Gospel Light Christian Church Thru-The-Bible Series (22.3)

The Book of Genesis

Genesis Chapter 37:2-36 - Read this Bible passage once through before referring to the notes below.

The Opposition of Envy and Hatred against Joseph: God’s Chosen Leader

v.2 From the generations of Esau, our attention is now turned to the “generations of Jacob” again.  The attention is now focussed on Joseph. He is seventeen years old. Along with his brothers, he is a shepherd of his father's sheep but he is only a young “lad” compared with his other brothers.  As a fellow shepherd of his father’s flock, Joseph had occasion to bring “unto his father [an] evil report” on his brothers (i.e. a report of their evil deeds).  This offers a glimpse of the nature of the other sons of Jacob and introduces the faithfulness of Joseph to his father.  Those who would be leaders must prove faithful in smaller responsibilities.

v.3 The fact that “Israel loved Joseph more than all his children” indicates that he learnt nothing from his earlier experiences of favouritism, where envy and hatred were the result.  Jacob's special love for Rachel (cf. 29:30) appears to have carried over to that of her son, and the faithfulness of Joseph to him further enhanced this love.  The love of the father was expressed by giving the favourite son a distinctive tunic – “a coat of many colours”.  The original Hebrew phrase can also be referring to “a sleeved coat that reached to the wrists and ankles,” which would set Joseph apart from the brothers as the favoured one who would receive the inheritance.

v.4 Jacob's preferential treatment of Joseph was the central problem, which angered Joseph's brothers and turned them against him.  Jacob should have remembered from his own childhood as well as from his early marriage days what a display of favouritism would do to a family – it had separated him from his mother; and it would separate Joseph from him.  It may be difficult to avoid those feelings of favouritism in a family like this (cf. v.2) but to openly display such affections is certainly unwise.  Jacob’s preferential treatment of Joseph ignited and fueled the unholy fires of envy and turned the hearts of his brothers in hatred against him.  The hostility in the brother’s hatred is amplified by the notice that they “could not speak peaceably unto him”.

v.5-8 Through two dreams, God confirmed Jacob’s choice of his faithful son to be a leader in the family (v.5). In his youthful naivete, Joseph reported the dreams to his brothers (v.6-7), and they fully understood its meaning (v.8, “Shalt thou indeed reign over us?”), and “hated him yet the more for his dreams”.  The first dream had an agricultural symbolism (“binding sheaves in the field”), possibly anticipating the manner by which Joseph would come to power in Egypt.

v.9-11 The second dream involved celestial images – “the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me” (v.9).  These symbolic dreams carried the same message – Joseph will be exalted over his whole family (who, incidentally, would also have positions of authority, as the symbol of the stars signified) but that point was missed when they saw only the supremacy of Joseph.  Jacob’s at first reacted by rebuking his son (v.10) but then he “observed the saying” (v.11).  However, Jacob probably also saw the repetition of his own beginnings in the beginnings of Joseph’s career for he was definitely aware that God could select the younger over the older and could declare His election in advance by a vision or a dream (cf. 25:23).

The brothers’ response was unbelieving, mocking and bitter opposition out of envy and hatred.  The question of who should rule, especially among brothers or equals is a troubling matter at any time but it is especially contentious when it marked a change from the normal societal norm of seniority in age.  While we may understand such a reaction of envy and hatred from the brothers, we must also realise that this is why they were not chosen by God to be the future leader.  There is no place in spiritual leadership for such uncontrolled envy and hatred.  God’s sovereign choice had brought out the envy of those who would have to submit.  Rather than accepting God’s will, the brothers set themselves on a course in which they would eventually try to destroy him. 

The lesson remains timeless and applicable for believers today – the one who would be a leader for God must be faithful in discharging duties at hand, and bravely endure whatever envy, hatred, or opposition this faithfulness brings.  God, and those who are spiritually mature, will honour it.  And those who are called to submit to others, even though they might feel more qualified to lead, must not let their envy turn into cruel hatred.

The Fruit of Envy and Hatred – The “Murder” of Joseph

v.12-14 While Joseph’s brothers were leading “their father’s flock [to feed] in Shechem” (v.12), Israel decides to send Joseph (v.13) to see if “it be well with thy brethren” (v.14).  Perhaps the evil report of the earlier mission (cf. v.2) prompted Israel to send Joseph on this one.  Joseph went in obedience to his father (“Here am I”).  Obedience was the mark of Joseph, no matter what prospects lay ahead of him.  In contrasts to response of other men of God to their commissions (cf. Ex. 3:11; Judg. 6:15), Joseph offered no objections at all even though the feelings of his brothers towards him would made this an unpleasant and difficult task.

v.15-17 Having exhausted the grazing areas in the south, Joseph’s brothers herded their father’s flock a further 21 kilometres north to Dothan.  Shepherds could move freely through the central hill country because it was only sparsely occupied in those days.  The incident with the man demonstrated the diligence on the part of Joseph to find his brothers.

v.18-22 The envy and hatred of Joseph’s brothers came to fruition in their plot “against him to slay him” (v.18).  Their contempt for Joseph is expressed in their scoffing, “Behold, this dreamer cometh” (v.19).  The murderous scheme of the brothers were not simply motivated by their hatred towards Joseph, but they plotted together to thwart Joseph’s dream from being fulfilled – “and we shall see what will become of his dreams” (v.20).  Therefore, it should not be concluded that the brothers merely hated Joseph as a brother, they were rebelling against the matter contained in the dream and against God who had given the dream.  Reuben, as the eldest son might have felt a special responsibility for his brother, and his commendable intervention averted the shedding of innocent blood (v.21).  He changed the plan to simply “cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness” (v.22), by which he intended to “deliver [Joseph] to his father again” eventually.

v.23-28 Reuben’s plan was adopted and the brother “stript Joseph out of his coat…of many colours” (v.23) and “cast him into a pit” (v.24).  The brothers had earlier schemed to deceive their father by saying that “some evil beast hath devoured [Joseph]” (cf. v.20).  Ironically, when the brothers “sat down to eat bread” (v. 25) after they attacked Joseph, the Bible pointed out which “evil beasts” were the true assailants of Joseph.

Judah suggested a 3rd scheme to the brothers, which called for the sale of Joseph.  His appeal to avoid any blood shed was on the basis that Joseph is “our brother” (v.26) and he further stressed this by calling Joseph “our brother and our flesh” (v.27).  Although Judah’s scheme was designed to lessen their crime by selling their brother rather than murdering him, it nevertheless highlighted how wicked their deed was – they sold their brother, their own flesh and blood.  Even though they did not actually carry out their initial plan of murdering Joseph, they had, for all practical purposes, in selling him to “the Ishmeelites…[who brought him] into Egypt” (v.28) “murdered” him because they believed that they had finally gotten rid of him from their life and destroyed all possibility of the fulfillment of his dreams.  This is the evil fruit of envy and hatred – the execution of wicked deeds in opposition to the Divine plan.

v.29-32 Reuben initial response was anxiety (“he rent his clothes”) when he discovered that “Joseph was not in the pit” (v.29) because his plan to rescue Joseph had been foiled (v.30).  All that was left now was to deceive their father over the “murder” of Joseph.  The wicked sin of deception once again raised its ugly head in the house of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  Once again, there is a touch of irony here – Jacob had deceived his father with a goat’s skin; now he would be deceived by his sons with goat’s blood (v.31, “dipped the coat in the blood”).  With two kids of goats, Jacob had deceived his father Isaac; with “a kid of the goats” Jacob’s sons would now deceive him.  They brought the blood-stained “coat of many colours…to their father” (v.32) and with a degree of callousness that could come only from their hatred, asked their father to identify whether it be, not their brother, but “thy son’s coat or no”.

v.33-35 Predictably, Jacob recognised the coat and his conclusion was exactly what they had schemed to promote – “an evil beast hath devoured him; Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces” (v.33).  Jacob “mourned for his son many days” (v.34) as his grief over the loss of his favourite son was very great, and “he refused to be comforted” (v.35).  This brings to memory Esau’s great grief over the loss of what he believed was still his birthright to Jacob through his deception of Isaac (cf. 27:34, 38).  This episode, even though sad for Jacob, is another example of reaping what was sown.  A family that so easily deceived to win their way cannot hope for anything but pain and grief.  The brothers succeeded in their plan to rid themselves of their hated brother Joseph but they also succeeded in causing inconsolable grief and bitter pain in the family.

v.36 Joseph is reported to have been sold “into Egypt unto Potiphar”.  He did not become an ordinary field slave but was placed in a household (“the captain of the guard”), where he would enter into a position of higher responsibility.  By the Divine overruling hand of God, Joseph was not “murdered” by his brothers but has been started on the path in the fulfillment of his dreams.  The Divine Providence of God secures a glimmer of light, though faint at the moment, in contrast to the grief in Hebron and to darkness of the brother’s wicked attempt to destroy him and end his dreams.