Trekking Genesis

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 37:18a . .They saw him from afar,

It's unlikely they would recognize Joseph's face from a distance but that coat of his
probably stood out like a semaphore flag.

• Gen 37:18b-20 . . and before he came close to them they conspired to kill him.
They said to one another: Here comes that dreamer! Come now, let us kill him and
throw him into one of the pits; and we can say a savage beast devoured him. We
shall see what comes of his dreams!

The brothers' display of intended cruelty to their own kid brother Joseph is shocking
coming from the sacred patriarchs of the people of Israel.

I seriously doubt the brothers were intent upon ending Joseph's life only so his
dreams wouldn't come true. That was just bombastic rhetoric. Truth is: they just
hated him; simple as that.

Isn't it odd that when people hate someone they want them dead? How about
maybe a beating instead? Why not throw hot coffee or scalding water in their face,
or maybe singe their back with a hot steam iron while they're sleeping? Why death?
Because death is all that will truly satisfy the human heart's hatred. Maybe nobody
reading this will ever actually murder anybody; but that doesn't mean they aren't a
murderer. Wishing somebody would die, is the wish of a murderous heart.

"Whosoever hates his brother is a murderer" (1John 3:15)

The Greek word translated "brother" in that passage is adelphos (ad-el-fos') which
refers to one's kin rather than to one's neighbor.

Hatred for one's kin doesn't make the hater guilty of murder; it's only saying that
someone harboring hatred for their kin has the nature of a murderer; and were
conditions favorable, they would definitely act it out.

For example if a lion never ate meat even once in its life, it would still be a
carnivore because lions have the nature of a carnivore. In like manner, even if
someone's hatred never drove them to lethal violence; they would still be a
murderer because they have a murderous nature. In other words: people's nature—
i.e. the core of their being --defines them just as much as their conduct.

"Out of the heart come murders" (Matt 15:19)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 37:21-22 . . But when Reuben heard it, he tried to save him from them. He
said: Let us not take his life. And Reuben went on: Shed no blood! Cast him into
that pit out in the wilderness, but do not touch him yourselves-- intending to save
him from them and restore him to his father.

The suggestion to murder Joseph was apparently discussed in private among only
some of the brothers at first. When they attempted to bring Reuben in on it, he
balked. Reuben, the eldest son, seems to be the one dissenting opinion in Joseph's
case-- so far. Exactly why, is not stated; but even though he messed up by
sleeping with his father's concubine; that doesn't mean he's okay with murdering
his own kid brother.

No doubt Simeon and Levi had no reservations about ending Joseph's life on the
spot; having already displayed malicious tempers and made their bones while
handling their sister's scandal back in chapter 34. Reuben's balk seems honestly
motivated by a sincere concern for his dad's paternal feelings. Reuben already hurt
Jacob's feelings once before by sleeping with his concubine. I don't think he wanted
to do that again.

• Gen 37:23-24 . .When Joseph came up to his brothers, they stripped Joseph of
his tunic, the ornamented tunic that he was wearing, and took him and cast him
into the pit. The pit was empty; there was no water in it.

Some of the brothers would have sorely loved to burn that "despicable" coat to
ashes since it fully represented their kid brother's lording it over them.

The Hebrew word for "pit" is bowr (bore); and means a hole (especially one used as
a cistern or a prison). Bowr is variously translated cistern, well, prison, dungeon,
and sometimes a pit as bottomless; viz: an abyss.

The "pit" may have been one of two widely-known natural water tanks in that area.
Some commentators believe the word "Dothan" means two wells, or two natural
tanks; like the Terrapin Tanks in the 1948 western movie "The Three Godfathers"
with John Wayne and Ward Bond. I seriously doubt that experienced drovers like
Jacob's sons would have dropped Joseph in a tank with water because if he were to
die in there; his putrefying body would have contaminated it; thus rendering the
precious resource unfit for drovers and their herds. Natural water sources were
essential to the safety of both man and beast in those days.

Ancient Jewish commentators made the tank home to some lethal critters.

T• And when Joseph came to his brothers, they stripped him of his garment, the
figured garment that was on him, and took and threw him into the pit; but the pit
was empty, no water was therein, but serpents and scorpions were in it. (Targum
Jonathan)

• Gen 37:25a . .Then they sat down to a meal.

Would you be comfortable sitting down to a meal while listening to somebody
weeping and sobbing in the background? According to Gen 42:21 that's what
Joseph's brothers did. He spent some of his time down in that tank begging for his
life; and they just kept right on dining like he wasn't even there.

I read a story of the torture and mistreatment of captives in Sadaam Hussein's pre
invasion jails. This one poor Iraqi man was forced sit down upon the jagged neck of
a broken glass pop bottle; and while the bottle filled with blood from his torn bowel,
Iraqi police played a game of cards.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 37:25b . . Looking up, they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from
Gilead, their camels bearing gum, balm, and ladanum to be taken to Egypt.

In our day, the Ishmaelites would be driving diesel trucks loaded with flat screen
TVs, 501 Levi jeans, Nike sports apparel, Apple iPhones, and Doritos.

The gum may have been tragacanth, or goats-thorn gum, because it was supposed
to be obtained from that plant.

The balm (or balsam) is an aromatic substance obtained from a plant of the genus
Amyris, which is a native of Gilead. In point of biblical fact, Gilead was famous for
its balm (Jer 8:22, Jer 46:11). Balms were of medical value in those days.

The ladanum was probably labdanum, (possibly myrrh), a yellowish brown to
reddish brown aromatic gum resin with a bitter, slightly pungent taste obtained
from a tree (esp. Commiphora abyssinica of the family Burseraceae) of eastern
Africa and Arabia.

Gilead was located in the modern-day country of Jordan-- a mountainous region on
the east side of the Jordan River extending from the Sea of Galilee down to the
north end of the Dead Sea. It's about sixty miles long and twenty miles wide. Its
scenery is beautiful; the hills are fertile and crowned with forests. It was on Gilead's
western boundary that Jacob confronted Laban in chapter 31, and also on Gilead's
western boundary where Jacob grappled with the angel in chapter 32.

The land of Gilead connected to a major trade route (spice road) from Turkey and
Mesopotamia to Egypt; and all points in between. Quite possibly the Ishmaelites
were following a track that would eventually take them right down the very road
that Hagar had taken towards Shur on her flight from Sarah back in chapter 16.

The Ishmaelites were a blended people consisting of the families of Ishmael and
Midian, who were Abraham's progeny (Gen 16:15, Gen 25:2). The two ethnic
designations-- Midianites and Ishmaelites --are interchangeable (e.g. Gen 37:28,
Jdgs 8:24, Jdgs 8:26). Since the Ishmaelites were Abraham's progeny, then they
were blood kin to Jacob's clan; ergo: blood kin not only to Joseph, but also to all
the rest of the people of Israel.

• Gen 37:26-27 . .Then Judah said to his brothers: What do we gain by killing our
brother and covering up his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, but let
us not do away with him ourselves. After all, he is our brother, our own flesh. His
brothers agreed.

Judah's alternative made good sea sense. There was always the risk that somebody
might rescue Joseph out of that tank and he would then high-tail it for home and
tattle on his brothers for what they did to him. With him an anonymous slave, miles
and miles away in Egypt, everything would work out just the way most of them
wanted, and the brothers would get a little something in return for Joseph's hide.

• Gen 37:28 . .When Midianite traders passed by, they pulled Joseph up out of the
pit. They sold Joseph for twenty pieces of silver to the Ishmaelites, who brought
Joseph to Egypt.

The money in this instance isn't by weight as it had been in the purchase of Sarah's
cemetery back in chapter 23. This money is by the piece; of which the precise
nomenclature and value are currently unknown. They could have been any size and
worth; depending upon international merchant agreements in those days. Joseph
was sold at a price that Moses' Law later fixed for juveniles. (Lev 27:5)

Incidentally, Christ was sold out for thirty pieces of silver (Matt 26:15) about which
the Bible says was a "lordly" price. (Zech 11:12-13)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 37:29-30 . .When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that Joseph was not in
the pit, he rent his clothes. Returning to his brothers, he said: The boy is gone!
Now, what am I to do?

Precisely where, and why, Reuben wasn't present when his brothers sold Joseph
isn't stated.

Reuben wasn't privy to his brothers' scheme to sell Joseph so he innocently
"informs" them of their kid brother's disappearance. Imagine his dismay to discover
that they, of all people, sold their own blood kin into slavery! How in blazes is he
supposed to explain that to his dad!?!

Reuben is so disturbed that he can't think straight; so his brothers, in their
characteristic cold, calculating way, devise yet another nefarious scheme. They will
stain Joseph's ornamental garment with blood and let their dad draw his own
conclusions about it.

• Gen 37:31-32 . .Then they took Joseph's tunic, slaughtered a kid, and dipped the
tunic in the blood. They had the ornamented tunic taken to their father, and they
said: We found this. Please examine it; is it your son's tunic or not?

So without any explanation, nor details of the circumstances leading up to Joseph's
disappearance, they let Jacob jump to his own conclusion. That is a very, very
common, and very, very human way of perpetrating a lie.

• Gen 37:33-34 . . He recognized it, and said: My son's tunic! A savage beast
devoured him! Joseph was torn by a beast! Jacob rent his clothes, put sackcloth on
his loins, and mourned for his son many days.

This is the very first mention of sackcloth in the Bible. It's a rough, coarse material
like burlap commonly used for packaging grain in bags. Though an inexpensive
fabric, it's prickly and chafes the skin so it's not really suitable for undergarments.
Exactly where Jacob got the idea to abuse himself like that is unknown; but it's
common in the Old Testament: mostly donned as an outer garment rather than
under.

If Joseph was "torn" then why was his tunic still in one piece? It's not uncommon
for carnivorous beasts like grizzly bears to devour a portion of people's clothing
right along with their flesh.

Well . . poor Jacob is so overcome with grief over the loss of his favorite son that
his logic chip just simply overheated and crashed. People who are gravely upset
sometimes have trouble finding their car keys even if they're right inside their own
pants pocket.

• Gen 37:35a . . All his sons and daughters sought to comfort him

"sons and daughters" is somewhat ambiguous and can indicate not just Jacob's
progeny, but every man, woman, and child in the whole family regardless of age
with himself the paterfamilias of the whole bunch.

• Gen 37:35b . . but he refused to be comforted, saying: No, I will go down to the
grave mourning for my son.

The Hebrew word translated "grave" is sheol (sheh-ole') and this is its first
appearance in the Bible.

The New Testament equivalent of sheol is haides (hah'-dace) which is an afterlife
place where all the dead go-- both the good dead and the bad dead --regardless of
age, race, religion, and/or gender.

The prophet Jonah went to sheol at some time during his nautical adventure (Jonah
2:2) a place that he described as the roots of the mountains (Jonah 2:6a). Well;
the mountains aren't rooted in the tummies of fish; they're rooted down deep in the
earth (Jonah 2:6b).

According to Ps 16:8-10 and Acts 2:22-31, Christ spent some time in sheol/haides
while waiting for his body to be restored to life.

According to Matt 12:40, sheol/haides is in the heart of the earth. Well; Christ
wasn't buried in the heart of the earth; he was buried on the surface in a rock-hewn
tomb. So in order for Christ to be on the surface of the earth and simultaneously in
the heart of the earth, he and his body had to part company.

• Gen 37:35c . .Thus his father bewailed him.

Sometimes it's really best to leave people alone and let them grieve through their
loss. Many a well-meaning "comforter" has only succeeded in making matters
worse by attempting to talk friends out of their grief with good-intentioned, but
nevertheless; tiresome philosophical platitudes.

And people who stifle their grief are only forestalling the inevitable. One day,
possibly when they least expect it, and quite possibly inconveniently, it will catch up
to them.

• Gen 37:36 . .The Midianites, meanwhile, sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, a courtier
of Pharaoh, and his chief steward.

Although slavery normally isn't regarded a blessing, in this case Joseph couldn't
have been sold into a better situation. Potiphar was well-connected instead of just
another plantation owner who would work Joseph to the bone; undernourished,
inadequately housed, and poorly clothed.

Courtiers were typically royalty's personal assistants and performed a variety of
duties. Potiphar was "chief steward". The Hebrew words means boss of the
butchers; an ambiguous term which implies not just slaughtering and/or cooking
animals for food, but also supervising capital punishments, and/or supervising
Pharaoh's personal bodyguards along with the oversight of his own private jails;
especially jails for political prisoners.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:1a . . About that time

Joseph was 17 when he arrived in Egypt (Gen 37:2) and 30 when he became prime
minister (Gen 41:46). When he went to work for Pharaoh; a 14-year period began,
consisting of two divisions-- seven years of plenty, and seven years of famine. After
9 of the 14 years had passed-- the 7 years of plenty, and 2 of the years of famine
--Joseph summoned his dad to Egypt (Gen 45:6-9) which would add up to a period
of only about 22 years or so.

Some commentators feel that chapter 38 is out of place chronologically; that it
really should have followed chapter 33 because there just isn't enough time
lapsed-- from Joseph's arrival in Egypt and Jacob's subsequent arrival --for all the
births; and all the growing-up time needed for the particulars in chapter 38 to
reach an age mature enough to sleep with a woman and father a child (see Adam
Clarke's Commentary for an analysis of the circumstances).

"about that time" is so ambiguous, and so unspecific, and the above mentioned
time elements so narrow; that the phrase could simply indicate that the events of
chapter 38 happened not right after Joseph went to Egypt, but most likely any time
during the whole time Jacob was resident in Canaan; in other words: any time
between chapter 33 and chapter 47. Joseph was 7 years old when Jacob returned
to Canaan, and 17 when carted off to Egypt. So, adding 10 to the 22, would make
the period of "about that time" equal to about 32 years total.

• Gen 38:1b . . Judah

Judah's saga is pretty interesting because it concerns the Israeli tribal head chosen
to perpetuate the Jewish line to Messiah (Gen 49:8-12, Heb 7:14).

Some people call this section in Genesis sordid; but I think it's actually kind of
humorous because a very resourceful Gentile girl is going to really get one over on
the "chosen people".

• Gen 38:1c . . left his brothers

One can hardly blame Judah for wanting to put some distance between himself and
the others once in a while. They were so cruel, so selfish, and so thoughtless.
People of cruelty generally make bad company what with all their complaining, their
sniping, their carping criticism, their tempers, and their propensity to harm people.
If those boys were hard hearted against their own kid brother, just think how cruel
they must have been with animals.

Judah was no prize himself, that's true, but at least he wasn't a cold blooded
murderer at heart. I have no doubt he felt very bad at Josephs' sobbing and
begging for his life down in that pit. But I thoroughly suspect he felt that selling his
kid brother into slavery was the only way he could possibly save the boy's life. Even
if Joseph had escaped his brothers that day, they would always be looking for
another opportunity to finish the job.

• Gen 38:1d . . and camped near a certain Adullamite whose name was Hirah.

The community of Adullum was roughly 12 miles northwest of Hebron, and later
apportioned to the tribe of Judah during Joshua's campaign. (Josh 15:35)

Some translations say that Judah "turned in" to Hirah; implying he lodged in Hirah's
home rather than set up his own pavilion. The Hebrew word is natah (naw-taw')
which simply means to stretch or spread out; which may indicate that Judah was
into a little independent ranching on his own in the area; implying that Judah's
spread neighbored Hirah's range land.

Natah is one of those ambiguous words with more than one meaning; which only
serves to accent a frustrating fact of life in the world of Bible scholarship that it's
pretty near impossible to translate ancient Hebrew texts verbatim into the English
language without making an inadvertent error here and there.

• Gen 38:2 . .There Judah saw the daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name
was Shua, and he married her and cohabited with her.

From the spiritual aspect; Jacob's family was practically on an island in the midst of
a sea infested with caribes. The only viable option for spouses in that predicament
was either for a prospective Canaanite to be a God-fearing person, e.g. Melchizedek
(Gen 14:18) or sincerely convert to Jacob's religion like Ruth did. (Ru 1:16, Ru
2:11-12)

Whether the daughter converted isn't said. And since there existed no Divine
prohibitions against intermarriage with Canaanites at this time-- Israel's
covenanted law doesn't have ex post facto jurisdiction (Gal 3:17) --then surely no
one could possibly accuse Judah of a sin for marrying outside either his religion or
his ethnic identity. However, since two of Shua's boys were incorrigible and ended
up dead, slain by God, and none of her three male children by Judah were selected
to forward Abraham's line to Messiah; Judah's choice doesn't look good.

Gen 38:2 is tricky because at first glance it looks like the girl might be the daughter
of a man named Shua. But in verse 12, the daughter's moniker in Hebrew is Bath
Shuwa' (see also 1Chrn 3:5) which is the very same moniker as Bathsheba's.
(1Chrn 3:5)

NOTE: In Hebrew, a daughter is a bath; and a son is a ben (e.g. Uri ben Hur, Ex
31:2).

Bath-Shuwa' (or: Bath-Shua) just simply means a daughter of wealth; which isn't
really a name at all, but a status. Exactly what the status of a "daughter of wealth"
is supposed to convey about a girl is hard to tell. Perhaps it just means she's an
eligible consideration for marriage-- like a girl who comes of a good family; but that
doesn't necessarily mean that a blue-blooded girl is the best choice. Things like
education, breeding, and wealth are no guarantee that maybe a girl from across the
tracks wouldn't make a much better wife and mother. (she'd certainly tend to be
more frugal)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:3-5 . . She conceived and bore a son, and he named him Er. She
conceived again and bore a son, and named him Onan. Once again she bore a son,
and named him Shelah; he was at Chezib when she bore him.

The community of Chezib (a.k.a. Achzib and Chozeba) has been identified with
Khirbet Kueizibah by somebody named Conder (Palestine Exploration, Jan. 1875).
The Talmud mentions that a plain is in front of Chozeba; so Kueizibah has before it
the valley of Berachoth (wady Arrub); which is a bit southwest of Adullum. So
although Judah moved away from Bath-shua's parents, it wasn't far away.

• Gen 38:6 . . Judah got a wife for Er his first-born; her name was Tamar.

Ms. Tamar is a total mystery. Neither her family, her ethnic identity, her age, her
looks, her education, her material worth, nor anything else is known about her. But
she's the one through whom God will bring Messiah into the world; so I think it's
safe to say she was probably a much better woman than Bath-shua.

• Gen 38:7 . . But Er, Judah's first-born, was displeasing to The Lord, and The Lord
took his life.

Er has the distinction of being the very first member of the people of Israel-- the
chosen people --whom God personally clipped Himself. Er was only the beginning
because God's chosen people weren't chosen to be His pampered pets; no, they
were selected to be the number-one caretakers, and propagators, of the knowledge
of God. So then, of all the people in the world, Jews have the least excuse for
failure to comply with God's wishes because they have always had that information
at their fingertips while a very large portion of the rest of the world; for many,
many centuries, didn't. Therefore, the status of God's chosen people isn't
something to be proud of; no, it's something to be afraid of.

"Hear this word that the Lord has spoken against you, O children of Israel-- against
the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt --saying: You only have
I known of all the families of the earth: that's why I will punish you for all your
iniquities." (Amos 3:1-2)

• Gen 38:8 . .Then Judah said to Onan: Join with your brother's wife and do your
duty by her as a brother-in-law, and provide offspring for your brother.

NOTE: This is the first mention of adoption in the Bible. Others are Moses' adoption
by an Egyptian princess, Manasseh's and Ephraim's adoption by Jacob, and Jesus'
adoption by Joseph.

According to Deut 5:2-4, the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as
per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy isn't retroactive. So then
Judah's directive wasn't a strict by-the-book legal requirement as-stipulated by
Deut 25:5-6; but was nevertheless something that God approved without it being a
covenanted requirement.

The "duty" to which Judah referred was apparently a widely accepted custom; not
only in his own day, but in days preceding him. Some feel that the custom had its
origin in the early-day practice of purchasing a wife rather than courting; so that
she became a portion of the dead man's estate.

As such, she remained the "property" (and the responsibility) of the clan; thus
assuring widows of a livelihood, and of protection and security after their husband's
death. In that respect, being a "mail order" bride had its advantages in an era when
very few women had careers of their own outside the home or were entitled to
assistance programs.

• Gen 38:9 . . But Onan, knowing that the seed would not count as his, spilled it on
the ground whenever he joined with his brother's wife, so as not to provide
offspring for his brother.

It's been suggested that Onan's motivation for leaving his new wife childless was to
make sure Er didn't posthumously cause his own inheritance to be reduced. As the
firstborn, Er came in for a larger portion of Judah's estate than Onan. But with Er
dead and out of the way, Onan became the firstborn by natural succession.

Actually, Onan didn't have to marry Tamar; but if and when he did, it was an
implied consent to try his best to engender a boy so the dead man would have
someone to carry on his name. But Onan chose instead to take advantage of his
brother's widow and use her like a harlot; and that was not only a cruel thing to do,
but a fatal error too.

• Gen 38:10 . .What he did was displeasing to The Lord, and He took his life also.

Some have attempted to use this passage as a proof text that it's a sin to practice
contraception. But any honest examination of the facts testifies otherwise. Onan
evaded his obligation, and married his brother's widow under false pretenses;
apparently with the full intention of protecting his own inheritance rather than that
of his dead brother.

That was unforgivable because it's all the same as fraud and breech of contract; not
to mention deplorably uncaring about a widow's predicament (cf. Luke 7:11-15).
Tamar had a legitimate right to a baby fathered by Judah's clan, and it was their
moral, if not sacred, duty to make an honest attempt to provide her with not only a
baby, but also a man by her side to take care of her too.

• Gen 38:11a . .Then Judah said to his daughter-in-law Tamar: Stay as a widow in
your father's house until my son Shelah grows up

At this point, Judah did the unthinkable: he disowned his daughter-in-law. That just
wasn't done. When a girl married into a clan; she became one with that clan. I can
scarce believe Judah sent Tamar back to her father; and I'm honestly surprised
Tamar's dad didn't march her right back to Judah's front door and get in his face
about it and demand he fulfill his obligations to one of Israel's own widows.

• Gen 38:11b . . for he thought: He too might die like his brothers.

No doubt Shelah's mom Bath-shua was by this time up in arms and protesting
vehemently against any more marriages of her own sons to this "toxic" female.

I've a pretty good notion of what Judah had in mind. He had no intention of letting
Tamar anywhere near his one and only surviving male heir. As far as he was
concerned, Tamar was nothing less than a Black Widow-- one of the those
venomous spiders in the American southwest that eats her mate for dinner after
the poor hormone-driven slob fulfills his one and only purpose in life.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:11c . . So Tamar went to live in her father's house.

Sending Tamar back home, as an unattached girl, Judah no doubt sincerely hoped she
would meet somebody in her own neighborhood; maybe an old boyfriend or two, and
remarry before Shelah got old enough; thus, his last son would be safe from Ms. Black
Widow. But as it turned out, Tamar had more grit than Mattie Ross of Darnel County.
Judah's clan owed her dead husband a baby boy, and that was that.

You can hardly blame her. Jacob's clan was very wealthy, so that any children Tamar
should produce by them, would have all the best that life had to offer in early-day
Palestine; plus her grandchildren would be well taken care of too. Since nothing is said
of her origin, Tamar may not have been a blue-blooded girl like her mother-in-law,
but could have easily come from a low income community on the wrong side of the
tracks. What would you do in the best interests of your children in that situation?

• Gen 38:12a . . As time went by, Judah's wife Bath-shua died.

This event left Judah single, and eligible to remarry; so that Tamar and Judah are now
both single adults; however, Tamar is betrothed, and that makes things a little
complicated.

• Gen 38:12b . . After he got over her passing, Judah went up to Timnah to his
sheepshearers, together with his friend Hirah the Adullamite.

Timnah-- a.k.a. Tibneh: a deserted site southwest of Zorah, and two miles west of Ain
Shems --was roughly 11 miles northwest from ancient Adullum towards Bethlehem.

• Gen 38:13-14a . . And it was told Tamar, saying: Look, your father-in-law is going up
to Timnah to shear his sheep. So she took off her widow's garments, covered herself
with a veil and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place which was on the way to
Timnah;

The Hebrew words for "open place" are weird. They mean "an open eye". One of those
words-- the one for "eye" --can also mean a spring or an artesian well (e.g. Gen 16:7).
A wayside rest, like as can be usually found on many modern Federal highways, would
probably qualify as an example of the "open place" to which Gen 38:14 refers.

Tamar's rest stop likely included a source of water, not for cars, but for the animals that
men either herded, rode upon, or used for pack animals when they traveled up and
down the primitive trails and roads of ancient Palestine.

Sheep-shearing occurs sometime in the spring, so the weather in Palestine at that
season was sunny and warm.

Veils weren't an eo ipso indication that a woman was loose, since Rebecca had worn
one upon meeting her spouse-to-be Isaac (Gen 24:65). Although the text says that
Tamar's veil covered her face (vs. 15), it likely not only covered her face, but her whole
body, because veils were more like a burqa than the little mask-like nets that women
sometimes wear to funerals; except that burqa's are cumbersome and ugly, whereas
Tamar's veil was a lightweight wrap, and likely quite colorful and eye-catching; and
conveyed an altogether different message than a woman in mourning.

• Gen 38:14b . . for she saw that Shelah was grown up, yet she had not been given to
him as wife.

Actually, Shelah wasn't the one who owed Tamar an Israeli baby; it was Judah, the
head of the clan, and that's why he's the one she's coming after rather than Judah's
son. Tamar is a scary girl; and one you wouldn't want to trifle with. Not many women
would have had the chutzpah to do what she did. To begin with, for a lone woman to sit
out along a remote road, unescorted, like she did, was inherently dangerous, and could
have led to all sorts of mischief.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:15a . .When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute,

The particular kind of prostitute in this episode is from the Hebrew word qedeshah
(ked-ay-shaw') which isn't your typical working girl, but rather a devotee raising
money for an established religion (Gen 38:21) typically a pagan kind of religion
centered upon the worship of a goddess like Ashtoreth (a.k.a. Astarte). So one
might say that a qedeshah's services were for a worthy cause.

• Gen 38:15b . . for she had covered her face.

It's just amazing how difficult it is sometimes to recognize familiar people when
they turn up in places we least expect them. Take Jesus for example. When he
revived after his ordeal on the cross, people didn't know him right off: close friends
like Mary Magdalena didn't recognize him at first even at close proximity (John
20:13-16). Another example is when Jesus came out to his followers' boat during a
storm on open water. At first they thought he was a ghost, and Peter wouldn't
believe it was Jesus until he gave him the power to walk on water himself. (Matt
14:25-29)

• Gen 38:16-17 . . Not realizing that she was his daughter-in-law, he went over to
her by the roadside and said: Come now, let me sleep with you. And what will you
give me to sleep with you? she asked. I'll send you a young goat from my flock; he
said. Will you give me something as a pledge until you send it? she asked.

The Hebrew word for "pledge" in that passage is 'arabown (ar-aw-bone') which
means property given as security-- viz: collateral --as in a pawn shop or a bank
loan. This is the very first place in the Bible where that word is used. In the usury
business, an 'arabown is forfeited if the borrower fails to repay his loan; i.e. make
good on his promise. This is a very important element in the divine plan.

"In him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your
salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of
promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased
possession, to the praise of His glory." (Eph 1:13-14)

The Greek word for "pledge" in that passage is arrhabon (ar-hrab-ohn') which
means essentially the same as the Hebrew word 'arabown except that the Greek
word indicates a little something extra.

Real estate transactions usually involve a sum called the earnest money. Although
it may be applied towards the purchase price of property, earnest money itself
serves a specific purpose of its own in the real estate business. In some quarters;
this is also called good-faith money.

When the contract, and all the other necessary documents are submitted to Escrow,
the buyer is required to also submit a token amount of the purchase price. It's
usually a relatively small number of dollars compared to the full price of the
property. I think ours was just $1,000 back in 1988 on a $74,000 home. When the
buyer follows through on their intent to purchase the property, the good-faith
money (minus some Escrow fees of course) goes towards the purchase.

However, if the buyer decides to renege, then they forfeit the good faith money. No
doubt that's done to discourage vacillating buyers from fiddling around with other
people's time and money.

So then, since God's Spirit is the earnest depicted in Eph 1:13-14; then, according
to the principles underlying the arrhabon, should God betray a believer's trust by
reneging on His promise to spare people who hear and believe the gospel, then He
forfeits; and the believer gets to keep the Spirit regardless of their afterlife destiny.

But of course God won't renege because doing so would not only embarrass
Himself, but embarrass His son too as Jesus has given his word that believers have
nothing to fear.

"I assure you, those who heed my message, and believe in God who sent me, have
eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already
passed from death into life." (John 5:24)

There are people who actually believe the Bible's God can get away with reneging
on His promises. A belief of that nature of course eo ipso insinuates that He lacks
integrity, i.e. the Bible's God is capable of dishonesty and can't be trusted to make
good on anything He says.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:18a . . He said: What pledge should I give you? Your seal and its cord,
and the staff in your hand; she answered.

The items that Tamar required for a pledge were akin to a photo ID or a thumb
print in those days. Judah's staff wasn't just a kendo stick or a walking cane or a
shepherd's crook. It was more like a king's scepter, specially made just for him,
and served the express purpose of identifying him as the head of his tribe. Staffs
were made of either wood or metal, and usually capped with a masthead. The
quality of the staff would of course depend upon the material wherewithal of the
person ordering it.

Judah's seal could have been a small, uniquely engraved cylinder, or possibly a ring
(e.g. Jer 22:24) but wasn't always worn on a finger. Way back in Judah's day, seals
were sometimes worn around the neck with a necklace; or attached to personal
walking sticks and/or staffs with a lanyard, and forced into wax or soft clay to leave
an impressed "signature". The whole shebang-- seal, cord, and staff --was often a
unit; and there were no two alike.

The staff, with its cord and seal, was, of course, quite worthless for a shrine
prostitute's purposes. In dollar value, it was nothing, as it couldn't be sold or
traded. However, its value to Judah was why it was a good pledge item. He would
certainly want it back.

• Gen 38:18b-23 . . So he gave them to her and mated with her, and she
conceived by him. After she left, she took off her veil and put on her widow's
clothes again.

. . . Meanwhile, Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite in order to
get his pledge back from the woman, but he did not find her. He asked the men
who lived there: Where is the shrine prostitute who was beside the road at Enaim?
There hasn't been any shrine prostitute here; they said.

. . . So he went back to Judah and said: I didn't find her. Besides, the men who
lived there said there hasn't been any shrine prostitute here. Then Judah said: Let
her keep what she has or we will become a disgrace. After all, I did send her this
young goat, but you didn't find her.

It might seem silly that Judah was concerned for his tribe's honor in this matter,
but in those days, cult prostitutes did have a measure of respect in their
community, and it wasn't unusual for every woman in the community to be
expected to take a turn at supporting their "church" in that manner; so cult
prostitution wasn't really looked upon as a vice but rather as a sacred obligation.

Judah's failure to pay up could be construed by locals as mockery of their religion's
way of doing business, thus insulting those who believed and practiced it; so he
emphasized his effort to find the woman and make good on his I.O.U.

This appears to me the first instance of religious tolerance in the Bible; and the
circumstances are intriguing: to say the least.

• Gen 38:24 . . And it came to pass, about three months after, that Judah was told,
saying: Tamar your daughter-in-law has played the harlot; furthermore she is with
child by harlotry.

At this time, Tamar was living with her dad; so Judah wouldn't have known she was
expecting unless a rumor mill brought the news around.

The word for "harlot" in Gen 38:24 is zanah (zaw-naw'), and the word for "harlotry"
is zanuwn (zaw-noon') and both mean adultery. Tamar is accused of adultery
because at this point, she's assumed betrothed (though not yet married) to Shelah.
(cf. Matt 1:18-19)

• Gen 38:24 . . So Judah said: Bring her out and let her be burned!

Since there were no Federal, nor any State, nor any Municipal laws in existence in
primitive Palestine, local sheiks like Judah were the Supreme Court of their own
tribes. Though Tamar was living back at home with her dad, she remained under
Judah's jurisdiction because of her past marriages to two of Judah's sons.

NOTE: I suspect Judah saw this turn of events as a golden opportunity to save his
last surviving son from marrying Ms. Black Widow.

• Gen 38:25a . .When she was brought out,

It's odd to me that Judah didn't attend Tamar's execution: possibly because he
couldn't look her in the eye for reneging on his promise to give her Shelah.
However; Judah was in for a very big jolt to his nervous system because Tamar
produced a surprise witness.

• Gen 38:26 . . she sent to her father-in-law, saying: By the man to whom these
belong, I am with child. And she said: Please determine whose these are-- the
signet and cord, and staff. So Judah acknowledged them and said: She has been
more righteous than I, because I did not give her to Shelah my son. And he never
saw her again.

Actually, neither Judah nor Tamar were "righteous" in this matter. His comment
was relative. Though both had behaved rather badly; Tamar held the high moral
ground. It's like movies today. The good guys and the bad guys are no longer
distinctly moral and immoral and/or scrupulous and unscrupulous. Often both sides
of the equation are immoral and unscrupulous; with the "good" guys just being
more likable.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 38:27-28 . . And it came about at the time she was giving birth, that behold,
there were twins in her womb. Moreover, it took place while she was giving birth,
one put out a hand, and the midwife took and tied a scarlet thread on his hand,
saying: This one came out first.

According to modern medicine, a baby isn't really born until it's head is outside the
womb; so that it's legal (in some states) to kill babies with a so called "dilation and
extraction" abortion; which is a term coined by Ohio abortionist Dr. Martin Haskell
for an abortion method in which he removes a baby's brain while it's head is still
partially within the womb, and then completes the delivery by extracting its little
corpse. But in Tamar's day, even the exit of so much as a hand was counted birth:
thus baby Zerah became Tamar's legal firstborn son.

• Gen 38:29 . . But it came about as he drew back his hand, that behold, his
brother came out. Then she said: What a breach you have made for yourself! So he
was named Perez.

Perez's name indicates that he forced his way to the front of the line.

• Gen 38:30 . . And afterward his brother came out who had the scarlet thread on
his hand; and he was named Zerah.

Zerah's name sort of refers to dawn or morning twilight, viz: like when the sun is
coming up; i.e. a new day, or something like that.

Well . . regardless of Zerah's primo-genitive prerogatives, God bypassed him in
Judah's line to Messiah; which, by Divine appointment went to Perez, the second
born. (Matt 1:1-3)

NOTE: You'd think holy propriety would demand that the sacred line to Messiah be
pure. I mean, after all, a child of adultery and incest hardly seems like a proper
ancestor for the King of Kings. But no, an ancestry of adultery and/or incest makes
no difference to Christ.

In point of fact, in time a famous harlot from Jericho named Rahab produced yet
another male in the line to the lamb of God (Matt 1:5). And let's not forget Ruth
who descended from Lot sleeping with one of his own daughters in a cave. (cf. Gen
19:36-37, Ruth 4:10, and Matt 1:5)

According to Rom 8:3 Christ didn't come in the likeness of innocent flesh; no, he
came in the likeness of sinful flesh, and his ancestry certainly proves it.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 39:1-3 . . Now when Joseph arrived in Egypt with the Ishmaelite traders, he
was purchased by Potiphar, a member of the personal staff of Pharaoh, the king of
Egypt. Potiphar was the captain of the palace guard. The Lord was with Joseph and
blessed him greatly as he served in the home of his Egyptian master. Potiphar
noticed this and realized that The Lord was with Joseph, giving him success in
everything he did.

The identity of the Pharaoh during this moment in history is a total mystery, and
even that fact is a mystery in itself because Egypt was normally quite meticulous in
recording its accomplishments, and the names of Egypt's dynastic successions are
recorded practically without a break thru the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms, clear
on back to 3,000 BC. But for some reason, so far unexplained, a blank occurs in its
history between 1730 to 1580 BC.

This absence of information puzzles Egyptologists; and thus far has only been
satisfactorily explained by the conquering-- and subsequent dominance --of Egypt
by an ancient people called the Hyksos; who were Semitic tribes from Syria and
Canaan. The Hyksos were of a different mentality than the Egyptians and
apparently weren't inclined to keep a meticulous record of their own
accomplishments as had their vanquished predecessors before them.

Not only is there a dearth of documents from that period, but there aren't even any
monuments to testify of it. If perchance Joseph was in Egypt during the Hyksos,
that might explain why there exists not one shred of archaeological evidence to
corroborate the Bible in regards to its story of Joseph in Egypt.

Joseph's success was, of course, in regards to his proficiency, and in no way says
anything about his personal prosperity because as a slave, he had no income,
owned no property, controlled no business ventures, nor maintained some sort of
investment portfolio.

How Potiphar found out that Yhvh was Joseph's god isn't said. But in knowing, he
quite naturally credited Yhvh with Joseph's proficiency because people in those days
were very superstitious. Even Potiphar's own name, which in Egyptian is Pa-di-pa
ra, means "the gift of the god Ra".

• Gen 39:3-6a . .So Joseph naturally became quite a favorite with him. Potiphar
soon put Joseph in charge of his entire household and entrusted him with all his
business. From the day Joseph was put in charge, Yhvh began to bless Potiphar for
Joseph's sake.

. . . All his household affairs began to run smoothly, and his crops and livestock
flourished. So Potiphar gave Joseph complete administrative responsibility over
everything he owned. With Joseph there, he didn't have a worry in the world,
except to decide what he wanted to eat!

This was all idyllic for Mr. Aristocrat; but unfortunately, there was a fly poised to
plop itself into the ointment.

• Gen 39:6b-7 . . Now Joseph was young, well built, and handsome. After a while,
his master's wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said; Sleep with me.

The apparent overture wasn't a request. Since Joseph was a slave, it wasn't
necessary for Potiphar's wife to seduce him. She only had to give him an order, and
he was expected to obey it.

It's not uncommon to find women who feel trapped in an unfulfilling marriages.
Henry David Thoreau once wrote that the mass of men lead lives of quiet
desperation. Well; some of that "mass of men" includes women.

Potiphar's wife (call her Anna for convenience) was an amorously active woman
married to the wrong man. No children are listed for her husband so it's very
possible Potiphar was a eunuch; a distinct possibility in ancient palaces. He might
have been an older man too, maybe a bit too old.

Anna probably didn't marry for love; but for security. That's understandable since
women of that day didn't have a lot of career options, nor a minority status, nor
retirement benefits, nor entitlements like Medicare and Social Security. For women
in Anna's day, marriage was often a matter of survival rather than a matter of the
heart.

She was obviously still lively and maybe would have enjoyed dinner out and salsa
dancing once or twice a week; while Potipher probably barely had enough energy
left to plop down and fall asleep in his La-Z-Boy recliner after working 12-14 hours
a day in the palace and just wanted to be left alone in his man cave with a cold
bottle of Heineken and FOX News, so to speak.

There are women who prefer older men; sometimes much older. But there are
other women, like Anna, who prefer the young ones; however, sometimes life just
doesn't give them any options.

So then, what's a desperate housewife to do when her husband is old and boring,
and here's this strapping, virile young slave guy around the house with you all day
long? Well . . you're either going to drink a lot, get witchy, take pills, or make a
move and see what happens. Unfortunately, Anna isn't going to be a very good
sport about it.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 39:8-9 . . But Joseph refused. Look; he told her; my master trusts me with
everything in his entire household. No one here has more authority than I do! He
has held back nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How could I
ever do such a wicked thing? It would be a great sin against God.

Note Joseph's diplomacy. He made no comments about Anna's age nor her appeal.
His defense was strictly reasonable rather than personal. All things considered;
Joseph simply wouldn't be able to live with either himself or his religion had he
betrayed Potiphar's trust; thus he was careful to avoid hurting Anna's feelings.

• Gen 39:10-18 . . She kept putting pressure on him day after day, but he refused
to sleep with her, and he avoided her as much as possible. One day, however, no
one else was around when he was doing his work inside the house. She came and
grabbed him by his shirt, demanding: Sleep with me! Joseph tore himself away, but
as he did, his shirt came off. She was left holding it as he ran from the house.

. . .When she saw that she had his shirt and that he had fled, she began screaming.
Soon all the men around the place came running. My husband has brought this
Hebrew slave here to humiliate us; she sobbed. He tried to abuse me, but I
screamed. When he heard my loud cries, he ran and left his shirt behind with me.

. . . She kept the shirt with her, and when her husband came home that night, she
told him her story. That Hebrew slave you've had around here tried to humiliate
me; she said. I was saved only by my screams. He ran out, leaving his shirt behind!

From a strategic standpoint, Anna's action was a wise initiative just in case Joseph
began complaining to Potiphar about his wife's conduct.

Joseph's situation parallels a case in a novel by author Harper Lee titled "To Kill A
Mockingbird " wherein a promiscuous woman destroys an innocent man in order to
cover up her own indiscretions.

• Gen 39:19-20a . .When his master heard the story that his wife told him, namely;
"Thus and so your slave did to me" he was furious. So Joseph’s master had him put
in prison, where the king’s prisoners were confined.

I seriously doubt Potiphar believed his wife's story (in point of fact, this may not
have been the first time she got in trouble with a man) or otherwise he would have
put Joseph to death rather than in a cushy jail where political prisoners were kept,
but what was he to do? Stick up for a slave over his wife? Not happening. I mean,
after all; Potiphar had to live with Anna, he didn't have to live with Joseph, so
Joseph was sacrificed to keep peace in the home.

• Gen 39:20-23 . . But while Joseph was there in the prison, Yhvh was with him;
He showed him kindness and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden.
So the warden put Joseph in charge of all those held in the prison, and he was
made responsible for all that was done there. The warden paid no attention to
anything under Joseph's care, because Yhvh was with Joseph and gave him success
in whatever he did.

A trustee's lot in prison is much more agreeable than regular inmates. Joseph was
very fortunate to have the Lord in his corner otherwise he might have been
neglected; but as a trustee, he could roam about the cell block like as if he were
one of the guards.

Joseph had quite an advantage. His management skills weren't due to a natural
aptitude, rather, they were due to providence; just as his grandpa Abraham's
wealth and success were due to providence.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
Joseph was 17 when he arrived in Egypt, and 30 when he became prime minister.
So 13 years of his young adulthood were wasted in servitude and prison; and all
that time without even so much as a date or a girlfriend. More than a full decade of
the best years of his life went by with no female companionship whatsoever.

A modern man's libido peaks in the years between 18 and 24, then begins tapering
off as he gradually gets older. Since there is no record of Joseph's association with
a special girl back home in Palestine, I think it's safe to conclude that he had never
cuddled with a girl in his entire life till he got married sometime in his thirties. So
you can see that Joseph was not only robbed of the best years of his life, but totally
missed out on something that's very important to the psychological well being of
the average red-blooded guy.

As Joseph got older, and began to realize that life was passing him by, and that his
youth was ebbing away, he no doubt began to wonder if maybe his current
situation wasn't permanent; and as the days and years continued to go by one after
another, he must have become frightened, depressed, and desperate as he saw no
plausible way to remedy his predicament and get his life back.

We used to joke among ourselves as professional welders that adverse conditions in
the workplace build character. (chuckle) Like as if any blue collar skull needs
"character" for anything. However, people destined for greatness can benefit
immensely from character-building experiences that serve to temper their success;
for example Franklin D. Roosevelt. He was immensely privileged and harbored a
horrid superiority complex. Polio really humbled him, and in time, Roosevelt's
handicap made him a much better man and a much better leader.

I've seen people's leadership and responsibility handed to them on the silver platter
of privilege; resulting in their treating lower ranking employees with thoughtless
contempt. If those managers had only started out laboring in construction, selling
luggage, shackled in slavery, or convicted of crimes they didn't commit; then
maybe they would have developed a sensitivity that would have made them, not
just managers, but great managers.

Under normal circumstances, Joseph's alleged crime was punishable by death. So
then, since he wasn't executed, but instead put in a prison normally reserved for
political prisoners, his circumstances tend to support the opinion that Potiphar
didn't believe his wife's story at all.

• Gen 40:1a . . Some time later,

Exactly how long Joseph had been in prison prior to this next section is uncertain.
However, his age would have been near 28 since it will be just two years afterwards
that he's released. (Gen 41:1)

• Gen 40:1b-4a . . the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt gave offense
to their lord the king of Egypt. Pharaoh was angry with his two courtiers, the chief
cupbearer and the chief baker, and put them in custody, in the house of the chief
steward, in the same prison house where Joseph was confined. The chief steward
assigned Joseph to them, and he attended them.

The "chief steward" was Mr. Potiphar. (Gen 39:1)

Exactly what these two muckity-mucks did to warrant being placed under arrest
isn't said, but since both men's functions were directly related to Pharaoh's
nourishment; it's reasonable to assume their offenses most likely had something to
do with the King's table. Perhaps the beverages, as well as the food, just happened
to be tainted both at the same time, thus suggesting a conspiracy to poison their
master. Since they weren't summarily executed, it's apparent that they're just
suspects at this point, and being held without bail until Potiphar's secret service
completed an investigation into the matter. It's entirely possible that some of the
lower ranking members of the kitchen staff are being held too, though not in the
same place.

Cupbearers weren't just flunky taste testers, but were savvy advisors: thus, in a
position of great influence. They were also saddled with the responsibility of
supervising the King's vineyards in order to ensure their potentate received only the
very best beverages deserving of the rank. So cupbearers were very competent
men who knew a thing or two about not only diplomacy, but also the wine business.
Egyptian documents testify to their wealth and power (cf. Neh 2:1).

Although the baker wasn't up as high as a cupbearer, his duties were still critical.
He didn't just make cookies and coffee cake, and/or supervise the kitchen staff, but
did the shopping too. He sniffed all the meats, fowls, and fishes, and nibbled all the
vegetables before they were ever brought inside the castle. Without the benefit of
refrigeration, his responsibility was very great since his master could easily become
gravely ill, and quite possibly die, from eating spoiled foods.

To be placed at the service of these two high ranking courtiers was really an honor,
even though they were just as much locked up as Joseph. However, he was a slave
and they were courtiers; so there was a big difference in rank even behind bars.
But the two men had it pretty cushy. They weren't treated like common convicts;
no, they each had a very competent, fully experienced butler with impeccable
references at their service-- Mr. Joseph ben Jacob.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 40:4b-8a . . After they had been in custody for some time, each of the two
men-- the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were being held in
prison --had a dream the same night, and each dream had a meaning of its own.

. . .When Joseph came to them the next morning, he saw that they were dejected.
So he asked Pharaoh's officials who were in custody with him in his master's house:
Why are your faces so sad today? We both had dreams; they answered, but there
is no one to interpret them. Then Joseph said to them: Do not interpretations
belong to God?

Actually, in the literal, Joseph said: Aren't interpretations with the gods? Because
the word for "God" isn't Yhvh, rather, it's 'elohiym (el-o-heem') which isn't one of
the creator's proper names, but a nondescript plural noun for all gods, both the true
and the false, i.e. the real and the imagined.

• Gen 40:8b . . Please tell me.

There's no record up to this point of Joseph ever interpreting a dream, not even his
own. He dreamed in the past (e.g. Gen 37:5-7, Gen 37:9) but at the time he didn't
know what his dreams meant; and in this particular instance, I seriously doubt he
believed himself able to interpret a one. I think he was just curious. Jail is boring;
what else was there to talk about? So what's going to happen next was probably
just as big a surprise to him as it was to them.

Incidentally, there's no record of God ever speaking one-on-one with Joseph. He
believed God was providentially active in his life, but was given no apparitions of
any kind whatsoever to corroborate his confidence other than the fulfillment of his
interpretations of people's dreams; which aren't eo ipso evidence of God at work.
(e.g. Acts 16:16)

People's dreams normally don't stick in their memories for very long; but these two
men's dreams seemed (to them anyway) to be of a mysteriously symbolic
significance, and so disturbing that they can't get the details out of their minds.

In psychoanalysis, dreams are of interest because they're often expressions of
subconscious anxieties and inner conflicts rather than portents and/or omens.

Dreams are both common and normal, and surely no one should try to derive a
message from God out of them. But these men's dreams defied psychoanalysis
because they were so weird and unnatural.

Had they been at liberty, they no doubt would have contacted one of Pharaoh's
astrologers, or an occultist or a diviner, or a highly intuitive wiz kid to tell them the
meanings. But for now they're stuck with Joseph-- a nice enough young fellow; but
a total unknown in their world regarding matters of paranormal precognition.

• Gen 40:9-13 . .Then the chief cupbearer told his dream to Joseph. He said to
him: In my dream, there was a vine in front of me. On the vine were three
branches. It had barely budded, when out came its blossoms and its clusters
ripened into grapes. Pharaoh's cup was in my hand, and I took the grapes, pressed
them into Pharaoh's cup, and placed the cup in Pharaoh's hand.

. . . Joseph said to him: This is its interpretation: The three branches are three
days. In three days Pharaoh will pardon you and restore you to your post; you will
place Pharaoh's cup in his hand, as was your custom formerly when you were his
cupbearer.

From whence Joseph got his interpretation isn't stated. Genesis doesn't say he
heard a voice, nor does it clearly say that God gave Joseph the interpretation. For
all Joseph knew, (and them too) he was just taking a wild guess. It probably came
right out of his head sort of like intuition or an imaginative locution.

• Gen 40:14 . . But remember me when all is well with you again, and do me the
kindness of mentioning me to Pharaoh, so as to free me from this place.

Don't worry, he won't; nor did he promise to.

• Gen 40:15 . . For in truth, I was kidnapped from the land of the Hebrews; nor
have I done anything here that they should have put me in the dungeon.

Joseph was telling the truth, but not the whole truth. He was in prison for the crime
of rape. Whether he actually did it or not is immaterial. And he wasn't realistic:
Joseph couldn't reasonably expect a courtier to take the word of a criminal; and a
slave at that.

• Gen 40:16a . .When the chief baker saw how favorably he had interpreted,

Apparently, for reasons unstated, the baker was somewhat reluctant to share his
dream with Joseph at first, but relented when the first dream had a happy ending.

• Gen 40:16b-17 . . he said to Joseph: In my dream, similarly, there were three
openwork baskets on my head. In the uppermost basket were all kinds of food for
Pharaoh that a baker prepares; and the birds were eating it out of the basket above
my head.

Birds are usually an ill omen in Scripture; sort of like the connotation borne by
serpents. So, now it comes out why the baker was reluctant to tell his dream. If
Pharaoh ever suspected that his food was being picked over by birds, he would be
very disappointed in the quality of the care that a potentate had a right to expect
from his own personal team of cooks. Food left uncovered, exposed and out in the
open, is certainly not food fit for a king.

The baker's dream may have been his subconscious at work reminiscing the error
of his ways. Up till now, the baker had no doubt insisted upon his innocence; which
was nothing less than feigned since he knew very well with whom the real fault lay
between himself and the cupbearer.

Apparently Pharaoh had actually gotten some sort of food poisoning, and the
investigation underway by Potiphar sought to find the source; and likely to
determine if it was in any way evidence of a conspiracy to assassinate Pharaoh.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 40:18-19 . . Joseph answered: This is its interpretation: The three baskets
are three days. In three days Pharaoh will lift off your head and gibbet you upon a
pole; and the birds will pick off your flesh.

It's lucky for the baker that he would be already dead before the gibbeting because
a common method of gibbeting in those days was impaling; which was a grizzly
spectacle. Wooden poles, about three to four inches in diameter were sharpened to
a pencil point and forcibly inserted into the abdomen, up into the rib cage to catch
on the spine in back of the throat; and the pole was then set upright to suspend the
victim above the ground like human shish kabob.

I'm looking here at an impaling on an Assyrian stone relief-- in the July/August
2006 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review --commissioned by Sennacherib for his
palace at Ninevah to celebrate the capture of Lachish. The victims are three
Israelites who still have their heads; strongly suggesting that they were alive when
the poles were run into their bellies and up into their upper torsos.

Nobody could possibly survive an injury like that for more than a few seconds. The
pole would not only penetrate the stomach, but also the liver, diaphragm, lungs,
some large blood vessels, and the bronchial tubes; resulting in almost instant
death-- quite excruciating, and very bloody.

Public impaling was no doubt a very effective deterrent to insurrection; and nobody
in those days seemed overly concerned about executing criminals in a "humane"
manner. Cruel and unusual punishments were the norm; and nobody dared stage a
protest about it lest their days end in like fashion.

• Gen 40:20a . . Pharaoh's birthday came three days later, and he gave a banquet
for all his officials and household staff.

What really is the purpose of a birthday party anyway if not to celebrate the
continuance of your own existence?

For guys in Pharaoh's position (e.g. Kim Jong Un of N. Korea, Robert Mugabe of
Zimbabwe, and Thein Sein of Myanmar) life is good: better than what you could
ever hope to ask for; and of course that's cause for celebration. But for the majority
of their subjects, life wasn't all that good, and nothing to celebrate. No doubt
relatively few Egyptians in that day derived a significant amount of pleasure from
their own existence.

People normally count Job as one of the most righteous men who ever lived, yet
when he lost his health and wealth, Job cursed the day of his birth and wished he
was never born. (Job 3:1-26)

• Gen 40:20b-23 . . He sent for his chief cup-bearer and chief baker, and they were
brought to him from the prison. He then restored the chief cup-bearer to his former
position, but he sentenced the chief baker to be impaled on a pole, just as Joseph
had predicted. Pharaoh's cup-bearer, however, promptly forgot all about Joseph,
never giving him another thought.

One might wonder how it was possible for the cup-bearer to not be thoroughly
amazed enough at the fulfillment of Joseph's predictions to begin exclaiming his
prison experience with such enthusiasm as to totally rivet the attention of every
single one of Pharaoh's courtiers and instantly secure Joseph's freedom.

But if we take into account the hand of God in the glove of His people's history,
then it seems reasonable to conclude that God didn't want Joseph in the limelight
just yet; so he put a mental block in the cup man's head to silence him for the time
being.

No doubt when Joseph was apprised of recent developments by his friend Potiphar,
he was deeply disappointed, and probably a bit consternated too. Joseph probably
assumed-- and with good reason --that those successful predictions were his ticket
to freedom at last.

But even if Pharaoh had taken note of Joseph at this particular point in the
narrative, he was still Potiphar's property, and would have to remain in custody
because of his "affair" with Potiphar's wife. Dreams or no dreams, does anyone
seriously believe that Pharaoh would have taken the word of a slave over one of his
own trusted courtiers?

So even had the cup-bearer brought Joseph's ability to Pharaoh's attention, it
probably wouldn't have succeeded in gaining him the degree of freedom he really
wanted. In point of fact, it may have even resulted in his death because Pharaoh
would certainly want to know why Joseph hadn't been summarily executed on the
spot for rape. No; bringing Joseph to Pharaoh's attention at this point would have
caused problems for both the slave and his master.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 41:1a . .Two years later

Poor Joseph. He's now at the very threshold of his fourth decade of life and still
hasn't slept with a girl, nor does he even really have a life of his own. He was under
his dad's thumb for seventeen years as a kid, a slave in a foreign country for
thirteen; and thus far nothing to show for it.

• Gen 41:1b-7a . . Pharaoh had a dream, and behold, he was standing by the Nile.
And lo, from the Nile there came up seven heifers, sleek and fat; and they grazed
in the marsh grass. Then behold, seven other heifers came up after them from the
Nile, ragged and bony, and they stood by the other heifers on the bank of the Nile.
And the ragged and bony heifers ate the seven sleek and fat ones. Then Pharaoh
awoke.

. . . And he fell asleep and dreamed a second time; and behold, seven ears of grain
came up on a single stalk, plump and good. Then behold, seven ears, shriveled and
dehydrated by the east wind, sprouted up after them. And the shriveled ears
devoured the seven plump and full ears.

Pharaoh's dreams are all the more disturbing because they contain incidents that
are contrary to nature. Cows, as a rule, aren't carnivorous; and ears of grain derive
their nourishment from the stems of their own parent plant, not dining upon each
other.

The scenes in both dreams are extremely violent with the cows and the ears not
just sitting down to dinner, but literally attacking their neighbors with desperate
savagery, like ravenous caribes: eating everything-- flesh, hide, hooves, bones,
grains, chaff, and all --raw and uncooked.

• Gen 41:7b . .Then Pharaoh awoke, and behold, it was a dream.

The first dream was disturbing enough to wake Pharaoh from his sleep. But the
second was so vivid and so real that when he awoke, he was actually surprised it
was just a dream. And with that last dream, I'd not be surprised he was very
relieved to discover it wasn't a reality.

• Gen 41:8a . .The next morning, as he thought about it, Pharaoh became agitated
as to what the dreams might mean. So he called for all the magicians and wise men
of Egypt and told them about his dreams,

Magicians in those days were not the same as the sleight-of-hand entertainers of
our own day. Those occultists were scary; they used dark arts that actually worked,
and they were really and truly in touch with paranormal powers. The magicians who
opposed Moses (Ex 7:11) were able to duplicate several of God's miracles; so
ancient magicians were legitimately powerful sorcerers and to be seriously
reckoned with.

I think it was mentioned previously that "wise men" were highly educated men of
extraordinary intelligence; sort of like ancient college professors and wiz kids.
Although Moses himself isn't stated to have been a wise man; he is stated to have
been educated in all that Egypt had to offer. (Acts 7:22)

Incidentally, although Genesis never mentions God directly in Joseph's life, Stephen
confirms that it was God's providence that made the young man so successful, and
protected him from mortal harm. (Acts 7:9-10)

• Gen 41:8b . . but not one of them could suggest what they meant.

No doubt the magicians and wise men would normally have guessed the meaning of
Pharaoh's dreams in an instant via their connections with the dark world. But this
time the dark world wasn't responsible for those two dreams.

That had to be a very tense moment for the think tank. Potentates have been
known to execute brain trusts for failure to produce. (Dan 2:1-12)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 41:9-13 . .Then the chief cupbearer said to Pharaoh: Today I am reminded of
my shortcomings. Pharaoh was once angry with his servants, and he imprisoned
me and the chief baker in the house of the captain of the guard. Each of us had a
dream the same night, and each dream had a meaning of its own.

. . . Now a young Hebrew was there with us, a servant of the captain of the guard.
We told him our dreams, and he interpreted them for us, giving each man the
interpretation of his dream. And things turned out exactly as he interpreted them to
us: I was restored to my position, and the other man was hanged.

Why wait till now to talk about Josephs' abilities? Well . . first off, God more than
likely put a mental block in the cupbearers head to forget all about Joseph; and that
mental block could have been something as simple as a very reasonable decision on
the cupbearer's part. Pharaoh already had a corps of magicians and wise men who
were actually very proficient at their jobs. What need was there to suggest taking
on another one; and a Hebrew slave at that?

No doubt during the performance of his duties over time, the cupbearer had seen
lots of dreams correctly interpreted, so Joseph's dog and pony show was nothing
new to him. The kind of mental block where people talk themselves out of
something, is quite normal and very common. But now, circumstances are going to
twinge the cupbearer's conscience, not just about Josephs' ability, but the fact that
Joseph had practically begged the man to talk to Pharaoh and get him released as a
return for the favor.

• Gen 41:14a . . So Pharaoh sent for Joseph,

Normally, Egyptians didn't associate with Hebrews (cf. Gen 43:32) and that cultural
barrier no doubt factored in to the cupbearer's mental block. But Pharaoh was at his
wit's end, and was favorably disposed to swallow his pride for a matter that, to him,
seemed of the utmost importance to not only himself, but also to the welfare of his
whole country.

• Gen 41:14b . . and he was quickly brought from the dungeon.

All this was done so that Joseph could appear in court that very day, not some
other time. Pharaoh was anxious.

• Gen 41:14c . .When he had shaved and changed his clothes,

Shaving for an Egyptian meant not only trimming and sculpting their beards (by
now, Joseph must have looked like Rumpelstiltskin) but also cutting their hair;
actually shaving their scalps bald like Vin Diesel. According to Herodotus, the
Egyptians had extreme care for cleanliness and would let their hair and beards grow
out only during periods of mourning.

• Gen 41:14d . . he came before Pharaoh.

Jiminy! Here's this no-account sheep rancher from the outback getting the full-on
attention of one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, monarchs in the
world of that day!

You know, there comes a day-- and that day may never come for some people -
when you get that big break. It's at that moment when you better have your ducks
in a row and your peas in their pods because opportunity knocks only for those who
are prepared for it. For all others, it's bye-bye; and don't call us; we'll call you-- or
worse. If Joseph blows his big moment, he could very well end up not just sent
back to prison for life; but gibbeted just like the baker. This is a tense moment, and
somebody's life is about to change.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 41:15 . . I had a dream last night; Pharaoh told him; and none of these men
can tell me what it means. But I have heard that you can interpret dreams, and
that is why I have summoned you.

Potiphar of course would have been responsible for delivering Joseph, and probably
informed him of the purpose. But just to set his mind at ease, I'm assuming
Pharaoh himself personally informs Joseph of the reason why he's there because
when prisoners like Joseph were summoned to a Pharaoh, it was more than likely
for trial.

• Gen 41:16 . . It is beyond my power to do this; Joseph replied. But God will tell
you what it means and will set you at ease.

A verse like that is ambiguous since the Hebrew word translated "God" in that verse
is plural so that verse could just as accurately be read: "But the gods will tell you
what it means . . ." However, Pharaoh would have no problem with the god being
Yhvh because his land was literally infested with gods and were a common part of
everyday Egyptian life.

Although Mr. Pharaoh is probably not going to like what he hears, at least he'll have
the peace of mind of knowing what to expect. How many of us really want our
doctors to lie to us? No, we want the truth; even if it's terminal cancer.

• Gen 41:17a . . So Pharaoh told him the dream.

Pharaoh is really grasping at straws here since Joseph had no credentials nor could
produce any references aside from the cup-bearer's to recommend him and vouch
for his skills; and he had only one successful interpretation to his credit thus far; so
you can see just how desperate Pharaoh really is.

• Gen 41:17b . . I was standing on the bank of the Nile River; he said.

The Nile River's role in the dream is highly significant since it was a major factor in
Egypt's economy; especially its agriculture. Every year the Nile overflowed it banks;
leaving behind a deposit of silt; which kept the land's flood plain replenished with a
nice new layer of fresh topsoil. Take away the Nile's flooding, and eventually the
soils would become depleted in an era when hardly anybody knew anything about
crop rotation.

Not only that, but winds coming in from the eastern deserts would not only dry the
soils out and blow them away, but in the process leave behind sands that would
eventually render the land unproductive like during America's depression era when
its croplands turned into dust bowls.

Lower the Nile's water level significantly, and it would make irrigation very difficult
in a time without pumps powered by internal combustion engines or electric
motors.

Joseph is going to predict a famine; and in those days, as even now, famines were
caused by insufficient rainfall. Reduced rainfall results in less natural irrigation and
less runoff, so that Egypt's worst fears will be realized: crops will dry up, the Nile
won't overflow its banks, and its levels will shrink.

Back in chapter 2, Genesis says that a flow welled up from the ground to water the
whole surface of the earth, and a river watered the garden of Eden. River systems
irrigate the subsoil and replenish aquifers. Lower a river system too much, and see
what happens.

I can recall an instance, I think it was somewhere in Australia, where the natural
aquifer below a farmer's land went down because a marsh nearby was drained for
commercial purposes. The aquifer was like a dam. When it went down, salt water
moved in to take its place and the stuff percolated up and flooded the man's
property. All his trees died and the land became good for nothing. Tamper with
nature too much; and nature will tamper with you.

• Gen 41:18a . . when out of the river

That is so perfect because the Nile was Egypt's source of life; so that whatever
happened to the Nile, or whatever the Nile produced, effected Egyptian life in a big
way.

During Moses' confrontation with Pharaoh in the book of Exodus, the Nile was
turned into blood (Ex 7:17-25), and subsequently Egypt's streams, rivers, ponds,
and their pools. Next, God made the Nile produce myriads of frogs (Ex 8:1-6), so
that the frogs were so thick, they became a serious infestation. So then, the Nile,
which ordinarily was a blessing, became a superfund site.

• Gen 41:18b-24a . . there came up seven heifers, sleek and fat; and they grazed
in the marsh grass. After them, seven other heifers came up— ragged and bony, I
had never seen such ugly cows in all the land of Egypt. The hideous heifers ate up
the seven fat heifers that came up first. But even after they ate them, no one could
tell that they had done so; they looked just as hideous as before. Then I woke up.

. . . In my dreams I also saw seven heads of grain, full and good, growing on a
single stalk. After them, seven other heads sprouted— withered and thin and
dehydrated by the east wind. The thin heads of grain swallowed up the seven good
heads.

This second dream sounds like a redux of The Little Shop Of Horrors.

• Gen 41:24b . . I told this to the magicians, but none could explain it to me.

Since Pharaoh's brain trust couldn't figure out the dreams, then they certainly
wouldn't be able to devise effective contingency plans to deal with their meanings.
It's always nice to know the future so you can get ready for it; and certainly nobody
likes to be kept in the dark.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 41:25a . .Then Joseph said to Pharaoh:

Note Joseph's quick response time. He didn't even go off and pray about it and wait
for an answer from God-- no; he hopped right to it. Seeing as how Genesis doesn't
say that God whispered inside Joseph's head, or spoke to him by an audible
dictation that only Joseph's own ears could hear; then I think it safe to assume that
God gave Joseph the interpretation of those dreams by means of his own intuition
so that Joseph knew what they meant without even having to think about it.

Divine inspiration is very subtle at times and pretty amazing too. Back in the early
days of Christianity, certain individuals were supernaturally enabled with a variety
of useful skills and abilities; e.g. Rom 12:5-8 and 1Cor 12:1-11. Compare those
passages with Exodus 31:1-6.

• Gen 41:25b-32 . . Both dreams mean the same thing. God was telling you what
he is about to do. The seven fat cows and the seven plump heads of grain both
represent seven years of prosperity. The seven thin, ugly cows and the seven
withered heads of grain represent seven years of famine. This will happen just as I
have described it, for God has shown you what he is about to do.

. . .The next seven years will be a period of great prosperity throughout the land of
Egypt. But afterward there will be seven years of famine so great that all the
prosperity will be forgotten and wiped out. Famine will destroy the land. This
famine will be so terrible that even the memory of the good years will be erased. As
for having the dream twice, it means that the matter has been decreed by God and
that he will make these events happen soon.

The "twice" method was first seen in Gen 37:5-11. Peter's vision (Acts 10:9-17)
was the same one three times over, while Joseph's and Pharaoh's two dreams
apiece were redundant, indicating that God meant business and wasn't going to
change His mind regarding this matter. You know though, with some people, no
matter how many times, or in how many ways, you try to tell them something, they
refuse to listen; like when a girl keeps saying NO to a boy's advances and he just
keeps coming on anyway because for some strange reason the boy thinks she
doesn't mean it; and he's somehow convinced that her protests aren't serious.

Everybody accepted Joseph's interpretation without question-- Pharaoh and all the
magicians and wise men (Gen 41:37) --and that is pretty amazing in itself.

Suppose you were a US President in San Diego for a one-night fund raiser and a
Secret Service agent assigned to protect the President said he heard that the
Border Patrol had an illegal immigrant from Sinaloa in custody for rape down in San
Ysidro who says he knows exactly how to balance the Federal budget, stop
processed food from poisoning Americans, eradicate genetically engineered crops,
solve all your problems with Iran, China, and North Korea, and get America out of
Afghanistan. Would you be interested? I don't think so; you'd have to be pretty
desperate.

I believe that while Pharaoh and his corps of geniuses were listening to Joseph's
interpretation, God was doing a number on their minds so that they would accept
what Joseph was telling them; and by the time he finished, they were amazed that
they hadn't thought of the interpretation themselves because it seemed not only
quite simple, and obviously true; but also the only possible explanation.

God wasn't bringing all these things to pass for the purpose of embarrassing or of
dethroning the king of Egypt (not this one anyway). As a matter of fact, Pharaoh's
control over the country would be strengthened by these events. The underlying
purpose of it all had to do rather with God's plans and purposes for the people of
Israel. Therefore, not only did God give Pharaoh the dreams, and give Joseph the
true interpretation of the dreams, but also provided an effective action plan for
Egypt's survival.

People often complain that they can't respect a hell-fire God because He only uses
the threat of eternal suffering as coercion to get people in line. But the Bible's talk
of hell and eternal suffering isn't meant to intimidate people. No, it's just like
Pharaoh's dreams: talk of hell and eternal suffering is meant as an early warning of
things to come-- inevitable things.

A Danger Foreseen;
Is Half-Avoided.
Cheyenne Proverb
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 41:33-36 . . Now therefore I suggest Pharaoh look out a man discreet and
wise, and set him over the land of Egypt. Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint
officers over the land, and take up the fifth part of the land of Egypt in the seven
plenteous years.

. . . And have them gather all the food of those good years that come, and lay up
grain under the hand of Pharaoh, and let them keep food in the cities. And that
food shall be for store to the land against the seven years of famine, which shall be
in the land of Egypt; that the land perish not through the famine.

A grain czar "wise and discreet" was necessary so that the man appointed wouldn't
be tempted to profit from his own country's misfortune like so many of Wall Street's
psychopathic barracudas are wont to do. Thank God Pharaoh had the cool to
realize that what his country faced was not just long lines at the gas pumps, but
nothing less than a full blown national emergency.

On the other hand, a central bureaucracy could easily lead to despotism, red tape,
favoritism, cronyism, nepotism, corruption, payoffs, bribes, artificial shortages,
black marketing, and political manipulation; especially if all the available food
supplies were in the hands of self-serving corporations like ENRON, Monsanto,
Bechtel, and Nestlé.

The success of Joseph's plan relied heavily upon the integrity of its administrator.
The right man would be a savior; the wrong man could become a tyrant; and if the
top man was a crook, everybody under him could be expected to be crooked too,
and instead of a program intended to help the poor, it would only serve as a golden
opportunity to line the pockets of officials like Indian Agents of the old west who
embezzled Native Americans out of thousands of dollars worth of food, tools,
livestock, implements, shelter, and clothing.

It's been shown by historians that tithing was practiced in ancient Egypt and other
nations, as a form of taxes or tribute to the king; but a 20 percent levy would be
very unusual, and might well be resisted, especially if enacted by an unpopular
sovereign. Thus, the chief administrator of Joseph's plan would have to be skilled in
diplomacy and persuasion: a veritable expert on how to win friends and influence
people.

Actually, the 20 percent wasn't a hardship. Egypt's agricultural production was so
good that no doubt at least 20 percent went to waste anyway even after all the
people were satisfied and Egypt's export commitments were fulfilled. (Here in the
USA, we waste upwards of 40% of our annual purchases of food)

Some citizens might gripe at first, but it's hard to feel deprived when things are
going good. The seven years of plenty would be a time of bumper crops and
overabundance; and heck, you could give the children's food to the dogs and not
hurt them. The only real malcontents in Egypt would be people who are never
happy about anything anyway.

Americans themselves have so much left over that there's enough perfectly good
food thrown out in the dumpsters behind super markets and fast food chains like
Wendy's, Carl's Jr, Subway, McDonalds. Arby's, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken,
and Burger King to easily feed every homeless person in the USA three meals a
day. And that's not even counting all the other restaurants and food courts that are
tossing out literally tons of edible garbage every hour of the business day.

Although someone might get the wrong impression, there was really no indication
in Joseph's presentation that he was throwing his hat in the ring. Such a thought
could hardly have crossed his sheep-herder's mind. The last thing Joseph wanted
was a long-term commitment to Federal employment in a foreign country when the
only thing on his mind was getting back home to his dad in Hebron.

Joseph was not only an alien, but a slave; and a jailbird accused of rape. He had
never held a political office of any kind whatsoever. His only experience in business
management was the oversight of Potiphar's household affairs; nor had he any
experience in either running or participating in a bureaucracy of the magnitude of
which he spoke.

But there are people like Joseph who have a God-given natural aptitude in certain
areas. They don't need training and they don't need experience. They're like some
combat platoon sergeants who, when you throw them into the mouths of canons,
don't panic and don't get flustered. They perform like they've been doing that sort
of thing all their lives.

Joseph probably wasn't aware at first that he had a God-given knack for running a
big show like a national food bank. But God was, and that's exactly why He's going
to persuade the top brass to put His own man in charge because the very survival
of the people of Israel heavily depends upon an effective contingency to meet those
inevitable seven years of famine; and even after the famine ended, there would still
yet be a time of recovery before Egypt got back up to speed.
_