Bible Commentaries
Genesis 42

Verses 1-28

XXX

JOSEPH IN EGYPT

Genesis 42-45

The history of Joseph in Egypt is exquisitely charming in style, the most beautiful story of any language, and so plain that anybody can understand it. There are no critical questions to discuss, but I will emphasize some points.

Stephen, in Acts, says that this famine extended over Egypt and Canaan; other references indicate that it was much more extensive. Anyhow, it came to Jacob at Hebron, and he sent his ten sons to buy wheat. Corn in the Old Testament does not mean Indian corn, or maize, which was not known until the discovery of America. Many other things were not known until that time. The world had no sugar, molasses, coffee, tobacco, or potatoes. When Sir Walter Raleigh first carried Irish potatoes to England, they ate the tops like salad, not knowing the roots were good. So Jacob sends his sons to Egypt to bring back a caravan load of corn, and Joseph recognizes them. As they did not recognize him, he affected to consider them as spies. But he had a purpose in view. His heart was very kind and generous to them, but he wanted to impress some very solemn lessons on them. He put them in ward for three days. On the third day he took them out and said that by leaving one of their brethren as a hostage they could take corn home to their father, and if they had told the truth and were not spies, when they returned they must bring the youngest brother, about whom they had spoken.

Now follows this language, which I have often made the occasion of a sermon: "And they said one to another, We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the distress of his soul, when he besought us, and would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us. And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; but ye would not hear? therefore also, behold, his blood is required." The point is that they were convicted of the sin of having sold Joseph into Egypt. Joseph had not said anything to them about it. The crime had been committed a long time back) and they had never shown any compunction of conscience. A circumstance comes up in a strange land, and all at once every one of them is convicted of sin. The use I make of that in preaching is this: I begin at the first of Genesis and go through the entire Bible, making a digest of every case of conviction of sin mentioned. I write that case out, stating what the sin was, how long after the sin before conviction came, and the causes of conviction. The object of the study is to prepare me to preach to the unconverted. If you cannot convict people of sin, they do not want a Saviour. Their own consciences convicted these men. A sinner becomes apprehensive; he flees when nobody pursues. He will construe any sudden judgment as a punishment for that sin. Unless you know that about human nature, you won’t know how to deal with conviction. That was exactly the effect that Joseph wanted to bring about, but not by open accusation or denunciation. He wanted to treat them in such a way that they would get into a tight place and their consciences would do the rest. Other remarkable cases of conviction are where Nathan convicted David; Jonah the Ninevites; and the cases on the day of Pentecost. After studying the Bible through, I go to my experience to find the first thing that made me feel that I was a sinner, and the other times I have felt conviction of sin. From my own experience I learn how to deal with others in their experience. That I regard as the most important thought in this lesson.

Before these boys get home, they find the money paid for the wheat in their sacks. See how that conviction creeps out again: "Behold, my money is returned, and their hearts went out, and they turned trembling one to another, saying, What is this that God has done unto us?" When they got home they had to explain to their father the absence of Simeon, the return of their money, and that they must take Benjamin with them on their return. Jacob said, "Me have you bereaved of my children: Joseph is not, and Simeon is not, and ye will take Benjamin away: all these things are against me." I used to treat that this way: that in our pessimism we are apt to construe things against us that ultimately prove good for us. I illustrate it by: "All things work together for good to them that love God." But from the translation: "On me are all these things," you get an entirely different and very suggestive sermon. Jacob hints that they had killed Simeon, or disposed of him some way like they had Joseph. The thought is this: no man can commit a sin that terminates in himself. It always breaks some other heart. If a boy steals, it hurts his mother worse than it hurts him. If a man commits a murder, his wife may say, "On me is this thing." If he is a drunkard, on her and her children are all those things. In the social order no human being is independent of others, but bound by indissoluble ties of blood and society; nor stands by himself, and cannot sin by himself. Preaching on that subject once, I drew a picture of a North Carolina boy who went away from home and left his widowed mother in sorrow. While traveling he took a religious furlough; played cards, drank whiskey, became dissipated, finally had delirium tremens, spent all his money, got into debt, lost his reputation, and determined to commit suicide. I drew a picture of him standing on the brow of a precipice, ready to jump. I called attention to a cord around him which went back, and I followed that cord back to North Carolina, and found it knotted around his mother’s heart. When he jumped it tore her heart also. "On me are all these things."

We come to the generous proposition of Reuben: "My two eons shalt thou slay if I bring him not to thee." Since Reuben was not guilty of selling Joseph, it was very generous on his part. But his father could not trust Reuben: "My son shall not go down with you; for his brother is dead, and he only is left: if harm befall him by the way in which ye go, then will ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave [Sheol]." But Jacob did not take into account the pressure of the famine. We stand against many things, sometimes, to which after awhile we yield. Judah now proposes to become a surety for the lad: "My life and everything I have is in thy hands, if I don’t bring this boy back." That has often been used as a representation of Christ’s becoming surety for this people. Jacob most reluctantly gives his consent, and with his usual wisdom takes every precaution to guard against trouble: "Take of the choice fruits of the land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present, a little balm, a little honey, spicery and myrrh, nuts and almonds." He has done all that he could; now he is going to pray: "And God Almighty give you mercy before the man, that he may release unto you your other brother and Benjamin."

We have an account of their reception in Egypt, and I want you to note the working of that conviction again. Joseph made ready a feast for them, released Simeon to them, "And the men were afraid because they were brought to Joseph’s house, and they said: Because of the money that was returned in our sacks at the first time are we brought in: that he may seek occasion against us, and take us for bondmen, and our asses." How easy it is for an apprehensive heart to suppose that every seeming sinister thing is a messenger of God and of judgment. So they stepped out to the man who had charge of Joseph’s house and explained about the matter. They supposed that accusation was going to be made against them, and sought to defend themselves beforehand. Shakespeare in Hamlet thus refers to the queen: "The lady protests too much, I think." Whenever anybody gives you an explanation of a thing before there is an accusation and keeps on explaining, it instantly creates a thought in the minds of others that something needs explaining.

Here in Genesis 43:27, is a very touching thing, and in studying literature you ought always to notice pathetic and delicately expressed things: "And he asked them of their welfare, and said, Is your father well, the old man of whom you spoke? Is he yet alive? And they said, Thy servant, our father, is well, he is yet alive." Now, when he asked that question how must his heart have stood still until he got the answer, and how much he was touched at the sight of Benjamin. Notice in Genesis 43:32, that Joseph could not eat with his brethren, because Egyptians could not eat with strangers. The Jew to this day will not eat with Gentiles. A Jewish drummer has to get a dispensation from his Rabbi to eat at hotels. The Egyptians required certain precautions in order to escape ceremonial defilement, and would not eat with those who ate certain animals. They would not eat with any one who would kill a cow, a crocodile, a beetle, or sacred animal. The Jews once brought complaint against Peter because he had eaten with uncircumcised Gentiles. Notice Genesis 43:34: "And he took and sent messes to them from before him: but Benjamin’s mess was five times so much as any of theirs." That has become a proverb. Old Baptists used to say, "Have you prepared a feast for us today?" "Yea, a Benjamin’s mess."

The next chapter tells how Joseph sent them out again and put their money back; and how he had his silver cup inserted in Benjamin’s sack. When they had gone, he sent men after them with this question: "Wherefore have ye requited evil for good? Is not this that in which my lord drinketh, and whereby he indeed divineth?" What is meant by divining with a cup? When I was a little fellow they used to divine this way: They would take a cup of muddy coffee and let the coffee escape, leaving the grounds (dregs) in the bottom of the cup, and would whirl the cup around, and tell a fortune by the position the dregs assumed. That was a very simple Arkansas method of divining, but it was exactly in line with this Egyptian method. Gipsy women divine with cards, or by the lines of one’s hands. They denied having the cup, but when the bags were opened it was found in Benjamin’s bag. In v. II notice that conviction of sin again. When they got back Judah said, "What shall we say unto my lord? What shall we speak? God hath found out the iniquity of thy servants," still carrying everything back to that crime they had committed. It is that response of human conscience that enables criminal lawyers, who understand human nature, to become mighty prosecutors of crime. Daniel Webster used to say, when they were morally sure of the guilt of a man and he had no legal evidence, ’"Never mind, I will get the testimony." Then he would begin his speech. He would draw a supposititious picture of the crime; how the man crept in at the window, etc., and if he did not tell it exactly right the fellow would cry out: "It was not that way", which would betray him. If he would follow the crime to the line, the criminal would show the fear in his face. Webster always had an ally in the conscience of the criminal.

Now we come to one of the greatest pieces of oratory in the world, the speech of Judah before Joseph. Analyze the power of Judah’s speech. In Scott’s Heart of Midlothian, in Jeanie Deans’ speech before the queen of England, you will find the only thing in literature which I think compares with this speech of Judah. Effie Deans, sister of Jeanie, had been convicted of a crime; Jeanie walked most of the way from Scotland to make a petition for her sister’s pardon. The Duke of Argyll befriended her, and managed that she should have an interview with the queen, and told her just to speak her heart, and not to fix up anything to say. This noble Scottish girl – and that part is history as well as romance – delivered one of the most impressive, affecting, pathetic little speeches that ever fell from the lips of mortal. I will glance at this speech of Judah’s and show you what I think constitutes its elements of power. "And Judah came near to him, and said, O my lord, let thy servant, I pray thee, speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not thine anger burn against thy servant, for thou art even as Pharaoh." Notice two elements of power: the humility of the speaker and the conciliation of the one whom he addressed: "Thou art even as Pharaoh." The next element of power is that he most delicately makes Joseph responsible for the situation: "My lord asked his servants, saying, Have ye a father or brother? And we said unto my lord, we have a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a little one; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother." "His mother is dead and his father loves him, and you made us bring him." Having made that point clear, he introduces the father, "Thy servant, my father, said unto us, Ye know that my wife bare me two sons and one went out from me, and I said, Surely he is torn in pieces, and I saw him no more, and if you take this one also from my presence, and harm befall him, ye will bring my gray hairs in sorrow to the under-world. Now, when I go to my father, and the lad is not with us, it will come to pass that he will die." And he comes to the last point of power, and that is his proposition of substitution: "Now, therefore, let thy servant remain instead of the lad, and let the lad go to his father." When Judah reached the climax it had power with Joseph. Judah was a father himself and many times had made that generous proposition to go into bondage in place of the boy.

Whereupon Joseph makes himself known to his brethren. And Joseph said, "Come near, I am Joseph, your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt. Be not grieved nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me, for God sent me before you to preserve life." That brings up the question: Who sent Joseph into Egypt? Their consciences told them they had done it, and they knew it. But they sent him for evil, but God sent him for good. That will enable you to get a principle by which the hardest doctrines in the Bible will be reconcilable. We are all the time conscious of doing from our own will. AB Peter said to the Jews: "What God had predetermined to be done, ye with wickedness have done." There is predestination on God’s part, and action on their part, which did not exculpate them from blame, on account of free moral agency and predestination.

Alexander Carson, one of the greatest Baptist writers, a Presbyterian, converted in North Ireland, has written a book on the providence of God, and illustrates his theme by the case of Joseph, showing that while the father had his care, the boys their sin, and Joseph wept at being put into the pit and sold into bondage, and that Potiphar’s wife intervened with her lust, and that the prison held Joseph, yet over all these intermingling human feelings and devices and persecutions, far beyond human sight, the government of God was working. An examination question will be: "Who wrote a book on the providence of God, and illustrated it by the life of Joseph?" After this reconciliation Joseph sends his brothers back home to bring their father back. We will take up the story there in our next discussion.

QUESTIONS
1. What can you say of the story of Joseph in Egypt?

2. What the extent of the famine in Egypt?

3. What did Jacob send to Egypt after, and what several products were then unknown to the people in the Orient?

4. How did Joseph treat his brothers on their first trip, and why?

5. What inner nature of history does the narrative of his brethren disclose?

6. Show the workings of the consciences of his brothers.

7. What direction for a study of conviction?

8. What was the second step of Joseph in convicting them of sin?

9. What explanation did they have to make to Jacob?

10. What was his reply and the lessons therefrom? Illustrate.

11. What was the proposition of Reuben and Jacob’s reply?

12. Who finally prevailed with Jacob, and how?

13. What evidence of the workings of conviction on their return to Egypt and how did they try to excuse themselves?

14. What of Shakespeare’s statement in point and its lesson?

15. What touching incident of their meeting Joseph on the second trip?

16. Why did Joseph not eat with them?

17. What expedient did Joseph adopt to get Benjamin?

18. What is meant by divining with the cup?

19. What evidence of conviction here?

20. What advantage of this principle to criminal lawyers? Illustrate.

21. What is the expositor’s estimate of Judah’s speech before Joseph in behalf of Benjamin?

22. With what speech in the works of Sir Walter Scott may it be compared?

23. Give an analysis of the power of Judah’s speech.

24. Who sent Joseph into Egypt, and what part of the divine government is most strikingly illustrated in his history?

25. What noted Baptist author has written a book on this subject?