living at the date of the dream ('Speaker's Commentary'), though then
Joseph could not 'have had eleven brothers; who, being dead, was referred to in
order to show the impossibility of
its ever being fulfilled (Kalisch, Pererius); or
(2)
Leah, as the chief mistress of Jacob's household (Willet, Hughes, Inglis); or
so when he recognized Joseph's greatness and depended on him
for support (ch. 47:12). It is certain that Leah died before the immigration to
to
to resent the claim wh
(3) Bilhah, Rachel,s maid, who had
probably acted as Joseph s mother after Rachel's
death (Jewish interpreters, Grotius,
and others); or, what seems more probable,
(4) the
term "mother"
is here introduced simply for the sake of giving completeness
to the symbol (Kurtz, Murphy) - and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves
to thee - Joseph's brethren ultimately did so in
practically did ich it conveyed.
11 “And his brethren envied him; but his father
observed the saying.”
And his brethren envied him. The verb קָנָא (unused in Kal), to become red
in the face, seems to indicate that the hatred of Joseph's brethren revealed itself
in scowling looks. But his father observed the saying - literally, kept the word,
διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα - dietaeraese to rhaema – kept this saying in mind (Septuagint).
Compare Daniel 7:28; Luke 2:51.
Joseph in His Hather’s
House (vs. 2-11)
·
JOSEPH EMPLOYED WITH HIS BRETHREN.
Ø With them in the sense of as well as them.
That is to say, Joseph no
more than
the other sons of his father was trained to indolence. It is the
duty of
parents to educate their children in some useful and honorable
calling.
Even when not required for procuring daily bread, it is of
advantage
as a means of withdrawing one from temptations which would
otherwise
beset him, while it largely enhances
the enjoyment of existence,
and
enables one to contribute
more or less directly
to the sum of human
happiness. Adam. Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and even Laban, all brought up
their
sons to honest toil.
Ø With them in the sense of like them. That is, he was, as they had been
before
him, instructed in the business of a husbandman and shepherd.
There is
evidence that Jacob combined the callings of an agriculturist as
well as
sheep-farmer, and trained his boys to sow and reap and bind
sheaves
as well as tend the flocks and herds on his estate. From this,
however,
it were wrong to argue that all the children in a family should be
trained
alike, or put to learn the same craft or profession. In Jacob’s day
and
Joseph’s there was little choice of openings for young men who had
aspirations
above the crook or the plough. But in these times the
avocations
of men are as diverse as their gifts; and in all respects it is better
— more beneficial to society at large, and more advantageous
for the
individual
- that a wise discrimination be exercised by parents and guardians
in
selecting spheres of labor for those dependent on or entrusted to them
that
shall be suited to their gifts and tastes.
Ø With them in the sense of beside them. Joseph accompanied his brethren
when they
tended the flocks or reaped the ripened grain, and in particular
associated
himself, for reasons suggested in the Exposition, with the sons
of Bilhah and Zilpah. It was a
privilege which Joseph enjoyed that he did
not need
to go from home to learn his trade; and doubtless Joseph’s
amiable
disposition would make the society of his father’s sons more
agreeable
to him than the company of strangers.
·
JOSEPH PREFERRED ABOVE HIS BRETHREN.
Ø
By his father.
o
The ground of Jacob’s partiality for
Joseph. He was the son of
Jacob’s
old age.
However this expression may be explained (see Exposition), the
amount of
it seems to be that Joseph had come to gladden Jacob’s heart
after a
considerable period of waiting, and at a time when Jacob was
beginning
to feel himself an old man. Hence more than to any of his
other
children Jacob’s affections went out to the firstborn of Rachel,
and this
affection could not fail to strengthen after Rachel’s death.
It is just
possible also that it was kept alive and fostered by a
reminiscence of Rachel’s beauty, which he saw reproduced in the
well-proportioned frame and finely-cut features of the growing lad.
Anyhow, Jacob’s
fondness for Joseph was palpable; and without
affirming
that it was right, it may at least be contended that it was
natural,
the more especially when Joseph’s
piety is contrasted
with the
notorious wickedness of Jacob’s other sons.
o
The exhibition of Jacob’s partiality for
Joseph. Many parents who
find
themselves in Jacob’s situation, drawn to one child more than
another
in their families, make an effort at least to conceal a preference
which in
their inmost hearts they cannot but feel to be justifiable. But
Jacob,
with a sad lack of prudence, displayed his superior estimation
of
Rachel’s son by presenting him with a rich and valuable coat of ends
or pieces
(see Exposition). As might have been expected, such a mark
of
preference was distasteful to his other children, and, had it not been
for
Joseph’s superior character, might have been morally hurtful to
Joseph himself. As it was, it was no kindness to Joseph, but only a
foolish
gratification to Joseph’s father.
Ø By God. Joseph was honored to receive dreams prophetic of his future
greatness.
The first, the dream of the bowing sheaves, was a Divine
foreshadowing of his advancement above his brethren; and the second, the
dream of
the nodding orbs, of his elevation above all the members of his
family.
Even had they not concerned himself at all, to have been made the
recipient
of Divine communications was an honor; much more when these
communications related to his own exaltation. This preference of Joseph
was
unquestionably gracious, but it was also natural (I Samuel 2:30)
·
JOSEPH HATED BY HIS BRETHREN.
Ø
The cause of their hatred. This was:
o
The superior place which he enjoyed in
their father s affection
(v. 4).
Parents may
here observe the danger of cherishing, and especially of
manifesting,
a preference of one member of the family above another.
Unless in very
exceptional circumstances, all are equally entitled to a
father’s
care and a mother’s love.
o
The superior piety he displayed above themselves. It is difficult to
credit
the actors in the Shechemite and
the shape
of religion. Certainly they were not looked upon as exemplary
characters
by those who had the misfortune to live beside them. Out of
their father’s sight they shook off any
little restraint which his presence
may have inspired. Their scandalous behavior became the talk
of every
neighborhood they chanced to visit; and Joseph hearing it, as in duty
bound,
reported it to Jacob. Not that the mere reporting of it at home
would
much concern these reckless youths. Possibly it would exasperate
their
minds against their brother. But the thing which would incense them
most would be
the disinclination which he
showed to run with them into
the same excess of riot. (I
Peter 4:4)
o
The superior honor he received from God.
The brethren clearly
enough
understood
the dreams to contain a prognostication of Joseph’s future, else
why did
they allow themselves to become inflamed with anger on account
of a
foolish boy s fancies? At least they believed Joseph regarded them in
this
light, and they hated him on that account.
Ø
The progress of their hatred.
o
They omitted to give him the customary
salutation of Shalom. It is
a bad
sign when a man declines to exchange friendly greetings with
his
neighbor, and much more with his brother.
o
They passed on to deep and bitter hatred. They hated him yet the
more for
his dreams and his words. Evil passions have a tendency to
grow, and
should be nipped in the bud. Obsta principiis (resist the
beginnings)
o
They envied him; the fierce malignity of their enraged spirits
burning in
their bosoms, suffusing their countenances with
ominous looks
and angry scowls, and generally expressing
itself in
dislike, irritation, and annoyance.
Ø
The end of their hatred. It was impossible that the gathering storm
should continue long without bursting. All things mundane, evil
as
well as good, strive after completeness. “Lust, when it hath conceived,
bringeth forth sin: sin,
when it is finished, bringeth forth death”
(James 1:15). Hence,
“whosoever hateth
his brother is a murderer”
(I John 3:15); initially in
thought, and ultimately, granting time
and
opportunity, in deed. The murderous feeling of Joseph’s brethren
very speedily found occasion
to become the fratricidal act.
12 “And his brethren went to feed their father's flock in Shechem.”
I.e. the modern Nablous, in the plain of Muknah, which belonged to Jacob partly
by purchase and partly by conquest (see ch. 33:19; 34:27). Shechem was at a
considerable distance from the vale
of
this time resided.
13 “And
come, and I will send thee unto them. And he
said to him, Here am I.”
And
flock (literally,
Are not thy brethren shepherding?) in Shechem? come,
and I will
send thee unto them. Either he:
· was solicitous of the safety of his sons while in the vicinity of Shechem, or
· he hoped to effect a reconciliation between them and Joseph.
And he (i.e. Joseph, in response to this invitation, expressed a willingness to
undertake a mission to his brethren, and) said to him, Here am I.
14 “And he said to him, Go, I pray thee, see whether
it be well with thy brethren,
and well with the flocks; and bring me word
again. So he sent him out of the vale
of
see whether it be well with thy brethren (literally, see the place of thy brethren),
and well with the flocks (literally, and
the peace of the flock); and bring me word
again. So
(literally, and) he
sent him out of the vale of
and he same to Shechem - a
distance of sixty miles.
15 “And a certain man found him, and, behold, he
was wandering in the field:
and the man asked him, saying, What seekest thou? 16 And he said, I seek my
brethren: tell me, I pray thee, where they feed their flocks.” And a certain man
(or simply a man) found him, and, behold, he was wandering in the field (obviously
seeking some thing or person): and the man asked him, saying, What seekest
thou?
And he said, I seek my brethren: - or, more emphatically, My Brethren I (am)
seeking - tell me, I pray thee, where they feed their flocks - or, Where (are) they
shepherding?
Joseph Leaving Home (vs. 14-15)
“Go, I pray thee, see whether, see whether it be well with
thy brethren.” Joseph left
home unexpectedly. He knew not when he left it to seek his brethren that he would
never come back again.
After a longer journey than he anticipated Joseph finds his
brethren.
There are generally companions,
teachers, ministers to help.
help himself. The snares were not such as were willingly
entered. The
wicked entrapped him. On This youth, far from home, defenseless,
and
kindly-intentioned, nine cowardly men fell.
FOR HIM WHEN HIS EARTHLY FATHER COULD NOT. Reuben was
the means of saving him from death. Sold into slavery, he was still on the
highway to eminence. We
have to beware of hateful and murderous
thoughts, remembering “that he that hateth
his brother is” (so far as intent
goes) “a murderer.” In all journeyings we have to commit our way unto the
Lord, and he will guide and defend. (Proverbs 3:6)
17 “And the man said, They
are departed hence; for I heard them say, Let us
go to
And the man said, They
are departed hence; for I heard them say, Let us go to
direction of the plain of Esdraelon, situated on the great caravan road from
prophet (II Kings 6:13-18), and, though now a deserted ruin, still called by its
ancient name. And Joseph
went after his brethren, and found them in
"Just beneath Tell Dothan, which still preserves its name, is the little oblong
plain, containing the best pasturage in the country, and well chosen by Jacob's
sons when they had exhausted for a time the wider plain of Shechem" (Tristram,
'
18 “And when they saw him afar off, even before he
came near unto them,
they conspired against him to slay him.” And when (literally, and) they saw
him afar off, even (or, and) before he came near unto them, they (literally,
and they)
conspired against him (or,
dealt with him fraudulently) to slay him.
19 “And they said one to another, Behold, this
dreamer cometh.”
And they said one to another (literally, a man to his brother), Behold, this dreamer –
literally, this
lord of dreams - cometh -
expressive of rancor, contempt, and hatred.
20 “Come now therefore, and let us slay him, and
cast him into some pit, and
we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured
him: and we shall see what will
become of his dreams.” Come now therefore, and lot us slay him, and cast
him into some pit (literally, into one of the pits or cisterns in the neighborhood),
and we will say (to his
father and ours), Some (literally, an) evil beast hath
devoured him (which will account for his disappearance); and we shall see
what will become of his dreams - or, what his dreams will be.
21 “And Reuben heard it, and he delivered him
out of their hands; and said,
Let us not kill
him. 22 And
Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast
him into this pit that is in the
wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that
he might rid him out of their hands, to
deliver him to his father again.”
And Reuben (the eldest son, and therefore probably regarding himself as in
some degree responsible for
Joseph's safety) heard it, and he delivered him
out of their hands; and said, Let us not kill him -
literally, Let us not destroy
his life (nephesh). And Reuben said (further) unto
them, Shed no blood, but
cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness (i.e. into a dry pit that was near),
and lay no hand upon him; that (the adverb indicates the purpose Reuben had
in view) he
might rid him (translated above deliver him) out of their hands,
to deliver him (or, more correctly, to return him) to his father again.
God’s
THEIR
OWN PLANS. The word to Abraham (ch. 15:13) does
not seem to have been thought of by Jacob. After long
wandering he
seemed to be settled in
Ø
Jacob’s injudicious
fondness for Joseph,
Ø
the anger and
murderous design of his brethren (compare
John 11:50; Acts 3:17),
Ø
Reuben’s timid effort
for his deliverance (compare Acts 5:38),
Ø
Ø
Joseph’s imprisonment
by Potiphar,
Ø
the conspiracy in
Pharaoh’s household,
were so many steps by which the sojourn in
So in the
founding of the Christian Church. The
writing on the cross
(John 19:20) pointed to three
separate lines of history, two of them
pagan, which combined to bring about the sacrifice of Christ and
the spread of the gospel. So in the case of
individuals. God s promises
are sure (II Corinthians 1:20). There may seem to be many
hindrances,
from ourselves (Psalm 65:3) or from circumstances; but no cause
for
doubt (Luke 12:32; 22:35). Unlikely or remote causes are often
God’s
instruments. The envy of the Jews opened for
imprisonment, a door to the Gentiles which otherwise he would not have
had (Acts 21:28; Philippians 1:13).
GOOD (Compare Romans
9:19). The cruel act of his brethren brought about
the realizing of Joseph’s dreams, his greatness in
whole family during the famine, and the fulfillment of God’s
word; but not
the less was it wrong (ch. 42:21;
compare Matthew 26:24). Moral
guilt depends not upon the result, but on the motive. God has given the
knowledge of redemption to move our will, and the example of Christ
and
the moral law to guide our lives. The fulfillment of His purposes belongs to
Himself. He needs not our help to bring it to pass. It is not His will that we
should forsake His immutable rules of right and wrong, even for the sake
of bringing on the fulfillment of prophecy. Much evil has
sprung from
neglect of this — e.g. the maxim, Faith need not be kept with
heretics.
God’s will and promises are “Trust
in the Lord, and do good, so shalt thou
dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt
be fed. Delight thyself also in the
Lord, and He shall give thee the desires of thine
heart. Commit thy way
unto the Lord; trust also in Him; and He shall bring it to
pass. (Psalm 37:3-5)
Our actions lead to their
appropriate results (Galatians 6:8) at the same
time that they tend to carry out God’s purposes, whether we
will or not.
Each one is a factor in the
great plan which in the course of ages God is
working out (John 5:17). Men such as they are, wise or ignorant,
guided by the Spirit or resisting Him, loving or selfish,
pressing upwards or
following worldly impulses, all are so directed by a power they
cannot
comprehend that they bring about what He wills (Psalm 2:2-4). But
along with this there is a history which concerns ourselves,
which we write
for ourselves, the issues of which depend immediately upon
ourselves. To
each a measure of:
Ø
time,
Ø
knowledge,
Ø
opportunity
has been given, on the use of which
the line of our course depends.
Nothing can turn aside the course of God’s providence;
but upon our
faithfulness or unfaithfulness
depends our place and joy in it. Hence
encouragement to work for Christ, however small our
powers (I Samuel 14:6).
The little is accepted as well
as the great; and as “workers together with him”
(II Corinthians 6:1) our work cannot be in vain.
23 “And it came to pass, when Joseph was come unto
his brethren, that they
stripped Joseph out of his coat, his coat of
many colors that was on him;”
And it came to pass, when Joseph was come
unto his brethren, that they
stripped Joseph out of his coat, his coat of many colors - i.e. his coat of ends,
or coat of pieces (see on v. 3) - that was on him.
24 “And they took him, and cast him into a pit: and
the pit was empty, there
was no water in it. 25 And they
sat down to eat bread: and they lifted up
their eyes and looked, and, behold, a company of
Ishmeelites came from
Gilead with their
camels bearing spicery and balm and myrrh, going to
carry it
down to
the pit was empty, there was no water in it. Cisterns when empty, or only
covered with mud at the bottom, were sometimes used as temporary prisons
(Jeremiah 38:6; 40:15). And - leaving him, as they must have calculated,
to perish by a painful death through starvation, with exquisite cold-bloodedness,
paying no heed to his piteous outcries and appeals (ch. 41:21) - they sat down
(the callous composure of the act indicates deplorable brutality on the part of
Joseph's brethren) to eat bread (perhaps with a secret feeling of satisfaction,
if not also exultation, that they had effectually disposed of the young man and
his dreams): and they lifted up their eyes and looked, and, Behold, a company –
or chath, from arach, to walk; a band of travelers, especially of merchantmen;
a caravan; συνοδία ὁδοιπόροι - sunodia hodoiporoi - (Septuagint; compare
Job 6:19) – of Ishmaelites - Arabs descended from Ishmael, who occupied the
district lying between
record, carried on a trade with the former country. That Ishmael's descendants
should already have developed into a trading nation will not be surprising
(Bohlen) if one reflects that Ishmael may have married in his eighteenth or
twentieth year, i.e. about 162 years before the date of the present occurrence,
that four generations may have been born in the interval, and that, if Ishmael's
sons had only five sons each, his posterity in the fifth generation (not reckoning
females) may have amounted to 15,000 persons (Murphy). But in point of fact
the Ishmaelites spoken of are not described as nations - simply as a company
of merchants, without saying how numerous it was - came (literally, coming)
from Gilcad (see ch. 31:21) with (literally, and) their camels bearing spicery –
נְכאת, either an infinitive from נָכָא, to break, to grind (?), and signifying a
pounding, breaking in pieces, hence aromatic powder (Gesenius); or a
contraction from נְכָאות (Ewald), meaning that which is powdered or pulverized.
Rendered θυμιαμάτα – thumiamata – spices (Septuagint), aromata (Vulgate),
στύραξ – sturax - (
which appear in
Murphy), or storax, the resinous exudation of the styrax officinale, which
abounds in
Inglis) - and balm - ךצרִי (in pause צרי, after vau of union צְרִי), mentioned as one
of the most precious fruits of
balm (Septuagint) and refina (Vulgate), and derived from צָוָה, to flow, to run (hence,
literally, an outflowing, or out-dropping). was unquestionably a balsam, but
of what tree cannot now be ascertained, distilling from a tree or fruit growing in
Lexicons (Gesenius and Furst) sub voce; Michaelis, 'Suppl.' p. 2142; Kalisch
in loco - and myrrh, - לֹט, στακτή - staktae – myrrh (Septuagint), stacte (Vulgate),
pistacia (Chaldee, Syriac, Michaelis, 'Suppl.,' p. 1424), was more probably
ladanum (Gesenius, Furst, Rosenmüller, Keil, Kalisch, et alii), an odoriferous
gum formed upon the leaves of the
cactus-rose, a shrub growing in
L 280-288) - going - the
caravan route from Gilead crossed the
neighborhood of Bersan, and, sweeping through Jenin and the plain of Dothan,
joined another track leading
southwards from
and
to carry it down to
chief emporium for the world's merchandise.
Joseph Among His
Brethren at
Ø Its local destination. This was Shechem,
at a distance of sixty miles
from
and
acquired a small estate (ch. 33:18-19), where Jacob’s
sons
had
committed, a few years before, the terrible atrocity which made the
name of
now
Joseph’s brethren were shepherding their flocks, having gone thither
either on
account of the excellent pasture, or in order to be beyond the
reach of
Joseph and his tale-bearing, or perhaps with a mind to keep an
eye on
their father’s estate.
Ø Its kindly intention. Joseph was dispatched to this important
sheep
station
in the north to require after the welfare of his brethren. That Jacob
should
have sent a son so tender and beloved on a journey so arduous and
an errand
so fraught with danger to himself, considering the well-known
hostility
of his brethren towards him, if a proof of Jacob’s want of
consideration, was also a mark of his parental solicitude for his sons’
behavior,
as well as a sign of his apprehensions for their safety, venturing,
as they
had, to revisit the scene of their former crimes, and perhaps it may
be added,
an indication of his desire to effect a reconciliation between
Joseph and his brethren.
Ø Its cheerful susception.
Though realizing better
than his father did the
perilous
character of the enterprise, in consequence of knowing more
exactly
than his father the depth of malignant feeling entertained towards
him by
his brethren, Joseph did not hesitate to comply with his father’s
instructions, but, making nothing of the long journey, and keeping silent as
to the
risks of increased hatred, if nothing more, which he must have
known
that mission would entail upon him, cheerfully replied, Here am I.
What a bright
example of true filial piety and obedience!
Ø Its successful completion. Arriving at Shechem,
he first failed to find his
brethren,
and then lost his way, but ultimately, on being directed by a
stranger,
discovered them at
carrying
through his father’s commission may be profitably studied, as a
pattern
to all to whom any sort of work, but more especially Christian
work, is
entrusted.
Ø Its innocent occasion — the approach
of Joseph in his long-sleeved and
long-skirted tunic. Like a gunpowder train that has been carefully prepared,
and only
wants the application of a spark to produce an explosion, the
brethren
of Joseph were only needing some trifling incident to elicit all the
fratricidal
hate which was already growing in their bosoms, and that
incident
was supplied by the sight of the coat of ends. It was a striking
illustration of how great results frequently proceed from apparently
insignificant causes (James 3:4-5).
Ø Its murderous character. It aimed at the destruction of Joseph’s
life.
With unexampled
unanimity, not a voice was raised against the proposal
(perhaps made by Simeon) to kill him and cast his lifeless
body into a pit.
The proposal of
Reuben must have been understood by the others as only a
more
excruciatingly cruel way of inflicting death, viz., by starvation. See
here in
Jacob’s family a development of the same spirit of murder as
existed
in Adam’s. Like Cain, the sons of Jacob
were of that wicked one,
and slew (in intention at least) their brother, and for the same reason
(I John 3:12).
Ø Its impious design — to spoil
his dreams. From this it is
evident that they
regarded
his dreams as a
Heaven-sent prognostication of his future
greatness; else, if they regarded them as purely boyish fancies, why
should
they have felt annoyed at what was so
evidently groundless? Hence,
in
seeking to
prevent the realization of his dreams they were actually fighting
against God. But it is just precisely in proportion as wicked men see
God’s
hand in
any prophecy or program that they take measures to insure its
defeat
(compare I Samuel 19:1).
Ø Its ruthless execution. They took him and cast him into a pit.
The crime
was
perpetrated:
o
with
insolent humiliation
— they stripped the poor lad of his pretty
coat;
o
with
violent brutality — they
cast him into the pit; Jeremiah was let
down by
cords (Jeremiah 38:6);
o
with
relentless cruelty — they
heeded not his outcries and entreaties
(ch. 42:21-22); and;
o
with
exquisite cold-bloodedness — having dispatched their infernal
business,
with infinite nonchalance the ruffians sat down to eat bread,
to regale
their appetites after a good day’s work.
Ø Mercifully designed. Reuben, in some respects was not a person
to be
greatly
admired, weak and vacillating in his character, and easily drawn
aside by
stronger natures into sinful courses, appears in this matter to have
been the
only one of Joseph’s brethren in whom the natural affections of a
brother
were not completely overborne. Though he wanted the courage to
resist
his stronger-minded brothers, he seems to have conceived the
purpose
of saving, if he could, the life of Joseph. So far the stratagem was
good,
only it was:
Ø Timidly planned. The narrative would almost seem to convey that
Reuben in the
first onset of his opposition to his brother’s nefarious
intentions
had succeeded in wresting Joseph from their hands. Had he at
that
moment asserted himself with vigor and boldness, as became the
firstborn
of the house, he might have saved Joseph altogether. But, alas,
true to
his feeble and timid character, he allowed himself to be
overcome
by the clamors of his fiercer-natured brethren, and only
proposed
that instead of imbruing their hands in Joseph’s blood they
should
inflict on him the horrors of starvation. In making such a proposal
of course
Reuben hoped to be able to effect his deliverance, in which he
might
have succeeded, had he acted with promptitude and decision. But
instead
his stratagem was:
Ø Weakly carried through. Where Reuben was when his brethren were
comforting
their hearts with a dinner after Joseph’s consignment to the
cistern,
and concocting the matter of his sale, the narrative does not say;
but most
likely he was by himself, deliberating, and resolving, and
hesitating,
and delaying, instead of acting. Hence his stratagem was:
Ø Completely defeated. By the time he had got his mind made up
to act it
was too
late. When he returned to the pit Joseph was gone, and, like many
another
procrastinator, he could only bemoan his own folly.
26 “And
and conceal his blood? 27 Come, and
let us sell him to the Ishmeelites, and let
not our hand be upon him; for he is our
brother and our flesh. And his brethren
were content.”
And
his brethren, What profit is it if (literally, what of advantage that) we
slay our brother,
and conceal his blood? (i.e. and hide the fact of his
murder). Come, and let us sell
him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our
hand be upon him (literally, and our hand,
let it not be upon him, i.e. to slay him); for he is our brother and our flesh - or,
more expressly, our brother and our
flesh he (compare ch. 29:14). And his brethren
were content - literally, hearkened, viz., to the proposal.
28 “Then there passed by Midianites
merchantmen; and they drew and lifted
up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to
the Ishmeelites for twenty pieces
of silver: and they brought Joseph into
merchantmen; - literally, and passed by the men, Midianites (by country), merchants
(by profession). On the different
appellations given to the traders – see v. 36 - and
they - not the Midianites (Davidson), but Joseph's brethren - drew and lifted up
Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver –
literally, for twenty (shekels) of silver; the price afterwards fixed for a boy between
five and twenty (Leviticus 27:5), the average price of a slave being thirty shekels
(Exodus 21:32), and Joseph only bringing twenty because he was a lad (Kurtz),
because the Midianites desired to make money by the transaction (Keil), perhaps
because-his brethren wished to avoid the reproach of having acted from love
of gain (Gerlach), but most probably because Joseph's brethren cared little
what they had for him, if so be they were rid of him (Lawson). On the term
keseph see ch. 20:16.
And they brought Joseph into
disposed of their purchase, doubtless at a profit (v. 36).
Drawn from the Pit (v. 28)
“And they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit.” As a compromise
Joseph had been thrown into a pit. His brothers at first
intended to murder
him.
Their intention was almost as bad as a murder. The Scriptures tell us
that “he that hateth his brother is a murderer.”
(I John 3:15) And one writer
says, “Many a man who has not taken a brother’s life, by indulgence of
malevolence, is in the sight of God a more sinful man than many who
have
expiated their guilt on a scaffold.” Joseph only was the gainer in
that life was
spared. To the brothers deep guilt appertained. They threw him
into a pit to
perish, thinking possibly to lessen guilt by avoiding the actual
shedding of blood.
snare came suddenly. He was forced in. He had acted as he
believed rightly
in revealing the wicked deeds of his brethren, and he suffers
for it. His
brothers seize the first opportunity of bringing reprisals upon him
for what
they considered his officiousness. When alone
they seized him. They were
ten men to one stripling. Coward brothers! “In
with him,” they say. In the
pit’s depth is security, in its dryness speedy death. The
pitfalls into which
many stumble or into which they are drawn are such as these:
circumstances being altogether unfavorable in life; or severe and
overpowering temptations to some special sin, as intemperance, passion,
or
lust; or greed, or ambition, or spiritual pride. Debt, loss of
character, and
despondency are also deep pitfalls. If
we come to love evil for itself, that is
a very deep pit, and it
adjoins that state which is hopeless.
Many are drawn
into these pits by carelessness, indifference, and neglect,
while others are
so entangled by circumstances and conditions of birth that
the wonder is
that they ever escape.
PITFALLS. To
Joseph it came at the right moment. It came in response to
earnest desire. The brothers thought to make a profit by his
deliverance,
but God was saving him through their avarice and timidity.
Joseph was
helpless. His brothers had to lift him out. We must feel our helplessness,
and then Christ is sure to deliver us from the pit of sin and
despair. The
brothers of Joseph had low and mercenary aims in lifting up their
brother;
Jesus is all love and self-sacrifice in the effort to save
us. Nothing but the
long line of His finished work and fervent love could reach
souls. When
brought up from the pit we shall not be inclined to praise
ourselves. We
shall ascribe all the glory to Him who “brought us up out of the deep pit
and miry clay, and placed our feet upon a rock, and
established our
goings.” (Psalm 40:2)
29 “And Reuben returned unto the pit; and, behold,
Joseph was not in the pit;
and he rent his clothes. 30 And he
returned unto his brethren, and said, The
child is not; and I, whither shall I go?” And Reuben (in whose absence apparently
the scheme of sale had been concocted and carried through) returned to the pit
(obviously with a view to deliver
Joseph); and, behold, Joseph was not in the pit;
and he rent his clothes - a token of his mingled grief and horror at the discovery
(compare
v. 34; 44:13; II Samuel
13:31; II Kings
18:37; Job 1:20).
And he
returned unto his brethren, and said, The child (or young man, as in ch. 4:23,
where יֶלֶד
in the one hemistich is equivalent to אִישׁ in the other) is
not; and I,
whither shall I go - i.e. however shall I account for his disappearance?
31 “And they took Joseph's coat, and killed a kid of
the goats, and dipped
the coat in the blood; 32 And they
sent the coat of many colors, and they
brought it to their father; and said, This
have we found: know now whether
it be thy son's coat or no.” And they - i.e. Joseph's Brethren, including Reuben,
to whom manifestly the matter had been explained (Candlish thinks Reuben may
have been deceived by his brethren),
and who lacked the courage either to expose
their wickedness or to dissent from their device for deceiving
Jacob - took Joseph's
coat, and killed a kid of the goats, - more correctly, a he-goat of the goats, since the
name of goat seems to have belonged in a wider sense to other animals also (Gesenius);
usually understood to mean the somewhat older he-goat which was used as a sin
offering - Leviticus 16:9; 23:19; Numbers 7:16; 15:24 (Furst)
- and dipped the coat
in the blood; and they sent the coat of many colors (see on v. 3), and they brought it
(or caused it to be brought by the hands of a servant) to their father, and said (of
course by the lips of the
messenger), This have we found: know now whether it be
thy son's coat or no. Either Jacob's sons had not the fortitude to witness the first
outburst of his grief, or they had not the effrontery requisite to carry through their
scheme in their own persons, and were accordingly obliged to employ another,
probably a slave, to carry home the
bloody coat to Jacob in
33 “And he knew it, and said, It
is my son's coat; an evil beast hath devoured
him; Joseph is without doubt rent in
pieces.” And he knew it, and said, It
is
my son's coat; an evil beast (see v. 20) hath devoured him (this was precisely
what his sons meant him to infer); Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces - טְרֹפ טֹרַפ,
the inf. abs. Kal
with the Pual expressing undoubted certainty.
34 “And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth
upon his loins, and mourned
for his son many days.” And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his
loins, - שָׂק (compare σάκος – σάκκος - sakos – sakkos – sack cloth, the usual dress
of mourners (II Samuel 3:31; Nehemiah 9:1; Esther 4:1), was a coarse, thick haircloth,
of which corn sacks were also made (ch. 42:25), and which in cases of extreme mental
distress was worn next the skin (I Kings 21:27) - and mourned for his son many days.
Though twenty-two years elapsed before Jacob again beheld his son, and though
doubtless the old man's grief for the premature and, violent death, as he imagined,
of Rachel s child was little abated by the lapse, of time, yet the expression
"many days" may only be employed to mark the intensity of Jacob's sorrow,
which continued longer than the
customary mournings of the period.
35 “And all his sons and all his daughters rose up
to comfort him; but he
refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will
go down into the grave
unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.” And all his sons –
the criminals become comforters (Lange)- and all his daughters - either Jacob
had other daughters besides Dinah (Kalisch, Gerlach, 'Speaker's Commentary'),
or these included his
daughters-in-law, the word being employed as in Ruth
1:11-12 (Willet, Bush, Murphy), or the term is used freely without being designed
to indicate whether he had one or
more girls in his family (Augustine) - rose up to
comfort him (this implies the return of Jacob's brethren to
to be comforted; and he said (here the thought must be supplied: It is vain to ask
me to be comforted), For I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning –
or, retaining the order of the Hebrew words, which is almost always more
expressive than those adopted by our translators, I will go down to my son
mourning to, or towards, in the direction of, Sheol. The term שְׁאֹל - more
fully שְׁאול,
an infinitive absolute, for a noun, either:
(1) from שָׁאַל
= שָׁעַל,
to go down, to sink (Gesenius, Ftirst),
signifying the
hollow place; or,
(2) according to the older lexicographers and
etymologists, from שָׁאַל,
to ask,
and meaning either the region which inexorably summons all men into
its shade, the realm that is always craving because never satisfied
(Keil, Murphy, Lange), or the land that excites questioning and wonder
in the human heart, "the undiscovered country from whose destination no
traveler returns" (T. Lewis) - is not the grave, since Jacob's son had no
grave, but the place of departed spirits, the unseen world (Ἅδης
– Hadaes –
Hades - Septuagint) into which the dead disappear, and where they
consciously exist (II Samuel 12:23). Thus (literally, and) his father
(not Isaac) wept for him.
36 “And the Midianites
sold him into
Pharaoh's, and captain of the guard.” And the Midianites - or Medanites,
descendants of
by Keturah (ch. 25:2). That the Arabian merchants are called Ishmaelites (v. 27),
Midianites (v. 28), and Medanites (here), is explained as an evidence of varying
legends (Tuch, Bleek, Davidson, Colenso), but is better accounted for as indicating
that the traders were composed of men of various nations (Clericus); that the
Midianites, Ishmaelites, and Medanites were often confounded from their common
parentage and closely similar habits (Keil); that the narrator did not intend to lay
stress upon the nationality, but upon the occupation, of the travelers (Havernick);
that the proprietors of the caravan were Ishmaelites, and the company attending
it Midianites or Medanites (Lange); that the Ishmaelites were the genus, and the
Midianites and Medanites the species, of the same nation (Rosenmüller, Quarry);
that the Midianites or Medanites were the actual purchasers of Joseph, while the
caravan took its name from the Ishmaelites, who formed the larger portion of it
(Murphy) - sold him into
as Luther conjectures, passing
through
the name is abbreviated from Poti-Pherah (ch. 41:50), i.e. he who belongs to the sun
(Gesenius, sub voce). The Septuagint render Πετεφρής – Petephraes or Πετεφρῆ -
Petephrae - an officer – סָרִיס, from סָרַס, an unused root signifying to pull up by
the roots, originally means a eunuch (Isaiah 56:3-4), such as Oriental monarchs
were accustomed to set over their harems (Esther 2:3, 14-15; 4:5), but is here
employed to denote an officer or courtier generally, without any reference to the
primary signification, since Potiphar was married - of Pharaoh's (see ch. 12:15),
and captain of the guard - literally, captain of the slaughterers, i.e. chief officer
of the executioners, the nature of whoso duties may be understood from the fact
that he was keeper of the State prison, "where the king's prisoners were bound"
(ch. 39:20).
Joseph Carried by Midianites
to
Ø The wicked proposal. “Come, and let us sell him.” By whatever motives
thus to
dispose of Joseph’s life was not simply an open violation of the
Divine law
which constituted all men with equal fights, and in particular
made every man his brother’s keeper, not his brother’s destroyer or
proprietor, but a hideous discovery of the utter
perversion of moral nature
which had
taken place in the case of Joseph’s brethren. So low had they
now sunk,
that they were become not alone without humanity, but without
natural affection as well.
Ø The double reason.
o
The
advantageous character of the proposed transaction is exhibited by
Judah, who
doubtless understood the sort of arguments that would
weigh
most powerfully with his brethren. Simply to assassinate the
hated
stripling and conceal his blood might indeed gratify their feelings
of
revenge, but would not do much to enrich them. Might it not be
possible
to dispose of him more profitably than by the coarse way of
killing
him? Then:
o
the
humane aspect of the proposed transaction is pathetically dwelt
upon by
perhaps
may also be detected
nature,
in reasoning that men who cared nothing for the claims of
humanity
and brotherhood in themselves might be induced to do a
little
cheap philanthropy by sparing Joseph, after they had first been
made to
see that it would likewise be profitable.
was a
master-stroke which overbore every vestige of opposition:
“his brethren were content.”
Ø The favorable opportunity. Many wicked schemes are happily never
carried
through because the opportunity is wanting — thanks to Divine
providence!
But, on the other hand, thousands of nefarious crimes are born
of the
opportunity — thanks to the sinful ingenuity of the fallen heart! The
scheme of
that at
the moment an Ishmaelitish caravan was passing by on
its way with
gums and spicery to
Joseph to the throne of
van to
take their brother into slavery in
often
seem to play at cross purposes with one another, but GOD
ALWAYS
TRIUMPS!
Man proposes; God disposes.
Ø The accomplished transaction. “They drew and lifted
Joseph up out of
the pit, and sold him to the Midianites for thirty pieces of silver.” The
first
recorded specimen of a transaction which has frequently been repeated
in the
history of mankind. Slave markets have often imitated, but seldom
surpassed,
the wickedness of which Joseph’s brethren were guilty. It was
not
simply a fellow-creature that they sold, but a brother; and they had not
even the
poor apology of getting a good bargain, as they sold him for
twenty
shekels — little over forty shillings!
Ø The unforeseen result. Joseph’s purchasers conveyed him into
and sold
him, as probably his brethren expected; it is scarcely likely they
anticipated
he would find his way into so honorable service as that of a
high
officer of state. But God was taking Joseph thereby a step nearer to
his predicted elevation.
Ø The ominous symbol. The coat of ends, the token of a father’s
love for
his
darling son, the insensate ruffians, after dipping it in blood, caused to be
conveyed
into their father’s presence by the hands of a swift-footed
messenger.
This was rather a proof of their cowardice than of their
consideration for Jacob’s feelings.
Ø The pretended discovery. The bearer of the blood-stained tunic was
directed
to say that the brethren had found the robe, and to ask, with
expressions
of their deep concern, whether or not it was the coat of his
beloved
son. Their intention we cannot think was to stab their father’s
heart,
but to mislead his judgment.
Ø The expected inference. As they designed, the old man concluded
that
his son
was devoured: “Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces.” Seldom do
villains’
plots succeed so well.
Ø The bitter grief. The depth
and tenderness of Jacob’s mourning for his
lost son
was:
o
visibly
expressed: “he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth on
his
loins;”
o
long
continued: “he mourned for his son many days;” and, if
we accept
a proposed reading of the last clause of v. 35,
o
lovingly
shared: “his father,” the blind Isaac, who still survived,
“wept for him” — for Rachel’s dead child and Jacob’s lost son.
Ø The ineffectual consolation. “All his sons and all his daughters rose up
to comfort him; but he refused to be
comforted.” For this
Jacob was:
o
to be
excused, since his comforters were mostly hypocrites, whose
proffered
consolations must have sounded strangely hollow in his
ears; but
also:
o
to be
blamed, since although God in His providence had taken away
Joseph, that was no reason why he should give way to despairing
grief. Not
so did Abraham when he thought of losing Isaac.
The Representative Man (vs. 1-37)
Jacob may be
said to fall into the background from this time until his
parting benediction. The
history. The main points in this chapter are:
from his brethren in character, in his father’s affection, in
the method of his
life, in’ the communications of the Spirit. Joseph is the type
of the believer,
faithful to the covenant, amongst both the Canaanitish
heathen and the
unfaithful children of the covenant, the patriarchs.
BROUGHT TO A CLIMAX THROUGH
THE DEVELOPMENT OF
GOD’S GRACE IN THE
INDIVIDUAL. Joseph brought the evil report to
Jacob. Joseph dreamed. Joseph
was evidently both in himself superior to
his brethren and more favored by God. That is the old story — the Cain
spirit developed by contact with the Abel spirit. A time of special grace is
always a time of special wickedness and judgment. Witness the
advent of
the Lord, the Reformation period, the revival of religion in
the last century,
(18th Century – CY –
2018) leading on to the outburst of both wickedness
and judgment at the end.
STEPS IN THE COURSE OF REVELATION. The dominion which was
foreshadowed was that of the spiritual kingdom over the unspiritual.
through the personal character of Joseph, partly through the evil
passions
of his brethren, partly through the apparently casual
incidents of the
neighborhood, partly through the Spirit of righteousness working in the
heart of Reuben, partly through the weakness and fondness of
Jacob. How
strangely “all things work together” in God’s
hands! He weaves the web
composed of many single threads into one united, orderly pattern as
a
whole in which we are able to trace his own thought and purpose.
THE BELIEVER SUFFERING IN THE MIDST OF AN UNBELIEVING
WORLD. A type of Jesus cast into the pit of His humiliation,
while the
Jewish people despised and
rejected claims, His prophetic words, His
evident favor with God, and by their transactions with Gentiles,
the
Romans, gave Him up to what seemed
to them ruin, but what was the
crowning of His head with glory. We begin to see at this point
that, as the
Psalmist sang, “the word of the Lord tried him.” (Psalm 105:19)
his future triumph are EFFECTED
THROUGH JUDAH
IMMEDIATELY, THROUGH THE OTHER BRETHREN AND THE
ISHMAELITES OR MIDIANITES SECONDARILY. These names of
descendants of Abraham together are not lost sight of by God, are
called in
to serve the purposes of grace, but not to take the place of
the true
spiritual work, which goes on in its own appointed channel. So in
the
history of the Church, while there are many secondary influences
at work,
still there is a
remnant according to the election of grace in which there is
the real continuity of DIVINE
DEALINGS.
father of the fallen sons, THE
OVERWHELMING SORROW OF THE
AGED, HEART-BROKEN JACOB, the rising up of all his sons and
daughters to comfort him, are all beautiful and significant touches
of nature
in this history, which remind us that we are not “following cunningly devised
fables” (II Peter 1:16), and that God’s gracious
kingdom of truth and love
does not annihilate the human in order to reveal the Divine,
but puts its
rainbow on the cloud.
is the type of the world, as built upon the foundation of
fallen humanity
alone, without the special grace of God, Into that bulk of the unrenewed
race the
leaven of the kingdom must be put. The connection
between the
covenant family and
Isaac, and Jacob, as afterwards
in their descendants, represents at once:
Ø the thoroughly human character of the
kingdom that God would set up
in the earth,
for the people of God found much in
carried
away with them afterwards, and assimilated to their own
specially
communicated faith;
Ø the
breadth of the promises of God — the separation of the one people
was for
the sake of all the families of the earth.
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.