CHAPTERXI.THE PATRIARCHS.Isaac.THEstory of Isaac is brief; his life uneventful, perhaps we might say monotonous. The record shows that the Lord appeared to him on two distinct occasions; at Gerar (Gen.26: 2–5), renewing the covenant previously made with Abraham, with a very full restatement of all its salient points; also at Beersheba (26: 23–25) where we are told “he builded an altar and called on the name of the Lord,” in the steps of his godly father.——We see a point of his character in the fact stated incidentally, that Esau’s marriage into Hittite families “was a grief of mind to Isaac and to Rebekah.” Esau lacked sympathy with the spirit of the pious patriarchs and utterly failed to appreciate the inheritance of blessings which had lain so near the heart of his grandfather Abraham and of his father Isaac—facts which the historian touches briefly—“Thus Esau despised his birthright.” The writer to the Hebrews puts the case forcibly: “Who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright” (12: 16).——We have no means of knowing how persistently and wisely Rebekah had labored to win and hold him by her maternal opportunities and power. In later years she seems to have withdrawn her heart from him to give it (with apparently extreme partiality) to Jacob.——Of her duplicity in the matter of the paternal blessing, it can scarcely be necessary to say that the fact of its being recorded by no means proves that the Lord justified it. Indeed the absence of any explicit condemnation can not be taken as equivalent to a justification. Jacob’s exile from his father’s house and home for twenty long years—so manifestly the result of this duplicity—must have been to her mind painfully suggestive. It seems plainly to have been one of God’s ways in providence to rebuke and chasten herfor this wrong, and perhaps we may add, to save Jacob’s soul by removing him from a maternal influence which was so defective—not to say faulty and pernicious.As to Isaac, one point only is named of him by the writer to the Hebrews in his catalogue of illustrious examples of faith: “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come” (11: 20). These benedictions (recordedGen.27: 28, 29, 33, 37, 39, 40) must be regarded as far more than a venerable father’s good wishes—indeed as nothing less than prophetic benedictions—words uttered under the divine impulses of the Holy Ghost. Their broad outlook embraced the great outlines of the future history of the two nations that were before him in the person of his two sons.Jacob.In Jacob’s history there is no lack of stirring incident and critical exigency; in his character, no lack of positive elements and vigorous force.Bethelwhere he seems to have found God first;Mahanaimwhere the double hosts of God met him and the murderous rage of Esau threatened every precious life in all his household, and he found help only as he wrestled with the angel of the covenant till he prevailed; the scenes of his sojourning inCanaanwhere Joseph first comes to view, envied and hated of his brethren, and his father mourned for him many days as dead; and finallyGoshenwhere the aged patriarch found his lost Joseph yet alive and lord of all Egypt; stood before Pharaoh; saw his sons and sons’ sons—a growing host; gave them his blessing and was gathered to his fathers:—surely these salient points of his history indicate no lack of adventure, and in the religious point of view, abundant scenes of moral trial—exigencies that tasked his virtue and endurance, his faith and patience, and in the end brought forth his chastened soul purified by the discipline of suffering and strong in the faith of Abraham’s God.To understand well the scenes of Bethel, we must think of a young man, emerging from boyhood—his fond mother’s chief beloved—not to say, her pet boy—never yet thrown upon his own resources; an heir to wealth; a child of ease—perhaps of maternalindulgence;—but now suddenly brought into peril of life from his twin brother’s indignant rage and violence. It would be so horrible to the mother to see her Jacob slain by his own brother’s hand and to “lose them both in one day”! (Gen.27: 45). Safety seemed to be only in flight, so she must needs send him secretly to the distant land of her birth—the old maternal family home. Therefore, with many a pang of heart, and (let us hope) with many a prayer, she commended him to the God of the covenant and sent him away.One day of thoughtful travel had passed slowly over Jacob, his mind traversing by many rapid transitions from the home he had left behind to the new scenes that met his eye; from the brother before whose fury he was fleeing, to the unknown experiences of life among friends he had never seen. At last the sun had gone down; the eye had nothing more to see; weariness called for rest and sleep. With a stone for his pillow, with his tunic wrapt about him, and the broad heavens above for his canopy, he slept and dreamed—dreamed of a ladder with its foot on the earth beside him and its top in the heavens; and wonderful to see! the angels of God descending and ascending upon it! A new sense of communication between earth and heaven came upon him, assuming a strange reality when he saw the Lord standing above it and heard him say, “I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father and the God of Isaac.” Before this Jacob had heard of that wonderful covenant of God so often ratified with his venerable grandfather and his father. The transfer of blessing from Isaac to himself as the lineal heir of both birthright and blessing was a thing of quite recent experience. How fully he had comprehended its glorious significance before does not appear; but now that he is cast out alone upon the wide, unknown world—now that he so much needs the Great God for his friend—it comes over him with solemn, precious interest. The words spoken were full of comfort. They reminded him of the great family promise to Abraham, renewed to his father Isaac: “A God to thee andto thy seed after thee,” and he felt that the promise put its finger upon his own aching, solitary heart. He had a fresh assurance that his life would not come to nought and be a failure, for the Lord said: “The land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it andto thy seed; and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the West and to the East; to the North and to the South; and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” And lest these blessings might seem too remote to meet his sense of present peril and need, the Lord kindly added—“And behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again to this land; for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.” How deeply these scenes and words impressed the soul of the youthful Jacob is apparent in the few words which fell from his lips when he came to the full consciousness of wakeful life. “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not”! I had not thought to meet Godhereand to meet himso! I thought I was utterly alone but lo!God is here!——We must suppose that Jacob had never been so near to God before. Such a meeting with the Majesty of heaven was new to his experience, and a sense of solemn awe—of reverence amounting to fear, came upon him:—as the record is, “he was afraid and said, How dreadful is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” The ladder stretching upward, its foot resting beside him and its top in the heavens, the open door far in the sky through which the angels seemed to come and go; the voice of the Lord himself and withal uttering such words—ah indeed, the whole effect was as if God and heaven had truly dropped down upon him, and this was God’s dwelling-place and heaven’s door was there!The scene was entirely too precious to be suffered to pass into oblivion; so Jacob’s thought turned to some memorial of the scene and to a moral adjustment of his future life to this heavenly call. First, he took the stone which had served him for a pillow and set it up for apillarand poured oil upon the top of it—a sacred unction.——To the place he gave the significant name “Bethel”—house of God—by which it was ever after known. Then, by a solemn vow, he gave himself to the Lord who had thus called and comforted him with promise. We read, “Jacob vowed a vow, saying, ‘If God will be with me and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on so thatI come again to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Lord be my God, and this stone which I have set for a pillar shall be God’s house; and of all that thou shalt give me, I will surely give the tenth unto thee.’”——If we press the word “if” at the head of this sentence so as to make it thoroughly conditional, and withal suggesting some shades of doubt whether God would prove faithful, we shall wrong Jacob, imputing to him what manifestly he could not have meant. His words must be taken thus:—Inasmuch asGod has so kindly promised to be with me in all my otherwise doubtful way, and to bring me back despite of all peril to my father’s house again, I accept him as in very deed my God; and out of all my accumulated wealth, I will surely give one tenth to him.——The spirit is that of one drawn by God’s promised mercy—not of one who stands in grave doubt whether God will come up to the full height of his promise. These are the words of one who hasnodoubt on that point and who refers to that promise only to say that because of it, under the joyful assurance of it, he gives himself to God in full, prompt, and perpetual consecration. A reverent soul brought so near to God, impressed with a sense that heaven and God are verily here, does not tempt and provoke God by expressing the fear that he will not prove faithful to his promises!——Late into the morning Jacob lingered in this hallowed spot as one loth to close such an interview with God and break the charm of such sacred associations. And when at length he must go on his journey, it was with far other heart than in his solitary journey of the day before.Of the scenes of his sojourn at Haran there is no occasion to speak particularly. Perhaps the deception in which his mother and himself were the responsible parties came up fresh and clear to him when he found that Laban had taken similar liberties with him, giving him Leah when Rachel was in the bond. A man never gets so sharp and keen a sense of the wrong of these little deceptions as when he becomes the victim and the sting goes deep into his own bosom. This is sometimes the Lord’s way to testify his disapprobation of this wrong and to impress his own view of it upon those who may have sinfully indulged in it.Mahanaim.The second great exigency of Jacob’s life has its record inGen.32. Twenty years have passed away in Haran; he has wives, children, and ample substance of cattle, sheep, camels. Indeed all his children except Benjamin are now about him. Not feeling at home longer with Laban; remembering the Lord’s promise to give Canaan to him and to his children; mindful moreover of the scenes of Bethel, and we may hope, somewhat fearful lest the household gods which were dangerously near the heart of Laban, might be a snare to his wives and children, he fully makes up his mind to return to Canaan.At some point on this return journey, (as the narrative states rather abruptly), the angels of God met him. Jacob saw them and said, “This is God’s host”—a convoy—a kind of military guard, the demand for which presently appeared. He gave name to the place from the fact—“Mahanaim”—the double camps or hosts. They seem to have been an intimation to him that danger was near, and that God’s hosts were near also for his rescue.On his way back to Canaan, and consequently approaching the residence of Esau in the land of Seir, Jacob is fully aware that his coming must be known to Esau, and therefore he sends messengers to him for the purpose of conciliating his good will. These messengers soon returned to Jacob, saying; “We came to thy brother Esau, and also he cometh to meet thee and four hundred men with him.” In an instant Jacob comprehends the situation and sees his danger. Those four hundred men are led on by Esau with no peaceful purpose. The lapse of twenty years has not sufficed to quench the fire of his wrath and to revive fraternal affection. Still unforgiving he comes on “breathing out threatening and slaughter,” exhibiting identically the same character which he impressed on his posterity and which manifested itself in the vindictiveness of the Edomites at the fall of Jerusalem before the Chaldean power. Amos (1: 11, 12) and Obadiah (vs.10–16) represent this vindictiveness against the posterity of his brother Jacob as the ground and reason of God’s overwhelming judgments on their nation and land. “Becausehe did pursue his brother with the sword and did cast off all pity, and his anger did tear perpetually, and he nursed his wrath for ever.”——Such was the bearing of his nation toward the sons of Jacob in the day of Jerusalem’s fall; and with this same spirit he is coming, at the point of his history now before us, to cut off Jacob’s powerless family.——With admirable self-possession and wisdom, Jacob laid his plans promptly—first, to divide his train into two parts, placing one at some distance in advance of the other, so that if the front column were attacked, the rear might stand some chance of escape: and secondly, to send forward a valuable present to Esau;—“two hundred goats; two hundred ewes and twenty rams; thirty milch camels with their colts; forty kine; ten bulls; twenty she-asses and ten foals” (Gen.32: 13–15)—enough at least to arrest Esau’s attention and perhaps to soothe his spirit toward his brother. These he sent forward with fitting words of conciliation:—but by far the most vital measure of relief yet remained—prayer to the Great God of the covenant.Vs.9–12 record the words of this prayer, apparently as offered to God in the first moments after the messengers returned and apprised him of his danger. The prudential arrangements above named followed, occupying the morning hours of the day. When night came on Jacob was left alone save that the Lord came down in form as a man—the angel of the covenant—and a scene of struggling, wrestling prayer ensued which ceased not till the dawn of the morning. As the narrative has it; “Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him until the break of day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh was out of joint as he wrestled with him. And he [the angel-man] said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he [Jacob] replied—I will not let thee go except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said—Thy name shall no more be called Jacob, but Israel; for as a Prince hast thou power with God and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name; and he said—Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacobcalled the name of the place Peniel, for I have seen God face to face and my life is preserved.”What we may call the costume, the purely externalformsof this scene, are striking, peculiar, but thoroughly significant. In view of the circumstances, there can not be the least doubt that, mentally, spiritually,—this is a scene of prayer—nothing else, less or more. The prayer is a struggle of soul on the part of the suppliant. He is in trouble; he is shut up to God alone for help; and he feels thathe can not be denied. The scene of the wrestling must imply that God debates this matter with the suppliant Jacob, apparently resisting, contending,—certainly delaying, and prolonging the conflict hour after hour of the live-long night till break of day. Seeing that he prevailed not to silence Jacob’s supplication,i. e.to break his hold as a wrestler, he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh, crippling the wrestler seriously, yet leaving his arms with strength unimpaired to hold fast his antagonist. Then as if to test Jacob’s faith and endurance to the utmost, he said—“Let me go, for the day breaketh;” to which Jacob replied—“I will not let thee go except thou bless me.” Jacob as a wrestler with one thigh out of joint had become powerless to cast his opponent; but with his arms in their full strength he couldhold on—and he did. The culminating point in the struggle is reached in these remarkable words; “I will not let thee go except thou bless me.” I can not be denied. I have thy promise: it touches this very case—protection and succor till I return to my country; and I can not let go my hold. I must have help now, or perish!——The change of name is richly significant. Jacob,i. e.supplanter, suggested the deception by which he obtained from his blind father the blessing; but with it came the rage of his brother and this present peril to himself and to his great family. “Israel” meansa prince with God—one who has prevailed in the struggle of prayer and obtained the blessing he sought. The change of name thus indicates the change in Jacob’s relations to God and to Esau which followed his victory in this prayer-struggle.But what is the significance of this example? What was really the animus of this conflict? what the reason for it; what the point in debate, and what the great moral lessons which it teaches?Our data for the answer to these questions must come from one or both of two sources:(a.)The circumstances of the present case;(b.)The principles of God’s spiritual administrationof grace to his people in connection with prayer.(a) As to the circumstances of the present case:—The covenant of God with Jacob is very definite. Jacob understands and manifestly pleads it, as we see in this chapter. These are his words as recorded: “O God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac”—the Lord [theJehovah, signifying the faithful God of his people] “who saidst to me, Return unto thy country and to thy kindred and I will deal well with thee: I am not worthy of the least of all thy mercies and of all thy truth which thou hast showed unto thy servant; for with my staff I passed over this Jordan, and now I am become two bands. Deliver me, I pray thee, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he will come and smite me and the mother with the children. And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea which can not be numbered for multitude.”——It should be noted that the promise in this covenant precisely meets Jacob’s present emergency—“Return and I will deal well with thee: thou saidst, I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea.” These points fully covered his present danger. Jacob doubtless had in mind the very explicit terms of this covenant as announced to him at Bethel: “I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest andwill bring thee again to this land; for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.” There is therefore no room for mistake on this point. The Lord’s promise to Jacob is explicit, and in its terms guarantees perfect protection in his present peril. Why, then, it will be asked, was this night-long struggle?We may find some light toward the answer if we remember that every promise of God to man must in the nature of the caseimply certain conditions; and the promise in this covenant equally with all other promises. “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.” “Ye ask and receive not because ye ask amiss.”——As bearing on this very covenant let us recall the ground of the Lord’s confidence that he shouldbe able to fulfill his words to Abraham: “I know him that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment,that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.”——Now it will be in point to consider that these scenes of danger from Esau’s rage inevitably brought up between the Lord and Jacob the question whether the deception practiced upon Isaac to transfer to Jacob the blessing which legitimately fell to Esau could be passed over by the Lord without rebuke. Was it proper that the Lord should endorse it with no rebuke whatever? If he were ever to bear his protest against it, the present was the time.——Yet further, the fact had but recently come to Jacob’s knowledge that his favorite Rachel had stolen her father’s gods and taken them with her as she left the family home. Had Jacob been faithful to the God of his fathers in teaching and impressing the worship of the one true God and in protesting solemnly against idol-worship? And had he been firm and outspoken against such theft and deception as that of his beloved Rachel? Must not things of this sort be inquired into and definitely settled before the Lord could interpose with such manifest deliverance as would virtually endorse Jacob as right before God?——It ought not to escape our notice that while the narrative in the preceding chapter (31) recites the misconduct of Rachel and shows that Jacob then for the first time became aware of the extent of her idolatry, theft, and deception, so a subsequent narrative (35: 1–4) apprises us in a very significant way that both the Lord and Jacob remembered this wonderful night of struggle, and that some of the matters then in issue were set right. “God said to Jacob—Arise, go up to Bethel [that place of so many hallowed associations] and dwell there and make there an altar unto God who appeared to thee when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother. Then Jacob said to his household and to all that were with him,Put away the strange gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments, and let us arise and go up to Bethel, and I will make there an altar unto Godwho answered me in the day of my distress, and was with me in the way which I went.” Yes, “he who answered me in that day of my distress,” before whom this whole matter wasreviewed and debated through that long, fearful night—who called me to account in that dread emergency and pointed out my sins and put my soul to most humble confession of past short-comings and to most solemn vows of future service;—let us amend our ways and our doings before the eye of this holy God who mercifully spared us in that fearful hour. These circumstances throw light upon this remarkable scene of prayer.(b.) We may also call to mindthe principles of God’s spiritual administration over his people in respect to answering their prayer.Here it is safe to say that God never delays to answer prayer without some good reason. He could not delay from mere caprice.——On the other hand he may delay the blessing sought, for the purpose of holding it before the suppliant’s mind till he shall better appreciate its worth, and his own dependence on God alone for it, and that he may accept it more gratefully and prize it more adequately when it comes. The reasons for delay may often lie in this direction; but in the present case of Jacob we must look elsewhere, since in his fearful emergency this particular reason is scarcely supposable. His case was so urgent and involved interests so dear and so near to his very soul that his mind could scarce need to be sharpened to more intense desire or impressed with a deeper sense of dependence.Again, God often holds the suppliant in suspense for the sake of throwing him upon self-examination. It may be simply indispensable both for the good of the suppliant and for the honor of God that he should be put to the deepest self-searching, to compel reflection and consideration for the purpose of convicting him of some sin that must needs be seen, confessed, repented of and put utterly away. We must not overlook the great fact that when God grants signal blessings in answer to any man’s prayer, it will be taken as a tacit indorsement on God’s part of this man’s spiritual state. It will be considered as God’s testimony that he isnot“regarding iniquity in his heart”—that there are no iniquities palpable to the world and present to the man’s own consciousness—indulged and not condemned and forsaken. On this principle it often happens that God must needs compel the praying soul to the mostthorough heart-searching and to the most absolute and complete renunciation of known sin, before he can honorably and safely bestow signal blessings.If now we place this obvious principle of God’s spiritual administration alongside of the well-known facts of Jacob’s history, we shall readily see reasons, apparently all-sufficient, for this long delay and this remarkable struggle of prayer before the blessing was given. The Lord was searching his servant and impressing some great principles of practical duty upon his mind under circumstances well adapted to insure very thorough reformation.When Jacob at length prevailed and the Lord blessed him there, the crisis was past, and the danger really over. It was only for the Lord to put forth his finger and touch the heart of Esau:—then the revenge and murderous rage of the Esau that was, gave place to fraternal kindness and sympathy. We read, “Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him and fell on his neck and kissed him; and they wept” (Gen.33: 4). The result therefore was far more and better than a mere escape with life from Esau’s murderous purpose. It was the reconciliation of long alienated brothers. At least it secured one precious scene of fraternal sympathy and love.——We read little of Esau’s subsequent life. The brothers met at the death-bed and grave of their father (Gen.35: 29); perhaps their paths never came in contact again.The scenes of Mahanaim have afforded to the godly of all future ages some new light on the great subject of prayer. This was the first strong decisive case on record of prevalence in prayer. Abraham interceded long for Sodom; but with no further result than to show that God was very condescending to hear such prayer, yet that the thing asked could not be granted.——Here is a case of positive victory—a real prevailing with God, reached, however, only after a most remarkable struggle. It is a great advance in the revealed science of prayer to have a case so illustrative as this of the great laws of prevailing prayer.Jacob and Joseph.The group of historic incidents in which Jacob andJoseph were prominent actors is eventful and striking; in some points without a parallel in human history. If it were fiction, a mere drama, wrought out by some gifted imagination, it could not fail to command the admiration of men as a most finished plot, a wonderful outline of strange varieties of human character. Truth is sometimes “stranger than fiction”: and the careful reader of this narrative will testify, far more instructive and impressive.The points of chief value will be readily embraced under the following heads:I.The striking developments of personal character in the case of Jacob, Joseph, and his brethren.II.The hand of God in this history, manifested in two respects: (a.) In the suffering and moral trial of the righteous: (b.) In his overruling control of the wicked to bring forth abounding good from their wickedness.III.The divine plan and purpose in locating the birth of the great Hebrew nation in such contact with Egypt.IV.Egyptian history and life, studied in connection with this sacred narrative as affording confirmation of its truthfulness.I.The reader ofGen.34 and 35 and 37 and 38 will see that the ten older brethren of Joseph were “hard boys.” The sacred historian must have been quite willing to give this impression, else he would not have recorded Reuben’s incest with his father’s concubine (35: 22), nor Judah’s criminal connection with a supposed harlot who proved to be his own daughter-in-law (Gen.38), nor the pitiless cruelty of Simeon and Levi when stirred up to revenge the dishonor done to their sister Dinah (Gen.34). Especially do the worst elements of depraved character appear in their treatment of their younger brother Joseph. The narrative (Gen.37) is brief; gives facts without comments; butwhat facts! Joseph was young and very simple-hearted. Up to the point where the history introduces him, he had been trained in a religious home—which seems scarcely to have been the case with the ten older sons. Their shepherd life took them into distant parts of the country, and seems practically to have removed them much of the time from home and its domestic influences.Unfortunately the domestic influences of that polygamous home were by no means so wholesome as a religious home ought to furnish. Envy and jealousy were stimulated into fearful strength.Joseph was sent to help the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. Painfully impressed by their misdeeds, he reported them to his father. The special love of this aged father for Joseph, manifested in the “coat of many colors” (really a long tunic reaching to the wrists and ankles) occasioned more rankling jealousy. Finally, Joseph’s remarkable dreams which his simplicity related without apparently a thought of giving offense, brought their animosity to its climax. Soon Joseph is thrown into their power. They see him coming and conspire to take his life. “Come,” (say they) “let us slay him and cast him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured him; and we shall see what will become of his dreams.” We are not told which of them suggested this murderous purpose. Reuben, the eldest brother, was the first to protest. His plan was that they should cast him alive into some pit; and then in their absence he could take him out and return him safely to his father. They consented; stripped him of his new coat, and cast him into a pit without water. [These pits were dug in that poorly watered country for the sake of getting water for their cattle.] Then they sat down to eat bread, perhaps complimenting themselves that they had not murdered him, but had shown their power and for the present had put him out of their way. Manifestly their consciences were dead to that sense of guilt which a few years later forced them to say, “We are verily guilty concerning our brother in that we saw the anguish of his soul when he besought us and we would not hear” (Gen.42: 21). Just then a caravan of Ishmaelites and Midianites came in sight, moving toward Egypt, and Judah came to the rescue with the proposition to take up Joseph and sell him, to be taken as a slave to Egypt. With some manly feeling he says—“What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother and our flesh; and his brethren were content.”——Reuben’s better qualities come up to view again when he returned to the pit,hoping to rescue his brother—but found no Joseph there! “He rent his clothes”; he came to his brethren exclaiming, “The child is not;—and I—whither shall I go?”In the next scene these brethren were if possible more heartless still. It commonly happens that one crime demands another and yet another to conceal the first. So in this case, the next thing is to deceive their father even though it torture him with the agony of supposing his favorite son devoured by some evil beast. They kill a kid; stain Joseph’s coat with its blood; and then send it to their father, saying, “This have we found; see whether it be thy son’s coat or not.” There was no mistaking the coat, and Jacob’s grief is heart-breaking. Remarkably it is said that “all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted”; and he said, “I will go down into the grave to my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.”——How easily those sons might have said: “Father, we have sinned against God and against thee; but Joseph is not slain by lions; we sold him into Egypt! You may live to see him again.” But not even Reuben or Judah had conscience, and truthfulness, and filial affection enough to reveal the guilty secret. Miserable comforters were they all to their father’s broken heart!Leaving Jacob to long years of bitterest grief, we follow the fortunes of Joseph. From this point the thread of the story takes him into Egypt a slave. Sold to Potiphar, an officer under Pharaoh, it soon became apparent that the Lord was with him and made every thing prosper under his hand. He rises rapidly in the confidence of his master; is put in charge of all his house—but here springs up a new trial. Joseph is beautiful in person and amiable in manners. Potiphar’s wife, lewd and shameless, tempts him with solicitations to adultery. Joseph’s bearing in this case was worthy to be put on permanent record to pass down through all future generations to the end of time, a perfect model of both virtue and wisdom—the virtue that resists seductive temptation with unwavering firmness; and the wisdom that comprehends and applies the perfect methods of resisting temptation.Joseph did not dally with his tempter; did not suffer the temptation to gather new force, but met it instantly with the strongest considerations possible—“How can I do this great wickedness andsin against God!” God, said he to himself, is my best friend; I am his servant. He has stood by me through all my trials and given me this great prosperity; his pure eye is on me; I can not do this great wickedness against him!——The sense of a present God settled the question forever. There was indeed another line of considerations—his obligations to the husband of this lewd woman. Potiphar had trusted him most entirely; shall he abuse this trust? Never.——Thus Joseph’s course was at once decided. But this vile woman persisted in her solicitations, till at length, maddened by her failure, she plotted his death. She laid hold of his garment; he escaped leaving it in her hands. With this for her proof she accuses Joseph of the crime of which she alone was guilty. Joseph is thrown into prison—because of his virtue and not because of any crime. Of course the Lord was with him still, and again Joseph rises in the favor and confidence of those in power; is put in charge of all matters in the prison, and thus the Lord turned this great trial to account to bring Joseph before Pharaoh. Long was the trial; the story of his relations to the chief butler and the chief baker is in point chiefly as showing how ungratefully the butler could forget his imprisoned friend and prolong his imprisonment. But the hour of deliverance came at last. Pharaoh’s two dreams impressed and disturbed his mind so much that he summoned all his wise men to his help—but in vain. At this opportune moment the chief butler remembers Joseph. He should have spoken of him to the king two years before; but engrossed with his own prosperity, he forgot his prison benefactor till this time. Joseph comes to the help of the king. His first answer is beautifully modest and fragrant with piety. “I have heard of thee, said the king, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it.” Joseph replies: “It is not in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace” (Gen.41: 16). The dreams are interpreted to signify seven years of overflowing plenty, followed by seven of extreme famine throughout all the land. Joseph suggeststo the king to store up the excess of the plentiful years against the deficiencies of the famine years. The king sees the wisdom of this suggestion and at once appoints Joseph to this responsibility; in fact, sets him over all Egypt save only in the honors of the throne.At this point the historic thread brings Jacob and his sons in Canaan to view again. We are not told whether they had the seven years of exuberant plenty there, but the years of famine were there in terrible power. They were soon breadless. The father hears that there is corn in Egypt; so he sends ten of his sons—all that are with him save Benjamin—to get corn. It was to be brought on the backs of their asses, and therefore it was wise to send them all together.The scenes that follow are told with masterly simplicity. Joseph knows them; they do not recognize him: What policy shall he pursue? Why, we may perhaps ask, why does he not make himself known to them at once? Why does he treat them so roughly; accuse them of being spies; throw them all into prison for three days; propose to keep them all confined save one and send him back after Benjamin; but finally compromises the matter by taking Simeon as a hostage, binding him before their eyes, and then consenting that the rest may go home and bring Benjamin down as the condition of Simeon’s release? Why does he put their money into the mouth of each man’s sack of corn? Why this long delay, and these searching, harassing preliminaries?It was not that Joseph was hard-hearted and rather enjoyed using his power and taking some revenge—nothing of this sort. It is indeed said in the first stage of this interview—“Joseph remembered the dreams which he dreamed of them” (Gen.42: 9), and thereupon said, “Ye are spies; to see the nakedness of the land are ye come.” But this only shows that his policy was settled upon the spur of the moment. He saw what he needed to accomplish and laid his plans accordingly. The whole narrative shows that, so far from being void of fraternal feeling and hard-hearted, in fact it tasked his firmness of character to the utmost to suppress his emotions sufficiently to carry out his purpose. His main purpose was to bring them to thorough repentance.For this end he must needs throw their thought back upon their great sin and bring the heavy pressure of present calamity upon them with all its suggestive power to show them that God was taking them in hand for that wickedness. He also wished to see how they felt toward their father and toward Benjamin. Their feeling toward both the father and his youngest son would be an index of their penitence for their great sin toward himself.Joseph was a man of consummate wisdom. Few men have ever lived who understood human nature better than he, or could plan better for a given effect. Consequently we shall not miss greatly if we infer his design from the actual effect. When we see what he accomplished, we are reasonably safe in saying—This is what he aimed to do.Observe now that the first scene had not fully transpired ere he heard them saying one to another, “We are verily guilty concerning our brother in that we saw thee anguish of his soul when he besought us and we would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us.” And Reuben answered them (i. e.interposed at that point) saying, “Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? Therefore, behold also, his blood is required.”——Joseph saw that his scheme was taking effect; their consciences were at work. How his own heart must have throbbed! Accordingly we read—“He turned himself about from them and wept.” But the work is not yet complete; so he brushed away the tears and “returned to them and took from them Simeon and bound him before their eyes.” Why he chose Simeon is not indicated. Perhaps—not to say probably—he was the leading spirit in the cruel scenes thirteen years before. We remember that Simeon and Levi led off in that bloody affray with the men of Shechem. However this may be, he was the eldest after Reuben; and Reuben, though a coarse, rough nature, was on the side of mercy toward the abused Joseph. Simeon, therefore, is chosen for the hostage, to be kept in close confinement while the rest are dismissed to go home. Simeon will have abundant time to think over the guilty deeds of that dreadful past! Let us hope that it brought him to genuine repentance.The narrative details the return of the nine brethren to their father’s house; how they told their story there; how Jacob rebuked them for disclosing their youngest brother; how he struggled desperately against his manifest destiny; how he said—Benjamin shall never go down into Egypt; how Reuben interposed in his rough way, saying to his father: “Slay my two sons if I bring not Benjamin back to thee”—as if he could not see that murdering two of his grandchildren would be infinitely far from helping the matter or affording the least relief. With better good sense and a more just appreciation of his father’s feelings, Judah pled with his father:—We shall all die of starvation unless we go down to Egypt for corn: we must take Benjamin with us—else we get no corn. “Send the lad with me; I will be surety for him. Of my hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not unto thee and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame forever” (Gen.43: 8–10).——The heart of their father Israel comes to view here—yielding to the inevitable necessity; wisely getting up a liberal present of the best fruits of their land; double money, to return what came home with them in their sack’s mouth, and to buy again. Saddest of all he gave up his dear Benjamin, and then with many a prayer he sent them to Egypt a second time: “And God Almighty give you mercy before the man that he may send away your other brother and Benjamin: If I be bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”——But he did not see the deep thoughts of God in these trying scenes, and perhaps he had not yet fully learned how wise and safe it is to trust Almighty God to bring out his own results in his own way! He will learn more by and by.Events thicken; the final consummation hastens on. They are in Egypt again and stand before Joseph. His quick eye sees his beloved brother Benjamin among them. At once he gives orders to the ruler of his house to prepare a dinner for all these men and to bring them all into his house. A deeper fear seizes upon them: what, say they, can this mean? What new charges, what prosecutions, what fresh dangers, are coming now? They meet the Steward at the door and tell him their story about the returned money. The recognition of God in his reply seems strange for an Egyptian—unlesswe suppose that Joseph had given him the words. He said, “Peace be to you; fear not; your God and the God of your fathers hath given you treasure in your sacks. I had your money” (Gen.43: 23). “And he brought Simeon out to them”—which might well have given some relief to their burdened hearts.——The dinner hour approaches; they are to eat with the lord of the land. They get their presents ready; and when Joseph appeared “they bowed themselves to him to the earth.” The historian is careful to mention this for its bearing as the fulfillment of that long past dream of the boy Joseph. With the true politeness of profound sincerity Joseph inquires about his father: “Is your father well—the old man of whom ye spake? Is he yet alive?” “And they answered: Thy servant our father is in good health; he is yet alive; and [again] they bowed down their heads and made obeisance.”——Now his eye falls on Benjamin, his own mother’s son, and he asks—“Is this your younger brother of whom ye spake unto me? God be gracious unto thee my son.”——Ah, but Joseph’s heart is too full; “he made haste, for his bowels did yearn upon his brother; and he sought where to weep, and he entered into his chamber and wept there.” But, the time has not come yet to reveal himself; the searching ordeal through which he must needs make his brethren pass has not fully done its work; so Joseph washes off the tears; refrains himself from shedding more, and orders the food set on. The brethren of Joseph had probably a rather pleasant time—only it seemed strange to them that they were seated by age from the eldest to the youngest and Benjamin had a five-fold mess! How comes it that the lord of Egypt knows so much about us? They can not see.They are getting ready now for home; their sacks are filled with corn again, and again the money is put back into each sack’s mouth, and worst of all, Joseph’s silver cup is slipped into the mouth of Benjamin’s sack. Ere they are fairly out of the city Joseph posts his steward after them, abruptly charging them with having ungratefully stolen his lord’s silver cup. Consciously innocent and deeply indignant, they are rash enough to say—Let the man in whose sack it is found die, and take all the rest of us for slaves! How were they amazed and overwhelmed when the cup was found in Benjamin’ssack! They rent their clothes in bitterness of heart, and all return to the city. Judah comes to the front here; it is “Judah and his brethren” who come to Joseph’s house, and Judah who makes the plea in behalf of Benjamin. The historian is careful to say again that when they met Joseph “they fell before him on the ground.” He also remarks that Joseph was yet in his house, having remained there ever since the caravan left in the early morning, too full of thought on this subject to turn to any other business.——Now he expects to learn how they feel toward Benjamin and toward their aged father. He must be sure they are all right on these points before he lifts the vail and shows them himself.——They are brought back as criminals before him. With a sternness that is not at all in his heart but in his assumed manner only, he says—What deed is this that ye have done? Were ye not aware that I have the power of positive and certain divination?——Judah is in deep perplexity—but he speaks frankly: “What shall we say unto my lord? or how shall we clear ourselves? God hath found out the iniquity of thy servants”—which words can not, it would seem, refer to any iniquity in the matter of the silver cup, but must have referred to the long past crime of the brethren toward Joseph. He can not say less than that they will all become the slaves of Joseph, all including even Benjamin.——No, replies Joseph; I want only the guilty man, Benjamin; all the rest of you may go in peace to your father!——Now the crisis so long dreaded has come. A terrible responsibility falls upon Judah. With wonderful simplicity, with most touching filial affection toward his father, and with masterly skill he rises to the moral sublimity of the occasion. He comes near to Joseph and begins his great plea. Every reader must study it. We shall need to go far to find more touching eloquence, a more masterly setting forth of the facts of the case including the whole story from the beginning to the end. The case of the aged father and of his two younger sons left him by his best beloved wife—put in the aged patriarch’s own words—ran thus: “Ye know that my wife bear me two sons, and the one went out from me, and I said—Surely he is torn in pieces, and I have not seen him since; and if ye take this also from me, and mischief befall him, ye shall bringdown my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. Now therefore when I come to thy servant my father and the lad be not with us; (seeing that his life is bound up in the lad’s life)—when he shall see that the lad is not with us he will die; and thy servants will bring down the gray hairs of our father with sorrow to the grave. I said to him, If I bring not Benjamin back, I will bear the blame forever. Now therefore I pray thee, let me abide instead of Benjamin, the bond-servant of my lord, and let him go back to his father. For how shall I go to my father and the lad be not with me? Lest peradventure I see the evil that shall come on my father.”——This was more than Joseph could bear. He could refrain himself no longer; the tears would come; the swelling emotions must have vent. Joseph cried: “Have every man away from me save these men of Canaan.” The proof of their love to their aged father and to Benjamin is unmistakable; Joseph is satisfied. They are penitent for their long past crime against him, and he can therefore at length break the secret and show himself their long lost brother! How do their ears tingle as they hear him say—“I am Joseph: Doth my father yet live?”——The first shock is almost stunning: they can not answer him, for they are troubled at his presence. More kind words and the kindest possible manner are now in place. “Joseph said to his brethren, Come near to me, I pray you; and they came near.” Again he says—“I am Joseph,your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt.” Then with a turn which evinces the exquisite tenderness of his heart, he begs them “not to be grieved nor angry with themselves;” but to think rather of the design of God in permitting and providentially shaping this wonderful series of events. “God did send me before you to preserve life. There are five more years of famine yet to come; God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth and to save your lives by a great deliverance. So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God.” The best thing he could say under just those circumstances to soothe their mind, to assure them of his full forgiveness and to give them consolation in place of the agitation, fear, and remorse that so nearly overwhelmed their spirits.Arrangements for the future are soon made. Josephassures them that the best of Egypt’s land shall be given them, and insists that they hasten home and bring their aged father and their little ones—every thing they have—down to Egypt, because five more years of famine are to follow. Egyptian wagons—unknown to Jacob’s household—are sent, and the brethren are hastened off. Were they not a happy band? The great agony of fear is past; the surgings of anxiety and solicitude have ceased; the pungent convictions of that dread crime long ago against their younger brother have done their work, and wrought out “the peaceable fruits of righteousness.” This is a wonderful crisis in their life history. Let us hope that most if not all of them found God through these fiery trials and these penitent tears!They are home again. The first thing is to break this strange secret to their father. They make just two points: “Joseph yet alive;” “Joseph Governor over all the land of Egypt.” It was too much—was too good to be believed. The English version has it, “Jacob’s heart fainted.” Better—“Jacob’s heartremained cold, for he believed them not.” It stirred no joyous and warm emotions, for he could not believe it. But when they told him all the words of Joseph, and especially when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, then his spirit rose; his heart waxed warm; he said: “It is enough; Joseph my sonisyet alive; I will go and see him before I die.”Beersheba, the old home of his father Isaac, lay on his route. He stopped there and offered sacrifice to the God of his father Isaac. The night following the Lord met him in vision, saying, “I am thy God and the God of thy father; fear not to go down into Egypt, for I will there make of thee a great nation: I will go down with thee into Egypt and will bring thee up again; and Joseph shall put his hand upon thine eyes”—i. e.to close them in death.——How tenderly appreciative of the circumstances and of Jacob’s need was this vision of Beersheba! Such are God’s blessed ways with his children. He can not send them into scenes of special danger or of critical interest, without some special manifestations of his presence.II.We are to noticethe hand of Godin this history in its twofold bearings:1. As active in the sufferings and moral trial of the virtuous;2. As manifested in his overruling control of the wicked to bring forth from their wickedness abounding good.1. As active in the sufferings and moral trial of the virtuous.——The most cursory reader of this story will see in it a striking case of the sufferings of innocence. Joseph, envied and hated for no fault of his; coming near to being murdered by his own brothers, and really sold into slavery—a slavery prospectively life-long and in a distant, unknown land; torn away from every thing dear inhome, at the age of seventeen:—this surely was innocence subjected to the sternest suffering.How do such things happen under the government of God? When they do happen,what do they prove?a. Negatively: They prove that all the suffering in this worldcan not be retribution for sin. There may be great suffering which can not in any true sense be the punishment of great crime. The greatest sufferers are not necessarily and always the greatest sinners. Suffering is not graduated to crime.——This lesson Job’s three friends were slow to learn. Even Job himself seems not to have learned it thoroughly, but was groping toward it, under the lessons of his own conscious experience. It may not be amiss to suggest here that Job and his friends reasonedwithout the lightwhich this history of Joseph would have given them if they had ever heard or read it. They either livedbefore Joseph, or too remote from these scenes to hear or in any way learn the lessons they teach.b. Positively this case illustrates some of the ends which God aims to secure by permitting the sufferings of the good;e. g.to discipline them to patience under suffering, and to trust in God in the midst of darkness and in spite of it. Joseph’s slavery and prison-life in Egypt would have been simply miserable without this patience and this trust in the Lord his God. Suppose he had given himself up to fretting and chafing and dashing his head against the strong walls of his prison and to wrenching off the fetters with which they “hurthis feet” (Ps.105: 18);—What could have come of such adjustment of one’s self to dark providences? Certainly not the sweet and blessed discipline which he did in fact get from his afflictions; certainly not the favor and the blessing of his God. Every thing in the future as before his eye was dark enough; but he knew there was a God of loving kindness above—a God who made no mistakes, yet whose purposes were often too deep for afflicted man to fathom, and therefore a God whom his children should learn to trust as certainly doingall thingswell.Again; the case serves to reveal God’s pity and his love in that hegoes withhis children into their slave-life and into their prison-life with such smiles of favor, such tokens of his presence, as may well make them joyful in the most terrible affliction. As Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises within the cold, desolate walls of a prison while yet smarting under the Roman scourge, and with perhaps some prospect of sufferings more severe when another day should dawn; so Joseph found the Lord with him when he reached Egypt a slave; with him when cast into prison because he virtuously repelled a foul temptation to crime. God was there, proving to his servant Joseph that no surroundings are so dark that God’s manifested presence will not make them light—that no sufferings and no bereavements are so severe that God can not throw his smile upon the sufferer and fill his soul with overflowing joy!Yet again; this lesson teaches that God uses means apparently rough and stern to prepare his servants for higher responsibilities and more signal blessings. We can not say what Joseph would have been if he had remained in the bosom of his doting father’s home through all those years from seventeen to thirty, instead of being in God’s school of suffering and trial; but it is safe to say that he made rapid strides forward in this school of God—in his knowledge of human nature; in his quick and manifest sympathy with every one in trouble; in his skill to gain the confidence of those about and above him; in his capacity for business; and not least in his living piety and his humble walk with God. His surroundings threw him roughly upon his own resources, and at the same time sweetlyupon God’s resources; and in consequence he rose, as few men have even been fit to rise, from slave-life and from prison-life, to be the actuary of a great kingdom—the almoner of bread and of life to the nations of the then civilized world; and also to become one of the most exalted and spotless characters of all history. Are not the ways of God truly wonderful?The ways of God toward Jacobmust not be overlooked. We need not debate the question how far his sufferings were those of innocence, and how far he was criminally responsible for the lack of moral culture and the power of fearful depravity in his sons. Be this as it may, it was hard for him to lose Joseph—the one son who was a comfort to his heart among so many who were quite otherwise. Even after thirteen years his heart seems still to be sore with that great sorrow, so that when his ten sons say that Benjamin must go with them to Egypt, he exclaims, “All these things are against me”! And when at length he is compelled to consent, his words indicate that he bows to an inexorable fate rather than yields in sweet trust to a divine hand believed to be wise and kind, though utterly and inexplicably mysterious;—“If I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”Jacob lived to see the clouds of darkness lifted and rolled away. He lived to learn that all those things werenot against himby any means, but were in fact shaped of God to save his great household alive through a seven years’ famine; and (what is far more than even this)—were designed of God for the salvation of those sons of his whose wickedness had brought these sorrows upon him, and whom God had faithfully taken in hand to bring them to repentance. Had he not learned ere this that it was always safe to trust in his father’s God? Had not the Lord said to him, “I will surely do thee good”? As to being “bereaved of his children,” was not the covenant very definite: “A nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins”? (Gen.35: 11).——This discipline of the aged patriarch was sharp but wholesome. He might have said, “In faithfulness hast thou afflicted me.” The clouds of life’s stormy day cleared before sunset. It would be pleasant to hear, if we might,the experiences of his closing years when he came to understand God’s ways and to reap the blessed fruits of such chastening sorrows.These methods and ends of God in the discipline and culture of his peoplereach onward into eternity. The faithful here are the rulers there (Mat.25: 21). Those who take God’s discipline kindly here and turn it to best account according to his thought and will, have their reward above. It is not needful that we know in their details what the heavenly responsibilities are, and what the dignities and the honors of those who have been faithful over a few things here; but we are safe in the belief that earthly discipline and culture are not lost attainments as to the after life.——As one short day transferred Joseph from the prison-house of the kingdom to the lordship of that kingdom, so one day is long enough for the transfer of many a humble, suffering saint of God from dungeons of darkness and pain to palaces of royalty and bliss. In the story of Joseph these great truths of God’s administration with his people were breaking forth upon the minds of men by most interesting stages of progress.2. From these lessons in God’s ways with the righteous, we turn to other lessons pertaining to hisways with the wicked. This history of Joseph shows how skillfully and mightily God manages the wicked, making their wickedness work (wholly againsttheirpurpose) to evolve abounding good.We have seen how Joseph directed the thought of his brethren to these ways and designs of God. “Be not angry with yourselves that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to preserve life.” “So now it was not ye that sent me hither, but God” (Gen.45: 5, 7, 8). And again seventeen years later, after Jacob’s death, his brethren being apprehensive lest Joseph might then relapse into revenge, he said to them; “Fear not, for am I in the place of God? But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass as it is this day, to save much people alive” (Gen.50: 19, 20). We should quite under-estimate Joseph’s knowledge of human nature and his sense of moral distinctions if we were to press hiswords to mean that God’s agencies in those crimes superseded theirs; lifted off their responsibilities and left them essentially faultless.——The reason why Joseph’s remarks took this turn seems to have been this. He saw that conviction for sin had done its vital work in their souls; that they were apparently penitent and leaning toward the most severe self-condemnation—at a stage where it was both safe and kind to turn their attention to God’s hand as evolving good from their sin. In so far as we can have confidence in Joseph’s judgment as to their moral state, his words afford proof that his brethren were truly penitent, and at a stage where consolation might properly be suggested as some relief to their mental anguish.The use which God made of the sin of Joseph’s brethren exemplifies his consummate, far-reaching wisdom. He knew all the future. He saw the coming famine; knew how to advance Joseph to the lordship of all Egypt, and to put him there just in time to garner up the surplus of seven years of overflowing abundance, and then dispense these stores of corn for the sustenance of thousands less provident throughout all Egypt and all adjacent countries. The resources of God’s providence, guided by such wisdom, are simply boundless. What can he not do when he wills to do it?——The case is equally demonstrative of hislove. Mark how he bends the great powers of his infinite being to the production of good, to multiply the means of happiness. This view of his character is doubly, yea infinitely precious when studied in its developments in a world, or rather a universe,with sin in it. If the Lord were obliged to say—I must content myself with the co-operation of the good, the unfallen, turning their agency to best account for the promotion of happiness; but as to the wicked, they are beyond my reach; I can do nothing with them; the evil they do must be endured as so much dead loss to the universe, never to be of any service toward virtue and happiness—the case would be, so far, one of unrelieved sadness. We may bless the name of our God that his resources of wisdom and power and the outgoings of his love are not thus limited. No indeed; some good results will be extorted from even those horrible crimes of Joseph’s brethren. Even the devil’s wickedness in which he exults as availing tofrustrate God’s plans and to shake his throne, he will find at length to his everlasting confusion and shame, has been made, by the over-mastering wisdom, power, and love of God, to subserve the very cause he thought to break down, and to break down every thing he had vainly hoped to build up! For is not God wiser and mightier than the devil? The final result of the conflict will prove it.——But it is in place here to note that this story of Joseph’s brethren and of God’s over-ruling hand in their case was shedding some rays of light on these previously dark problems, and therefore was indicating progress in the revelations of God and of his ways with sinful men.Nor let us overlook this one other point—that the case evinces the consummate skill of God in managing the free moral activities of men without the least infringement upon their free agency and moral responsibility. We see this in the way they went into their sin—purely of their own free purpose—after their own envious and proud heart, although God had purposes to answer by means of this very sin. We see it still more, if possible, in the means he used to bring them to repentance; how he put his great hook into their jaws and brought them down to Egypt; took the pride out of them; pressed them with one calamity after another till they came to feel very weak before Almighty God; aroused their long slumbering consciences and kept their thought upon that long past, almost forgotten crime against Joseph—till at length they seem to have become thoroughly penitent. Only by legitimate means and influences, and only by such a use of these as still left their moral activities under their own responsible control—were these grand results reached.——Thus we may take lessons in the masterly skill with which God’s agencies interwork with man’s, effective to the result he proposes because God is more and mightier than man.III.Taking a broader range of view, we may next study the purposes of Godin locating the birth of the Hebrew nation in the land of Egypt.Since God’s purposes never come to nought but are always accomplished perfectly, the ends he has in view being surely secured, it is safe to reason backward fromknown results to original purposes. It would amount practically to the same thing if we were to ask—What great results were actually secured by locating his people in Egypt when and as he did; by shaping their history as he did, and by bringing them out at length with his high hand and outstretched arm?1. In answering these questions we may note that Egypt in that age stood at the summit of the world’s civilization, a fully organized kingdom, a great and highly cultured people. There is most ample proof that Egypt was then eminent above any other nation in learning, wisdom, science, and art; in jurisprudence, and in the administration of law; in industry and in wealth; in short, in all the main appliances and results of a high civilization. The antiquities of Ancient Egypt are the marvel of our times. Her temples, pyramids, and obelisks; her paintings and works of art, have come down to our age in most wonderful preservation, living witnesses to her ancient greatness. There was no other kingdom on the face of the earth where a man like Moses could have been educated and trained to become the law-giver of the Hebrew nation, or where such a system of civil law as God gave his people by the hand of Moses could have taken its rise and could have been understood, accepted, appreciated, and ultimately wrought into established usage and into the national life. We shall have occasion in its place to inquire how far the civil system given through Moses was borrowed from the Egyptian Code, and consequently how far the scenes of their Egyptian life prepared the way for the new national life instituted in the wilderness.2. The plan of transferring his people from their nomadic, pastoral life in Canaan, to a settled residence in Egypt provided scope for all those developments which we have been studying in the history of Jacob, Joseph, and his brethren.3. Yet more and greater developments of God’s mighty hand were provided for in the deliverance of his people from their bondage in Egypt; in his judgments on Pharaoh and his land; in the destruction of his hosts in the Red Sea; in the wilderness life of Israel during forty years; and at length in their location in the land of promise. All these points will come under review in their order.IV.Some notice should be taken of ancient Egypt as affording confirmation to the historic accuracy and truthfulness of Moses in Genesis.1. Moses assumes that Egypt had a king and a fully organized government. The evidence of this from Egyptian history and antiquities is too abundant and accessible to need citation.2. Also that the people subsisted mainly by agriculture, not pasturage; that their soil was exceedingly fertile and the country one of great wealth. The facts on these points also are beyond question. The Nile has always made Egypt rich in soil and in agricultural productions. Its periodical inundations have sustained the fertility of that valley for thousands of years. Alternations of years of plenty with years of famine have been their common experience in all ages, though probably never so extreme and protracted as in the age of Joseph.3. The history by Moses records the fact that in the early stages of this great famine the lands passed over largely to the crown, but were leased to the farmers for a certain portion (one-fifth) of the crops (Gen.47: 20–26).——Testimony from sources other than sacred proves these points. Herodotus was told by the priests of Egypt that the king gave each Egyptian laborer a square piece of land of equal extent and collected from each a yearly rent. Diodorus states that all the land of Egypt belonged either to the king, the priests, or the military caste. Strabo says that the farmers and tradesmen held their lands subject to rent. In the Egyptian sculptures as shown by Wilkinson, only kings, priests, and the military orders are represented as land-owners. [See “Hengstenberg and the Books of Moses,”pp.62–70.]4. The history by Moses makes an important exception in the case of the priests. Being supported directly from the royal treasury, they were not obliged to alienate their lands during the great famine and consequently continued to hold them (Gen.47: 22). With this all profane testimony concurs.5. This fact implies an organized priesthood as a favored and therefore powerful class in Egyptian society. Egyptian history confirms this and shows moreoverthat they were not merely priests, performing religious functions, but were the learned and scientific men of the nation; had charge of education; held in their body the art and the “wisdom” of the nation and performed largely the administrative functions of government. “The thirty judges (says Drumann) priests of Heliopolis, Thebes, and Memphis, were maintained by the king, and without doubt, the sons of the priests also, all of whom over twenty years of age were given to the king as servants; or, more correctly, to take the oversight of his affairs.” “The ministers of the court were in Egypt the priests, just as the state was a Theocracy, and the king was considered as the representative and incarnation of the Godhead.” (Hengstenberg,p.68).——It was by virtue of this usage that Joseph married into the class of the priesthood, Asenath his wife being a daughter of Potipherah priest of On (Gen.41: 50).——The reader will perhaps recall the striking analogy between the Egyptian system and the Hebrew Theocracy, particularly in the point that the ministers of religion were also ministers of civil law and prominent in its administration. The judges in the civil courts were taken chiefly from the tribe of Levi.6. Joseph’s arraignment of his brethren—“Ye are spies; to see the nakedness of the land are ye come”—suggests an inquiry into the relations of Egypt to foreign powers. The suspicions of Joseph obviously assume a consciousness of great liability to foreign invasion. Such was the fact; and the reasons for it will readily appear. We have only to think of the powerful tribes scattered over vast Arabia, the Hittites and other tribes of Canaan and of the regions North and East—all stalwart men, all poor and subsisting on precarious supplies, yet possessed of fleet animals—horses, dromedaries, camels—with which they were able to move masses of men with great celerity. Let such men see the tempting bait of corn in plenty in Egypt, and the marvel is how Egypt could protect herself against sudden and formidable invasion. The monuments of her early history testify to her long and bloody wars with the Hittites and other tribes of Western Asia, often carrying the war into their country as a wiser policy no doubt than to stand behind her own walls on the defensive. Suffice it to say here thatwhen those Asiatic countries were famishing for bread and it was well known there was corn enough in Egypt, the suspicion expressed by Joseph that those ten men were spies was not only natural but perhaps even a necessary measure of policy to satisfy the Egyptians.Theymust naturally apprehend danger thoughhemight personally know that these men were harmless.7. Sacred history drops this incidental remark—“For every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians” (Gen.46: 34). To some extent this feeling was a natural outgrowth of their relations to the nomadic tribes of South-western Asia—to which we have recently referred. But there is some reason to suppose among them a certain special antipathy against the sheep, more intense than against any other domestic animal unless swine be an exception. They had so much respect for the cow that they made her and her species objects of worship. Although they attained great skill in the manufacture of linen, cotton, and silk, I meet with no allusion to wool. Woolen cloths are never found upon Egyptian mummies; linen and cotton were used.——Some writers have supposed that shepherds were held in special abhorrence because their country had been conquered and ruled by a dynasty of shepherd kings from the North-east; but the precise date of their invasion and of their rule over Egypt is very much in doubt.8. Both Joseph and his father were embalmed after death (Gen.50: 2, 3, 26)—a service performed by the physicians. The antiquities of Egypt furnish most conclusive testimony to their skill in this art—a skill far surpassing that of any other people known to history. Great numbers of those embalmed bodies (“mummies”) have been found in Egyptian tombs within the present century, in perfect preservation. On this point the coincidences between sacred and profane history are striking.——The practice was very ancient, some mummies bearing the date of the oldest kings. It was performed by a special class of physicians. In harmony with Moses, Herodotus and Diodorus state that the embalming process occupied forty days; the entire period of mourning seventy. Classic authorities give accounts similar to those inGen.50 of greatmourning for the dead. The monuments contain representations to the same effect. Funeral trains, processions, of such sort asGen.50 records, are represented abundantly in the oldest tombs at Elithias, also at Sagguarah, at Gizeh, and at Thebes. (Hengstenberg’s Egypt and Moses,pp.70–78).——Acoincidence so minute as this is noticed; that mourners forbore to shave their hair or beard; but none might appearbeforethe king unshorn. Consequently we observe that in the mourning scene ofGen.50, Joseph does not come before the king in person but “spake unto the house of Pharaoh” requesting them to speak in his behalf to the king (Gen.50: 4–6).Quite in contrast with the usual oriental custom, women were exempt from seclusion and moved in society with apparently entire freedom. This appears in the family of Potiphar. The ancient sculptures and paintings found in their tombs give a very full view of the domestic life of the ancient Egyptians, no point of which is more striking than the high social position of woman and the entire absence of the harem system of seclusion. “The wife is called the lady of the house.” (See Smith’s Bible Dictionary,p.677). According to the monuments the women in Egypt lived under far less restraint than in the East, or even in Greece. Wilkinson’s Egypt is full of testimony to this point (Vol. II.,p.389). Hengstenberg’s Moses,p.24.Sad to say there is abundant evidence from profane sources of a very lax morality among married women—of which the history of Joseph in Potiphar’s house is an illustration. Herodotus gives a fact in point: “The wife of one of the earliest kings was untrue to him. It was a long time before a woman could be found who was faithful to her husband. When at last one was found, the king took her without hesitation for his wife.”Yet other points might be adduced of coincidence between the sacred and the profane records of Egypt as the former appear in Moses. The above may be taken as specimens. Most amply do they testify that the author of Genesis was entirely familiar with Egyptian life and manners. The sharpest and most unfriendly criticism has hitherto detected no point of discrepancy between these respective records—no point in which itcan be made to appear that Moses wrote without well understanding the Egyptian life of which he speaks.——The corresponding coincidences in Exodus will be suggested in their place.Some special passages occurring in these latter chapters of Genesis should receive attention.Jacob going down into Sheol to his son Joseph.InGen.37: 35 Jacob, supposing Joseph to be dead, says—“I will go down into the grave (Sheol) to my son mourning.” The reader of the Hebrew text of Genesis has not met with this word before, and may reasonably expect to see its meaning discussed here.In the outset it should be observed that these words can not possibly mean—My dead body shall go down into the grave proper, the sepulcher—there to lie by the side of Joseph’s dead body. He could not have meant this because the place of Joseph’s supposed dead body was entirely unknown to him. He had seen his bloody coat and inferred that Joseph was no doubt torn in pieces;where, he knew not; and whether devoured by flesh-eating animals he could not know. We must therefore reject this construction of his words.——Plainly the Joseph he thought of was the undying soul. He expected at his own death to meet Joseph in that state or place which the Hebrews indicated by the word “Sheol.”What is the primary significance of this word? What were the views of the ancient Hebrews in regard to its location and the state of its occupants?The noun “Sheol” is made from the verbShaal25having the sense, to ask, to demand; and conceives of the place as evermore demanding, insatiable; that which is never full; never has enough. The current Hebrew conceptions of the word may be seen inProv.30: 15, 16, andIsa.5: 14, andHab.2: 5. “There are three things that are never satisfied; yea four say not, It is enough: the grave” [Sheol],etc.——“Therefore hell [Sheol] hath enlarged herself and opened her mouth without measure; and their glory, and their multitude and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth shall descendinto it.” “Who enlargeth his desire as hell” [Sheol] “and is as Death, and can not be satisfied,”etc.As to the location of Sheol it seems clear that they thought of it as anunder-world, as somehow beneath the surface of the earth. We see this in the case of Korah and his company (Num.16: 28–34), of whom Moses said:—“If the earth open her mouth and swallow them up with all that appertain to them, and theygo downalive into Sheol [Eng.‘the pit’], then shall ye understand that these men have provoked the Lord” ... “As he had made an end of speaking these words, the ground clave asunder that was under them and the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up,”etc.——We find the same view inDeut.32: 22. “For a fire is kindled in mine anger and shall burn unto the lowest hell [Sheol], and shall consume the earth with her increase and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.”In regard to their conceptions of Sheol as a state of being for the righteous and the wicked dead, it is easy to see that holy men of the oldest time lacked the clear light of the gospel age. Then it had not yet been said—“In my father’s house are many mansions”; “I go to prepare a place for you, and I will come again and receive you to myself that where I am, there ye may be also” (Jno.14: 2, 3). They had not heard these words of Jesus—“This day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23: 43); those of Paul: “Having a desire to depart and to be with Christ which is far better” (Phil.1: 23).——But the patriarchs did expect to “be gathered to their people”—the good men who had gone on before. This is said of Abraham (Gen.25: 8); of Ishmael (25: 17); of Isaac (35: 29); and of Jacob (49: 29, 33). David said of his deceased infant child: “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” Job said of that little known world—“There the wicked cease from troubling, and there the weary are at rest” (Job 3: 17), and yet he sometimes thought of it as intensely dark, for gospel light had not then fallen upon it:—“Before I go whence I shall not return, even to a land of darkness and the shadow of death; a land of darkness as darkness itself; and of the shadow of death without any order, and where the light is as darkness” (Job 10: 21, 22). Conceptions of this state as well illustrating the falland doom of wicked kings and kingdoms, tinged, it would seem, with the spirit of poetry, may be seen in Isaiah 14, andEzek.31: 15–18.How far these notions as to the locality of Sheol are to be ascribed to direct inspiration, and how far to a merely human speculation, following the leading thought that the bodygoes downand back to dust at death, it seems by no means easy to determine positively. We may be allowed to doubt whether the Lord intended to reveal definitely thelocationof human souls after death. It was a point of the least conceivable importance; and moreover our knowledge of celestial geography may be yet quite too limited to admit of any intelligible revelation on this point.Jacob’s benedictions upon his sonson his death-bed—more or less prophetic—present some points that call for special notice. Remarkably they seem in most if not in all cases to start from the then existing present, and to build their allusions to the future upon it. We see it in the case of Reuben—noted for his outrage of his father’s nuptial bed; of Simeon and Levi, whose history suggested their cruelty toward the men of Shechem; of Judah, whose name bore the thought ofpraiseand whose record in the case of Joseph put him at once in the front among his brethren; of Joseph, whose relations to his father and indeed to all the family had been surpassingly precious. The special address of Jacob to each of these was closely linked to their past history. The prophetic feature in all these cases seems to have been suggested by these salient points of their history. Reuben as the first-born might have kept his supremacy—if he had been worthy of it—but he was not. Simeon never rose to any distinction, and scarcely held any well-defined territory in Canaan. Levi came into prominence as the ancestor of Aaron and of Moses, and redeemed himself also by the religious zeal and energy of Phineas in a great emergency during the wilderness life (Num.26: 6–13). The tribe were scattered in Israel, yet not in the bad sense. Judah and Joseph had each a future more resplendent and distinguished than any other of the twelve—their prominence in Jacob’s benediction being fully carried out through the history of their nation.Some special passages and phrases should be briefly explained.Inv.4, the phrase, “Unstable as water,” does not compare water to the solid earth or to more solid rock as treacherous to the foot and unsafe to stand on; but rather as bubbling, effervescing under heat or applied force—as therefore a fit image of ungoverned passion; of wantonness, impatient of restraint. Reuben had no moral stamina, and therefore could not hold his natural place of headship as the first-born—a moral lesson worthy of thoughtful consideration. A young man given to licentious indulgence can have no solid bottom to his character. The sagacious will never trust him.v.5. “Simeon and Levi are brethren”—of kindred spirit; “instruments of cruelty are in their habitation”; better, instruments of cruelty their swords are. Most solemnly does the dying patriarch disavow all sympathy with their cruelty!——The phrase—“Mine honor” in the sense of myself—my nobler powers—is specially significant here, for their spirit was dishonorable, treacherous, basely cruel. Jacob had a sense of honor which utterly forbade all sympathy with them in this thing.——In the last clause ofv.6, the English margin gives the sense of the Hebrew: “They houghed oxen.” They slew not one man only but man as a species; and cut the hamstrings of their cattle.The benediction upon Judah(v.10) stands unrivaled in importance and is not without difficulty. The main question is whether the word “Shiloh” signifies the Messiah, in the special sense of the Peace-giving One; or refers to the city of that name in Canaan. If it refers to the Messiah, the sense, the application and the fulfillment of the passage are facile and truly rich—thus: Judah shall head the tribes and give them kings until the Great Messiah shall come: then all the nations (Gentile and Jew) shall obey him—obedience rather than “gathering” being the best established sense of the word. It occurs elsewhere only inProv.30: 17.No facts of Jewish history are better known than these—that Judah led the march through the wilderness,and that from David to Christ the scepter was in Judah—until the Messiah came, when it dropped from his hand. “We have a law,” (said the Jewish Sanhedrim in the age of Christ) “and by our law he ought to die”—i. e.for blasphemy. But under their law, capital punishment was by stoning (Lev.24: 15, 16, andMat.26: 65, 66, andJno.19: 7). Having lost the power of life and death over criminals, they were compelled to take the case to the Roman authorities.Theirmode of capital punishment was crucifixion. Thus the “cross” stands through all the ages to prove that the scepter had departed from Judah and that the Messiah had come.——But he came not only to die but to reign, and the nations of the wide earth are to bow to his scepter.——Such is the construction of this passage, provided the term “Shiloh” refers to the Messiah.That it does refer to him may be argued on two grounds:(a.) This construction is facile, natural, and supported by analogous prophecies;(b.) The other which makes Shiloh the name of a town in Canaan, labors under serious, not to say insurmountable difficulties.(a.) “Shiloh” is derived readily from the verbShalah,26kindred with Shalam, both words being in frequent use in the sense of being at peace and in rest; expressing good wishes for peace—i. e.for all prosperity—the noun from which might naturally mean the author of peace, as we see inMic.5: 4. Furthermore, this distinctive feature of the Messiah’s character and mission is the theme ofPs.72 and of many passages in Isaiah,e. g.9: 6, 7, and 11: 1–10, and 60: 18–22. These prophecies naturally follow the lead of this and therefore sustain the construction here given it.Moreover, it is natural and highly probable that Jacob whose twelve sons were to found the twelve tribes of Israel and who knew that the Messiah was to come in the line ofsome oneof his sons, should indicate which. Noah had designated Shem: God had designated Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; now the choice is naturally made out of these twelve. That the long promised Seed was in Jacob’s thought is forcibly and beautifullysuggested in the midst of these dying benedictions by the words—“I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord” (49: 18). In the sustaining hope of a coming Savior he had waited and trusted through many long years; for these words express the precious experiences of a life. As Jesus himself testified of Abraham, “He rejoiced to see my day,” hailing it joyously from afar, so Jacob witnesses of himself, “I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord.”(b.) Those who give “Shiloh” here the geographical sense argue that in every other case of its use in scripture, it refers to the town of that name. This name for a town appears first inJosh.18: 1, 8, 10, and often subsequently in Judges,1 Sam.,etc.But there is no evidence that in Jacob’s day it had come into use in geography. This usage, so far as appears, was long subsequent. Nothing forbids, therefore, that Jacob should use it simply for its significance—the Peace-giving One.Again, the most marked supremacy of Judah beganafterthe nation had reached Shiloh. It is therefore bad history and very inept prophecy to represent Judah as holding the scepteruntilthe nation came to Shiloh; the fact being that he had not held it in the full sense previously to reaching Shiloh, but did hold it for many centuries after Shiloh had lost its pre-eminence as the religious capital. I see therefore no good ground for setting aside the Messianic interpretation of this passage. The argument in its defense is ably and fully drawn out by Keil in his Commentary, and yet more fully by Hengstenberg in his Christology,vol.1.pp.50–63.The less readable portions of Genesis.We have passed several portions of Genesis with little or no notice;e. g.the genealogical tables, and some of the less important sketches of family and tribal history;e. g.that of Abraham’s sons by Keturah; of Ishmael, Esau, Laban,etc.Of these less readable passages, let it be noted:1. They are such as never could find place in a tale of fiction, gotten up in some later age to interest and amuse the reader. The fact that nobody finds interestand amusement in reading them now proves conclusively that no writer of fiction could possibly have concocted such chapters from his own fancy and have foisted them into a professedly ancient history. The men who forge books of fiction to pass them off as truthful history are careful not to put in unreadable chapters—void of rational or even imaginative interest to the men of after ages.2. Consequently these passages are incontrovertible proof of the genuineness and real antiquity of these writings. In their time they had interest—just that interest which attaches to sober truth: none more or other than this.3. The Scriptures were written with special adaptation to their first readers, and must include therefore those matters which had real value and interestto them, whether they would continue to have interest and value many thousand years onward or not. This fact, often overlooked, has many important bearings.4. By far the greater portion of these historic books has a permanent interest and value to us and will have to their readers through all future ages. We see in these ancient books not only the earliest developments of human nature in the primitive society of the race, but also the earliest manifestations of God to men, and can trace their progressive unfoldings step by step, age after age by new methods and with clearer light as we move on toward the great era when God became manifest in human flesh.5. It may well reconcile us to the annoyance (if such it be) of some unreadable portions that precisely these above all others afford us the strongest evidence of the genuineness and high antiquity of these entire books. They constitute an internal mark of antiquity and genuineness which by the laws of human nature never could be counterfeited. The man who should attempt to counterfeit such proofs that his fiction is true history would not prove himself very sharp save in the skill of spoiling his book and frustrating the only conceivable object of a fiction—for the sake of what?We lay down Genesis, profoundly impressed that this oldest volume of human history is unsurpassed in simplicity and beauty, and wonderfully rich in its revelations both of man and of his Maker.
Isaac.
THEstory of Isaac is brief; his life uneventful, perhaps we might say monotonous. The record shows that the Lord appeared to him on two distinct occasions; at Gerar (Gen.26: 2–5), renewing the covenant previously made with Abraham, with a very full restatement of all its salient points; also at Beersheba (26: 23–25) where we are told “he builded an altar and called on the name of the Lord,” in the steps of his godly father.——We see a point of his character in the fact stated incidentally, that Esau’s marriage into Hittite families “was a grief of mind to Isaac and to Rebekah.” Esau lacked sympathy with the spirit of the pious patriarchs and utterly failed to appreciate the inheritance of blessings which had lain so near the heart of his grandfather Abraham and of his father Isaac—facts which the historian touches briefly—“Thus Esau despised his birthright.” The writer to the Hebrews puts the case forcibly: “Who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright” (12: 16).——We have no means of knowing how persistently and wisely Rebekah had labored to win and hold him by her maternal opportunities and power. In later years she seems to have withdrawn her heart from him to give it (with apparently extreme partiality) to Jacob.——Of her duplicity in the matter of the paternal blessing, it can scarcely be necessary to say that the fact of its being recorded by no means proves that the Lord justified it. Indeed the absence of any explicit condemnation can not be taken as equivalent to a justification. Jacob’s exile from his father’s house and home for twenty long years—so manifestly the result of this duplicity—must have been to her mind painfully suggestive. It seems plainly to have been one of God’s ways in providence to rebuke and chasten herfor this wrong, and perhaps we may add, to save Jacob’s soul by removing him from a maternal influence which was so defective—not to say faulty and pernicious.
As to Isaac, one point only is named of him by the writer to the Hebrews in his catalogue of illustrious examples of faith: “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come” (11: 20). These benedictions (recordedGen.27: 28, 29, 33, 37, 39, 40) must be regarded as far more than a venerable father’s good wishes—indeed as nothing less than prophetic benedictions—words uttered under the divine impulses of the Holy Ghost. Their broad outlook embraced the great outlines of the future history of the two nations that were before him in the person of his two sons.
Jacob.
In Jacob’s history there is no lack of stirring incident and critical exigency; in his character, no lack of positive elements and vigorous force.Bethelwhere he seems to have found God first;Mahanaimwhere the double hosts of God met him and the murderous rage of Esau threatened every precious life in all his household, and he found help only as he wrestled with the angel of the covenant till he prevailed; the scenes of his sojourning inCanaanwhere Joseph first comes to view, envied and hated of his brethren, and his father mourned for him many days as dead; and finallyGoshenwhere the aged patriarch found his lost Joseph yet alive and lord of all Egypt; stood before Pharaoh; saw his sons and sons’ sons—a growing host; gave them his blessing and was gathered to his fathers:—surely these salient points of his history indicate no lack of adventure, and in the religious point of view, abundant scenes of moral trial—exigencies that tasked his virtue and endurance, his faith and patience, and in the end brought forth his chastened soul purified by the discipline of suffering and strong in the faith of Abraham’s God.
To understand well the scenes of Bethel, we must think of a young man, emerging from boyhood—his fond mother’s chief beloved—not to say, her pet boy—never yet thrown upon his own resources; an heir to wealth; a child of ease—perhaps of maternalindulgence;—but now suddenly brought into peril of life from his twin brother’s indignant rage and violence. It would be so horrible to the mother to see her Jacob slain by his own brother’s hand and to “lose them both in one day”! (Gen.27: 45). Safety seemed to be only in flight, so she must needs send him secretly to the distant land of her birth—the old maternal family home. Therefore, with many a pang of heart, and (let us hope) with many a prayer, she commended him to the God of the covenant and sent him away.
One day of thoughtful travel had passed slowly over Jacob, his mind traversing by many rapid transitions from the home he had left behind to the new scenes that met his eye; from the brother before whose fury he was fleeing, to the unknown experiences of life among friends he had never seen. At last the sun had gone down; the eye had nothing more to see; weariness called for rest and sleep. With a stone for his pillow, with his tunic wrapt about him, and the broad heavens above for his canopy, he slept and dreamed—dreamed of a ladder with its foot on the earth beside him and its top in the heavens; and wonderful to see! the angels of God descending and ascending upon it! A new sense of communication between earth and heaven came upon him, assuming a strange reality when he saw the Lord standing above it and heard him say, “I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father and the God of Isaac.” Before this Jacob had heard of that wonderful covenant of God so often ratified with his venerable grandfather and his father. The transfer of blessing from Isaac to himself as the lineal heir of both birthright and blessing was a thing of quite recent experience. How fully he had comprehended its glorious significance before does not appear; but now that he is cast out alone upon the wide, unknown world—now that he so much needs the Great God for his friend—it comes over him with solemn, precious interest. The words spoken were full of comfort. They reminded him of the great family promise to Abraham, renewed to his father Isaac: “A God to thee andto thy seed after thee,” and he felt that the promise put its finger upon his own aching, solitary heart. He had a fresh assurance that his life would not come to nought and be a failure, for the Lord said: “The land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it andto thy seed; and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the West and to the East; to the North and to the South; and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” And lest these blessings might seem too remote to meet his sense of present peril and need, the Lord kindly added—“And behold I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again to this land; for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.” How deeply these scenes and words impressed the soul of the youthful Jacob is apparent in the few words which fell from his lips when he came to the full consciousness of wakeful life. “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not”! I had not thought to meet Godhereand to meet himso! I thought I was utterly alone but lo!God is here!——We must suppose that Jacob had never been so near to God before. Such a meeting with the Majesty of heaven was new to his experience, and a sense of solemn awe—of reverence amounting to fear, came upon him:—as the record is, “he was afraid and said, How dreadful is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” The ladder stretching upward, its foot resting beside him and its top in the heavens, the open door far in the sky through which the angels seemed to come and go; the voice of the Lord himself and withal uttering such words—ah indeed, the whole effect was as if God and heaven had truly dropped down upon him, and this was God’s dwelling-place and heaven’s door was there!
The scene was entirely too precious to be suffered to pass into oblivion; so Jacob’s thought turned to some memorial of the scene and to a moral adjustment of his future life to this heavenly call. First, he took the stone which had served him for a pillow and set it up for apillarand poured oil upon the top of it—a sacred unction.——To the place he gave the significant name “Bethel”—house of God—by which it was ever after known. Then, by a solemn vow, he gave himself to the Lord who had thus called and comforted him with promise. We read, “Jacob vowed a vow, saying, ‘If God will be with me and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on so thatI come again to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Lord be my God, and this stone which I have set for a pillar shall be God’s house; and of all that thou shalt give me, I will surely give the tenth unto thee.’”——If we press the word “if” at the head of this sentence so as to make it thoroughly conditional, and withal suggesting some shades of doubt whether God would prove faithful, we shall wrong Jacob, imputing to him what manifestly he could not have meant. His words must be taken thus:—Inasmuch asGod has so kindly promised to be with me in all my otherwise doubtful way, and to bring me back despite of all peril to my father’s house again, I accept him as in very deed my God; and out of all my accumulated wealth, I will surely give one tenth to him.——The spirit is that of one drawn by God’s promised mercy—not of one who stands in grave doubt whether God will come up to the full height of his promise. These are the words of one who hasnodoubt on that point and who refers to that promise only to say that because of it, under the joyful assurance of it, he gives himself to God in full, prompt, and perpetual consecration. A reverent soul brought so near to God, impressed with a sense that heaven and God are verily here, does not tempt and provoke God by expressing the fear that he will not prove faithful to his promises!——Late into the morning Jacob lingered in this hallowed spot as one loth to close such an interview with God and break the charm of such sacred associations. And when at length he must go on his journey, it was with far other heart than in his solitary journey of the day before.
Of the scenes of his sojourn at Haran there is no occasion to speak particularly. Perhaps the deception in which his mother and himself were the responsible parties came up fresh and clear to him when he found that Laban had taken similar liberties with him, giving him Leah when Rachel was in the bond. A man never gets so sharp and keen a sense of the wrong of these little deceptions as when he becomes the victim and the sting goes deep into his own bosom. This is sometimes the Lord’s way to testify his disapprobation of this wrong and to impress his own view of it upon those who may have sinfully indulged in it.
Mahanaim.
The second great exigency of Jacob’s life has its record inGen.32. Twenty years have passed away in Haran; he has wives, children, and ample substance of cattle, sheep, camels. Indeed all his children except Benjamin are now about him. Not feeling at home longer with Laban; remembering the Lord’s promise to give Canaan to him and to his children; mindful moreover of the scenes of Bethel, and we may hope, somewhat fearful lest the household gods which were dangerously near the heart of Laban, might be a snare to his wives and children, he fully makes up his mind to return to Canaan.
At some point on this return journey, (as the narrative states rather abruptly), the angels of God met him. Jacob saw them and said, “This is God’s host”—a convoy—a kind of military guard, the demand for which presently appeared. He gave name to the place from the fact—“Mahanaim”—the double camps or hosts. They seem to have been an intimation to him that danger was near, and that God’s hosts were near also for his rescue.
On his way back to Canaan, and consequently approaching the residence of Esau in the land of Seir, Jacob is fully aware that his coming must be known to Esau, and therefore he sends messengers to him for the purpose of conciliating his good will. These messengers soon returned to Jacob, saying; “We came to thy brother Esau, and also he cometh to meet thee and four hundred men with him.” In an instant Jacob comprehends the situation and sees his danger. Those four hundred men are led on by Esau with no peaceful purpose. The lapse of twenty years has not sufficed to quench the fire of his wrath and to revive fraternal affection. Still unforgiving he comes on “breathing out threatening and slaughter,” exhibiting identically the same character which he impressed on his posterity and which manifested itself in the vindictiveness of the Edomites at the fall of Jerusalem before the Chaldean power. Amos (1: 11, 12) and Obadiah (vs.10–16) represent this vindictiveness against the posterity of his brother Jacob as the ground and reason of God’s overwhelming judgments on their nation and land. “Becausehe did pursue his brother with the sword and did cast off all pity, and his anger did tear perpetually, and he nursed his wrath for ever.”——Such was the bearing of his nation toward the sons of Jacob in the day of Jerusalem’s fall; and with this same spirit he is coming, at the point of his history now before us, to cut off Jacob’s powerless family.——With admirable self-possession and wisdom, Jacob laid his plans promptly—first, to divide his train into two parts, placing one at some distance in advance of the other, so that if the front column were attacked, the rear might stand some chance of escape: and secondly, to send forward a valuable present to Esau;—“two hundred goats; two hundred ewes and twenty rams; thirty milch camels with their colts; forty kine; ten bulls; twenty she-asses and ten foals” (Gen.32: 13–15)—enough at least to arrest Esau’s attention and perhaps to soothe his spirit toward his brother. These he sent forward with fitting words of conciliation:—but by far the most vital measure of relief yet remained—prayer to the Great God of the covenant.Vs.9–12 record the words of this prayer, apparently as offered to God in the first moments after the messengers returned and apprised him of his danger. The prudential arrangements above named followed, occupying the morning hours of the day. When night came on Jacob was left alone save that the Lord came down in form as a man—the angel of the covenant—and a scene of struggling, wrestling prayer ensued which ceased not till the dawn of the morning. As the narrative has it; “Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him until the break of day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh was out of joint as he wrestled with him. And he [the angel-man] said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he [Jacob] replied—I will not let thee go except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said—Thy name shall no more be called Jacob, but Israel; for as a Prince hast thou power with God and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name; and he said—Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacobcalled the name of the place Peniel, for I have seen God face to face and my life is preserved.”
What we may call the costume, the purely externalformsof this scene, are striking, peculiar, but thoroughly significant. In view of the circumstances, there can not be the least doubt that, mentally, spiritually,—this is a scene of prayer—nothing else, less or more. The prayer is a struggle of soul on the part of the suppliant. He is in trouble; he is shut up to God alone for help; and he feels thathe can not be denied. The scene of the wrestling must imply that God debates this matter with the suppliant Jacob, apparently resisting, contending,—certainly delaying, and prolonging the conflict hour after hour of the live-long night till break of day. Seeing that he prevailed not to silence Jacob’s supplication,i. e.to break his hold as a wrestler, he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh, crippling the wrestler seriously, yet leaving his arms with strength unimpaired to hold fast his antagonist. Then as if to test Jacob’s faith and endurance to the utmost, he said—“Let me go, for the day breaketh;” to which Jacob replied—“I will not let thee go except thou bless me.” Jacob as a wrestler with one thigh out of joint had become powerless to cast his opponent; but with his arms in their full strength he couldhold on—and he did. The culminating point in the struggle is reached in these remarkable words; “I will not let thee go except thou bless me.” I can not be denied. I have thy promise: it touches this very case—protection and succor till I return to my country; and I can not let go my hold. I must have help now, or perish!——The change of name is richly significant. Jacob,i. e.supplanter, suggested the deception by which he obtained from his blind father the blessing; but with it came the rage of his brother and this present peril to himself and to his great family. “Israel” meansa prince with God—one who has prevailed in the struggle of prayer and obtained the blessing he sought. The change of name thus indicates the change in Jacob’s relations to God and to Esau which followed his victory in this prayer-struggle.
But what is the significance of this example? What was really the animus of this conflict? what the reason for it; what the point in debate, and what the great moral lessons which it teaches?
Our data for the answer to these questions must come from one or both of two sources:
(a.)The circumstances of the present case;
(b.)The principles of God’s spiritual administrationof grace to his people in connection with prayer.
(a) As to the circumstances of the present case:—The covenant of God with Jacob is very definite. Jacob understands and manifestly pleads it, as we see in this chapter. These are his words as recorded: “O God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac”—the Lord [theJehovah, signifying the faithful God of his people] “who saidst to me, Return unto thy country and to thy kindred and I will deal well with thee: I am not worthy of the least of all thy mercies and of all thy truth which thou hast showed unto thy servant; for with my staff I passed over this Jordan, and now I am become two bands. Deliver me, I pray thee, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he will come and smite me and the mother with the children. And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea which can not be numbered for multitude.”——It should be noted that the promise in this covenant precisely meets Jacob’s present emergency—“Return and I will deal well with thee: thou saidst, I will surely do thee good and make thy seed as the sand of the sea.” These points fully covered his present danger. Jacob doubtless had in mind the very explicit terms of this covenant as announced to him at Bethel: “I am with thee and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest andwill bring thee again to this land; for I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.” There is therefore no room for mistake on this point. The Lord’s promise to Jacob is explicit, and in its terms guarantees perfect protection in his present peril. Why, then, it will be asked, was this night-long struggle?
We may find some light toward the answer if we remember that every promise of God to man must in the nature of the caseimply certain conditions; and the promise in this covenant equally with all other promises. “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.” “Ye ask and receive not because ye ask amiss.”——As bearing on this very covenant let us recall the ground of the Lord’s confidence that he shouldbe able to fulfill his words to Abraham: “I know him that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment,that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.”——Now it will be in point to consider that these scenes of danger from Esau’s rage inevitably brought up between the Lord and Jacob the question whether the deception practiced upon Isaac to transfer to Jacob the blessing which legitimately fell to Esau could be passed over by the Lord without rebuke. Was it proper that the Lord should endorse it with no rebuke whatever? If he were ever to bear his protest against it, the present was the time.——Yet further, the fact had but recently come to Jacob’s knowledge that his favorite Rachel had stolen her father’s gods and taken them with her as she left the family home. Had Jacob been faithful to the God of his fathers in teaching and impressing the worship of the one true God and in protesting solemnly against idol-worship? And had he been firm and outspoken against such theft and deception as that of his beloved Rachel? Must not things of this sort be inquired into and definitely settled before the Lord could interpose with such manifest deliverance as would virtually endorse Jacob as right before God?——It ought not to escape our notice that while the narrative in the preceding chapter (31) recites the misconduct of Rachel and shows that Jacob then for the first time became aware of the extent of her idolatry, theft, and deception, so a subsequent narrative (35: 1–4) apprises us in a very significant way that both the Lord and Jacob remembered this wonderful night of struggle, and that some of the matters then in issue were set right. “God said to Jacob—Arise, go up to Bethel [that place of so many hallowed associations] and dwell there and make there an altar unto God who appeared to thee when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother. Then Jacob said to his household and to all that were with him,Put away the strange gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments, and let us arise and go up to Bethel, and I will make there an altar unto Godwho answered me in the day of my distress, and was with me in the way which I went.” Yes, “he who answered me in that day of my distress,” before whom this whole matter wasreviewed and debated through that long, fearful night—who called me to account in that dread emergency and pointed out my sins and put my soul to most humble confession of past short-comings and to most solemn vows of future service;—let us amend our ways and our doings before the eye of this holy God who mercifully spared us in that fearful hour. These circumstances throw light upon this remarkable scene of prayer.
(b.) We may also call to mindthe principles of God’s spiritual administration over his people in respect to answering their prayer.
Here it is safe to say that God never delays to answer prayer without some good reason. He could not delay from mere caprice.——On the other hand he may delay the blessing sought, for the purpose of holding it before the suppliant’s mind till he shall better appreciate its worth, and his own dependence on God alone for it, and that he may accept it more gratefully and prize it more adequately when it comes. The reasons for delay may often lie in this direction; but in the present case of Jacob we must look elsewhere, since in his fearful emergency this particular reason is scarcely supposable. His case was so urgent and involved interests so dear and so near to his very soul that his mind could scarce need to be sharpened to more intense desire or impressed with a deeper sense of dependence.
Again, God often holds the suppliant in suspense for the sake of throwing him upon self-examination. It may be simply indispensable both for the good of the suppliant and for the honor of God that he should be put to the deepest self-searching, to compel reflection and consideration for the purpose of convicting him of some sin that must needs be seen, confessed, repented of and put utterly away. We must not overlook the great fact that when God grants signal blessings in answer to any man’s prayer, it will be taken as a tacit indorsement on God’s part of this man’s spiritual state. It will be considered as God’s testimony that he isnot“regarding iniquity in his heart”—that there are no iniquities palpable to the world and present to the man’s own consciousness—indulged and not condemned and forsaken. On this principle it often happens that God must needs compel the praying soul to the mostthorough heart-searching and to the most absolute and complete renunciation of known sin, before he can honorably and safely bestow signal blessings.
If now we place this obvious principle of God’s spiritual administration alongside of the well-known facts of Jacob’s history, we shall readily see reasons, apparently all-sufficient, for this long delay and this remarkable struggle of prayer before the blessing was given. The Lord was searching his servant and impressing some great principles of practical duty upon his mind under circumstances well adapted to insure very thorough reformation.
When Jacob at length prevailed and the Lord blessed him there, the crisis was past, and the danger really over. It was only for the Lord to put forth his finger and touch the heart of Esau:—then the revenge and murderous rage of the Esau that was, gave place to fraternal kindness and sympathy. We read, “Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him and fell on his neck and kissed him; and they wept” (Gen.33: 4). The result therefore was far more and better than a mere escape with life from Esau’s murderous purpose. It was the reconciliation of long alienated brothers. At least it secured one precious scene of fraternal sympathy and love.——We read little of Esau’s subsequent life. The brothers met at the death-bed and grave of their father (Gen.35: 29); perhaps their paths never came in contact again.
The scenes of Mahanaim have afforded to the godly of all future ages some new light on the great subject of prayer. This was the first strong decisive case on record of prevalence in prayer. Abraham interceded long for Sodom; but with no further result than to show that God was very condescending to hear such prayer, yet that the thing asked could not be granted.——Here is a case of positive victory—a real prevailing with God, reached, however, only after a most remarkable struggle. It is a great advance in the revealed science of prayer to have a case so illustrative as this of the great laws of prevailing prayer.
Jacob and Joseph.
The group of historic incidents in which Jacob andJoseph were prominent actors is eventful and striking; in some points without a parallel in human history. If it were fiction, a mere drama, wrought out by some gifted imagination, it could not fail to command the admiration of men as a most finished plot, a wonderful outline of strange varieties of human character. Truth is sometimes “stranger than fiction”: and the careful reader of this narrative will testify, far more instructive and impressive.
The points of chief value will be readily embraced under the following heads:
I.The striking developments of personal character in the case of Jacob, Joseph, and his brethren.
II.The hand of God in this history, manifested in two respects: (a.) In the suffering and moral trial of the righteous: (b.) In his overruling control of the wicked to bring forth abounding good from their wickedness.
III.The divine plan and purpose in locating the birth of the great Hebrew nation in such contact with Egypt.
IV.Egyptian history and life, studied in connection with this sacred narrative as affording confirmation of its truthfulness.
I.The reader ofGen.34 and 35 and 37 and 38 will see that the ten older brethren of Joseph were “hard boys.” The sacred historian must have been quite willing to give this impression, else he would not have recorded Reuben’s incest with his father’s concubine (35: 22), nor Judah’s criminal connection with a supposed harlot who proved to be his own daughter-in-law (Gen.38), nor the pitiless cruelty of Simeon and Levi when stirred up to revenge the dishonor done to their sister Dinah (Gen.34). Especially do the worst elements of depraved character appear in their treatment of their younger brother Joseph. The narrative (Gen.37) is brief; gives facts without comments; butwhat facts! Joseph was young and very simple-hearted. Up to the point where the history introduces him, he had been trained in a religious home—which seems scarcely to have been the case with the ten older sons. Their shepherd life took them into distant parts of the country, and seems practically to have removed them much of the time from home and its domestic influences.Unfortunately the domestic influences of that polygamous home were by no means so wholesome as a religious home ought to furnish. Envy and jealousy were stimulated into fearful strength.
Joseph was sent to help the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. Painfully impressed by their misdeeds, he reported them to his father. The special love of this aged father for Joseph, manifested in the “coat of many colors” (really a long tunic reaching to the wrists and ankles) occasioned more rankling jealousy. Finally, Joseph’s remarkable dreams which his simplicity related without apparently a thought of giving offense, brought their animosity to its climax. Soon Joseph is thrown into their power. They see him coming and conspire to take his life. “Come,” (say they) “let us slay him and cast him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured him; and we shall see what will become of his dreams.” We are not told which of them suggested this murderous purpose. Reuben, the eldest brother, was the first to protest. His plan was that they should cast him alive into some pit; and then in their absence he could take him out and return him safely to his father. They consented; stripped him of his new coat, and cast him into a pit without water. [These pits were dug in that poorly watered country for the sake of getting water for their cattle.] Then they sat down to eat bread, perhaps complimenting themselves that they had not murdered him, but had shown their power and for the present had put him out of their way. Manifestly their consciences were dead to that sense of guilt which a few years later forced them to say, “We are verily guilty concerning our brother in that we saw the anguish of his soul when he besought us and we would not hear” (Gen.42: 21). Just then a caravan of Ishmaelites and Midianites came in sight, moving toward Egypt, and Judah came to the rescue with the proposition to take up Joseph and sell him, to be taken as a slave to Egypt. With some manly feeling he says—“What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother and our flesh; and his brethren were content.”——Reuben’s better qualities come up to view again when he returned to the pit,hoping to rescue his brother—but found no Joseph there! “He rent his clothes”; he came to his brethren exclaiming, “The child is not;—and I—whither shall I go?”
In the next scene these brethren were if possible more heartless still. It commonly happens that one crime demands another and yet another to conceal the first. So in this case, the next thing is to deceive their father even though it torture him with the agony of supposing his favorite son devoured by some evil beast. They kill a kid; stain Joseph’s coat with its blood; and then send it to their father, saying, “This have we found; see whether it be thy son’s coat or not.” There was no mistaking the coat, and Jacob’s grief is heart-breaking. Remarkably it is said that “all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted”; and he said, “I will go down into the grave to my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.”——How easily those sons might have said: “Father, we have sinned against God and against thee; but Joseph is not slain by lions; we sold him into Egypt! You may live to see him again.” But not even Reuben or Judah had conscience, and truthfulness, and filial affection enough to reveal the guilty secret. Miserable comforters were they all to their father’s broken heart!
Leaving Jacob to long years of bitterest grief, we follow the fortunes of Joseph. From this point the thread of the story takes him into Egypt a slave. Sold to Potiphar, an officer under Pharaoh, it soon became apparent that the Lord was with him and made every thing prosper under his hand. He rises rapidly in the confidence of his master; is put in charge of all his house—but here springs up a new trial. Joseph is beautiful in person and amiable in manners. Potiphar’s wife, lewd and shameless, tempts him with solicitations to adultery. Joseph’s bearing in this case was worthy to be put on permanent record to pass down through all future generations to the end of time, a perfect model of both virtue and wisdom—the virtue that resists seductive temptation with unwavering firmness; and the wisdom that comprehends and applies the perfect methods of resisting temptation.Joseph did not dally with his tempter; did not suffer the temptation to gather new force, but met it instantly with the strongest considerations possible—“How can I do this great wickedness andsin against God!” God, said he to himself, is my best friend; I am his servant. He has stood by me through all my trials and given me this great prosperity; his pure eye is on me; I can not do this great wickedness against him!——The sense of a present God settled the question forever. There was indeed another line of considerations—his obligations to the husband of this lewd woman. Potiphar had trusted him most entirely; shall he abuse this trust? Never.——Thus Joseph’s course was at once decided. But this vile woman persisted in her solicitations, till at length, maddened by her failure, she plotted his death. She laid hold of his garment; he escaped leaving it in her hands. With this for her proof she accuses Joseph of the crime of which she alone was guilty. Joseph is thrown into prison—because of his virtue and not because of any crime. Of course the Lord was with him still, and again Joseph rises in the favor and confidence of those in power; is put in charge of all matters in the prison, and thus the Lord turned this great trial to account to bring Joseph before Pharaoh. Long was the trial; the story of his relations to the chief butler and the chief baker is in point chiefly as showing how ungratefully the butler could forget his imprisoned friend and prolong his imprisonment. But the hour of deliverance came at last. Pharaoh’s two dreams impressed and disturbed his mind so much that he summoned all his wise men to his help—but in vain. At this opportune moment the chief butler remembers Joseph. He should have spoken of him to the king two years before; but engrossed with his own prosperity, he forgot his prison benefactor till this time. Joseph comes to the help of the king. His first answer is beautifully modest and fragrant with piety. “I have heard of thee, said the king, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it.” Joseph replies: “It is not in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace” (Gen.41: 16). The dreams are interpreted to signify seven years of overflowing plenty, followed by seven of extreme famine throughout all the land. Joseph suggeststo the king to store up the excess of the plentiful years against the deficiencies of the famine years. The king sees the wisdom of this suggestion and at once appoints Joseph to this responsibility; in fact, sets him over all Egypt save only in the honors of the throne.
At this point the historic thread brings Jacob and his sons in Canaan to view again. We are not told whether they had the seven years of exuberant plenty there, but the years of famine were there in terrible power. They were soon breadless. The father hears that there is corn in Egypt; so he sends ten of his sons—all that are with him save Benjamin—to get corn. It was to be brought on the backs of their asses, and therefore it was wise to send them all together.
The scenes that follow are told with masterly simplicity. Joseph knows them; they do not recognize him: What policy shall he pursue? Why, we may perhaps ask, why does he not make himself known to them at once? Why does he treat them so roughly; accuse them of being spies; throw them all into prison for three days; propose to keep them all confined save one and send him back after Benjamin; but finally compromises the matter by taking Simeon as a hostage, binding him before their eyes, and then consenting that the rest may go home and bring Benjamin down as the condition of Simeon’s release? Why does he put their money into the mouth of each man’s sack of corn? Why this long delay, and these searching, harassing preliminaries?
It was not that Joseph was hard-hearted and rather enjoyed using his power and taking some revenge—nothing of this sort. It is indeed said in the first stage of this interview—“Joseph remembered the dreams which he dreamed of them” (Gen.42: 9), and thereupon said, “Ye are spies; to see the nakedness of the land are ye come.” But this only shows that his policy was settled upon the spur of the moment. He saw what he needed to accomplish and laid his plans accordingly. The whole narrative shows that, so far from being void of fraternal feeling and hard-hearted, in fact it tasked his firmness of character to the utmost to suppress his emotions sufficiently to carry out his purpose. His main purpose was to bring them to thorough repentance.For this end he must needs throw their thought back upon their great sin and bring the heavy pressure of present calamity upon them with all its suggestive power to show them that God was taking them in hand for that wickedness. He also wished to see how they felt toward their father and toward Benjamin. Their feeling toward both the father and his youngest son would be an index of their penitence for their great sin toward himself.
Joseph was a man of consummate wisdom. Few men have ever lived who understood human nature better than he, or could plan better for a given effect. Consequently we shall not miss greatly if we infer his design from the actual effect. When we see what he accomplished, we are reasonably safe in saying—This is what he aimed to do.
Observe now that the first scene had not fully transpired ere he heard them saying one to another, “We are verily guilty concerning our brother in that we saw thee anguish of his soul when he besought us and we would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us.” And Reuben answered them (i. e.interposed at that point) saying, “Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? Therefore, behold also, his blood is required.”——Joseph saw that his scheme was taking effect; their consciences were at work. How his own heart must have throbbed! Accordingly we read—“He turned himself about from them and wept.” But the work is not yet complete; so he brushed away the tears and “returned to them and took from them Simeon and bound him before their eyes.” Why he chose Simeon is not indicated. Perhaps—not to say probably—he was the leading spirit in the cruel scenes thirteen years before. We remember that Simeon and Levi led off in that bloody affray with the men of Shechem. However this may be, he was the eldest after Reuben; and Reuben, though a coarse, rough nature, was on the side of mercy toward the abused Joseph. Simeon, therefore, is chosen for the hostage, to be kept in close confinement while the rest are dismissed to go home. Simeon will have abundant time to think over the guilty deeds of that dreadful past! Let us hope that it brought him to genuine repentance.
The narrative details the return of the nine brethren to their father’s house; how they told their story there; how Jacob rebuked them for disclosing their youngest brother; how he struggled desperately against his manifest destiny; how he said—Benjamin shall never go down into Egypt; how Reuben interposed in his rough way, saying to his father: “Slay my two sons if I bring not Benjamin back to thee”—as if he could not see that murdering two of his grandchildren would be infinitely far from helping the matter or affording the least relief. With better good sense and a more just appreciation of his father’s feelings, Judah pled with his father:—We shall all die of starvation unless we go down to Egypt for corn: we must take Benjamin with us—else we get no corn. “Send the lad with me; I will be surety for him. Of my hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not unto thee and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame forever” (Gen.43: 8–10).——The heart of their father Israel comes to view here—yielding to the inevitable necessity; wisely getting up a liberal present of the best fruits of their land; double money, to return what came home with them in their sack’s mouth, and to buy again. Saddest of all he gave up his dear Benjamin, and then with many a prayer he sent them to Egypt a second time: “And God Almighty give you mercy before the man that he may send away your other brother and Benjamin: If I be bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”——But he did not see the deep thoughts of God in these trying scenes, and perhaps he had not yet fully learned how wise and safe it is to trust Almighty God to bring out his own results in his own way! He will learn more by and by.
Events thicken; the final consummation hastens on. They are in Egypt again and stand before Joseph. His quick eye sees his beloved brother Benjamin among them. At once he gives orders to the ruler of his house to prepare a dinner for all these men and to bring them all into his house. A deeper fear seizes upon them: what, say they, can this mean? What new charges, what prosecutions, what fresh dangers, are coming now? They meet the Steward at the door and tell him their story about the returned money. The recognition of God in his reply seems strange for an Egyptian—unlesswe suppose that Joseph had given him the words. He said, “Peace be to you; fear not; your God and the God of your fathers hath given you treasure in your sacks. I had your money” (Gen.43: 23). “And he brought Simeon out to them”—which might well have given some relief to their burdened hearts.——The dinner hour approaches; they are to eat with the lord of the land. They get their presents ready; and when Joseph appeared “they bowed themselves to him to the earth.” The historian is careful to mention this for its bearing as the fulfillment of that long past dream of the boy Joseph. With the true politeness of profound sincerity Joseph inquires about his father: “Is your father well—the old man of whom ye spake? Is he yet alive?” “And they answered: Thy servant our father is in good health; he is yet alive; and [again] they bowed down their heads and made obeisance.”——Now his eye falls on Benjamin, his own mother’s son, and he asks—“Is this your younger brother of whom ye spake unto me? God be gracious unto thee my son.”——Ah, but Joseph’s heart is too full; “he made haste, for his bowels did yearn upon his brother; and he sought where to weep, and he entered into his chamber and wept there.” But, the time has not come yet to reveal himself; the searching ordeal through which he must needs make his brethren pass has not fully done its work; so Joseph washes off the tears; refrains himself from shedding more, and orders the food set on. The brethren of Joseph had probably a rather pleasant time—only it seemed strange to them that they were seated by age from the eldest to the youngest and Benjamin had a five-fold mess! How comes it that the lord of Egypt knows so much about us? They can not see.
They are getting ready now for home; their sacks are filled with corn again, and again the money is put back into each sack’s mouth, and worst of all, Joseph’s silver cup is slipped into the mouth of Benjamin’s sack. Ere they are fairly out of the city Joseph posts his steward after them, abruptly charging them with having ungratefully stolen his lord’s silver cup. Consciously innocent and deeply indignant, they are rash enough to say—Let the man in whose sack it is found die, and take all the rest of us for slaves! How were they amazed and overwhelmed when the cup was found in Benjamin’ssack! They rent their clothes in bitterness of heart, and all return to the city. Judah comes to the front here; it is “Judah and his brethren” who come to Joseph’s house, and Judah who makes the plea in behalf of Benjamin. The historian is careful to say again that when they met Joseph “they fell before him on the ground.” He also remarks that Joseph was yet in his house, having remained there ever since the caravan left in the early morning, too full of thought on this subject to turn to any other business.——Now he expects to learn how they feel toward Benjamin and toward their aged father. He must be sure they are all right on these points before he lifts the vail and shows them himself.——They are brought back as criminals before him. With a sternness that is not at all in his heart but in his assumed manner only, he says—What deed is this that ye have done? Were ye not aware that I have the power of positive and certain divination?——Judah is in deep perplexity—but he speaks frankly: “What shall we say unto my lord? or how shall we clear ourselves? God hath found out the iniquity of thy servants”—which words can not, it would seem, refer to any iniquity in the matter of the silver cup, but must have referred to the long past crime of the brethren toward Joseph. He can not say less than that they will all become the slaves of Joseph, all including even Benjamin.——No, replies Joseph; I want only the guilty man, Benjamin; all the rest of you may go in peace to your father!——Now the crisis so long dreaded has come. A terrible responsibility falls upon Judah. With wonderful simplicity, with most touching filial affection toward his father, and with masterly skill he rises to the moral sublimity of the occasion. He comes near to Joseph and begins his great plea. Every reader must study it. We shall need to go far to find more touching eloquence, a more masterly setting forth of the facts of the case including the whole story from the beginning to the end. The case of the aged father and of his two younger sons left him by his best beloved wife—put in the aged patriarch’s own words—ran thus: “Ye know that my wife bear me two sons, and the one went out from me, and I said—Surely he is torn in pieces, and I have not seen him since; and if ye take this also from me, and mischief befall him, ye shall bringdown my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. Now therefore when I come to thy servant my father and the lad be not with us; (seeing that his life is bound up in the lad’s life)—when he shall see that the lad is not with us he will die; and thy servants will bring down the gray hairs of our father with sorrow to the grave. I said to him, If I bring not Benjamin back, I will bear the blame forever. Now therefore I pray thee, let me abide instead of Benjamin, the bond-servant of my lord, and let him go back to his father. For how shall I go to my father and the lad be not with me? Lest peradventure I see the evil that shall come on my father.”——This was more than Joseph could bear. He could refrain himself no longer; the tears would come; the swelling emotions must have vent. Joseph cried: “Have every man away from me save these men of Canaan.” The proof of their love to their aged father and to Benjamin is unmistakable; Joseph is satisfied. They are penitent for their long past crime against him, and he can therefore at length break the secret and show himself their long lost brother! How do their ears tingle as they hear him say—“I am Joseph: Doth my father yet live?”——The first shock is almost stunning: they can not answer him, for they are troubled at his presence. More kind words and the kindest possible manner are now in place. “Joseph said to his brethren, Come near to me, I pray you; and they came near.” Again he says—“I am Joseph,your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt.” Then with a turn which evinces the exquisite tenderness of his heart, he begs them “not to be grieved nor angry with themselves;” but to think rather of the design of God in permitting and providentially shaping this wonderful series of events. “God did send me before you to preserve life. There are five more years of famine yet to come; God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth and to save your lives by a great deliverance. So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God.” The best thing he could say under just those circumstances to soothe their mind, to assure them of his full forgiveness and to give them consolation in place of the agitation, fear, and remorse that so nearly overwhelmed their spirits.
Arrangements for the future are soon made. Josephassures them that the best of Egypt’s land shall be given them, and insists that they hasten home and bring their aged father and their little ones—every thing they have—down to Egypt, because five more years of famine are to follow. Egyptian wagons—unknown to Jacob’s household—are sent, and the brethren are hastened off. Were they not a happy band? The great agony of fear is past; the surgings of anxiety and solicitude have ceased; the pungent convictions of that dread crime long ago against their younger brother have done their work, and wrought out “the peaceable fruits of righteousness.” This is a wonderful crisis in their life history. Let us hope that most if not all of them found God through these fiery trials and these penitent tears!
They are home again. The first thing is to break this strange secret to their father. They make just two points: “Joseph yet alive;” “Joseph Governor over all the land of Egypt.” It was too much—was too good to be believed. The English version has it, “Jacob’s heart fainted.” Better—“Jacob’s heartremained cold, for he believed them not.” It stirred no joyous and warm emotions, for he could not believe it. But when they told him all the words of Joseph, and especially when he saw the wagons which Joseph had sent to carry him, then his spirit rose; his heart waxed warm; he said: “It is enough; Joseph my sonisyet alive; I will go and see him before I die.”
Beersheba, the old home of his father Isaac, lay on his route. He stopped there and offered sacrifice to the God of his father Isaac. The night following the Lord met him in vision, saying, “I am thy God and the God of thy father; fear not to go down into Egypt, for I will there make of thee a great nation: I will go down with thee into Egypt and will bring thee up again; and Joseph shall put his hand upon thine eyes”—i. e.to close them in death.——How tenderly appreciative of the circumstances and of Jacob’s need was this vision of Beersheba! Such are God’s blessed ways with his children. He can not send them into scenes of special danger or of critical interest, without some special manifestations of his presence.
II.We are to noticethe hand of Godin this history in its twofold bearings:
1. As active in the sufferings and moral trial of the virtuous;
2. As manifested in his overruling control of the wicked to bring forth from their wickedness abounding good.
1. As active in the sufferings and moral trial of the virtuous.——The most cursory reader of this story will see in it a striking case of the sufferings of innocence. Joseph, envied and hated for no fault of his; coming near to being murdered by his own brothers, and really sold into slavery—a slavery prospectively life-long and in a distant, unknown land; torn away from every thing dear inhome, at the age of seventeen:—this surely was innocence subjected to the sternest suffering.
How do such things happen under the government of God? When they do happen,what do they prove?
a. Negatively: They prove that all the suffering in this worldcan not be retribution for sin. There may be great suffering which can not in any true sense be the punishment of great crime. The greatest sufferers are not necessarily and always the greatest sinners. Suffering is not graduated to crime.——This lesson Job’s three friends were slow to learn. Even Job himself seems not to have learned it thoroughly, but was groping toward it, under the lessons of his own conscious experience. It may not be amiss to suggest here that Job and his friends reasonedwithout the lightwhich this history of Joseph would have given them if they had ever heard or read it. They either livedbefore Joseph, or too remote from these scenes to hear or in any way learn the lessons they teach.
b. Positively this case illustrates some of the ends which God aims to secure by permitting the sufferings of the good;e. g.to discipline them to patience under suffering, and to trust in God in the midst of darkness and in spite of it. Joseph’s slavery and prison-life in Egypt would have been simply miserable without this patience and this trust in the Lord his God. Suppose he had given himself up to fretting and chafing and dashing his head against the strong walls of his prison and to wrenching off the fetters with which they “hurthis feet” (Ps.105: 18);—What could have come of such adjustment of one’s self to dark providences? Certainly not the sweet and blessed discipline which he did in fact get from his afflictions; certainly not the favor and the blessing of his God. Every thing in the future as before his eye was dark enough; but he knew there was a God of loving kindness above—a God who made no mistakes, yet whose purposes were often too deep for afflicted man to fathom, and therefore a God whom his children should learn to trust as certainly doingall thingswell.
Again; the case serves to reveal God’s pity and his love in that hegoes withhis children into their slave-life and into their prison-life with such smiles of favor, such tokens of his presence, as may well make them joyful in the most terrible affliction. As Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises within the cold, desolate walls of a prison while yet smarting under the Roman scourge, and with perhaps some prospect of sufferings more severe when another day should dawn; so Joseph found the Lord with him when he reached Egypt a slave; with him when cast into prison because he virtuously repelled a foul temptation to crime. God was there, proving to his servant Joseph that no surroundings are so dark that God’s manifested presence will not make them light—that no sufferings and no bereavements are so severe that God can not throw his smile upon the sufferer and fill his soul with overflowing joy!
Yet again; this lesson teaches that God uses means apparently rough and stern to prepare his servants for higher responsibilities and more signal blessings. We can not say what Joseph would have been if he had remained in the bosom of his doting father’s home through all those years from seventeen to thirty, instead of being in God’s school of suffering and trial; but it is safe to say that he made rapid strides forward in this school of God—in his knowledge of human nature; in his quick and manifest sympathy with every one in trouble; in his skill to gain the confidence of those about and above him; in his capacity for business; and not least in his living piety and his humble walk with God. His surroundings threw him roughly upon his own resources, and at the same time sweetlyupon God’s resources; and in consequence he rose, as few men have even been fit to rise, from slave-life and from prison-life, to be the actuary of a great kingdom—the almoner of bread and of life to the nations of the then civilized world; and also to become one of the most exalted and spotless characters of all history. Are not the ways of God truly wonderful?
The ways of God toward Jacobmust not be overlooked. We need not debate the question how far his sufferings were those of innocence, and how far he was criminally responsible for the lack of moral culture and the power of fearful depravity in his sons. Be this as it may, it was hard for him to lose Joseph—the one son who was a comfort to his heart among so many who were quite otherwise. Even after thirteen years his heart seems still to be sore with that great sorrow, so that when his ten sons say that Benjamin must go with them to Egypt, he exclaims, “All these things are against me”! And when at length he is compelled to consent, his words indicate that he bows to an inexorable fate rather than yields in sweet trust to a divine hand believed to be wise and kind, though utterly and inexplicably mysterious;—“If I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”
Jacob lived to see the clouds of darkness lifted and rolled away. He lived to learn that all those things werenot against himby any means, but were in fact shaped of God to save his great household alive through a seven years’ famine; and (what is far more than even this)—were designed of God for the salvation of those sons of his whose wickedness had brought these sorrows upon him, and whom God had faithfully taken in hand to bring them to repentance. Had he not learned ere this that it was always safe to trust in his father’s God? Had not the Lord said to him, “I will surely do thee good”? As to being “bereaved of his children,” was not the covenant very definite: “A nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins”? (Gen.35: 11).——This discipline of the aged patriarch was sharp but wholesome. He might have said, “In faithfulness hast thou afflicted me.” The clouds of life’s stormy day cleared before sunset. It would be pleasant to hear, if we might,the experiences of his closing years when he came to understand God’s ways and to reap the blessed fruits of such chastening sorrows.
These methods and ends of God in the discipline and culture of his peoplereach onward into eternity. The faithful here are the rulers there (Mat.25: 21). Those who take God’s discipline kindly here and turn it to best account according to his thought and will, have their reward above. It is not needful that we know in their details what the heavenly responsibilities are, and what the dignities and the honors of those who have been faithful over a few things here; but we are safe in the belief that earthly discipline and culture are not lost attainments as to the after life.——As one short day transferred Joseph from the prison-house of the kingdom to the lordship of that kingdom, so one day is long enough for the transfer of many a humble, suffering saint of God from dungeons of darkness and pain to palaces of royalty and bliss. In the story of Joseph these great truths of God’s administration with his people were breaking forth upon the minds of men by most interesting stages of progress.
2. From these lessons in God’s ways with the righteous, we turn to other lessons pertaining to hisways with the wicked. This history of Joseph shows how skillfully and mightily God manages the wicked, making their wickedness work (wholly againsttheirpurpose) to evolve abounding good.
We have seen how Joseph directed the thought of his brethren to these ways and designs of God. “Be not angry with yourselves that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to preserve life.” “So now it was not ye that sent me hither, but God” (Gen.45: 5, 7, 8). And again seventeen years later, after Jacob’s death, his brethren being apprehensive lest Joseph might then relapse into revenge, he said to them; “Fear not, for am I in the place of God? But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass as it is this day, to save much people alive” (Gen.50: 19, 20). We should quite under-estimate Joseph’s knowledge of human nature and his sense of moral distinctions if we were to press hiswords to mean that God’s agencies in those crimes superseded theirs; lifted off their responsibilities and left them essentially faultless.——The reason why Joseph’s remarks took this turn seems to have been this. He saw that conviction for sin had done its vital work in their souls; that they were apparently penitent and leaning toward the most severe self-condemnation—at a stage where it was both safe and kind to turn their attention to God’s hand as evolving good from their sin. In so far as we can have confidence in Joseph’s judgment as to their moral state, his words afford proof that his brethren were truly penitent, and at a stage where consolation might properly be suggested as some relief to their mental anguish.
The use which God made of the sin of Joseph’s brethren exemplifies his consummate, far-reaching wisdom. He knew all the future. He saw the coming famine; knew how to advance Joseph to the lordship of all Egypt, and to put him there just in time to garner up the surplus of seven years of overflowing abundance, and then dispense these stores of corn for the sustenance of thousands less provident throughout all Egypt and all adjacent countries. The resources of God’s providence, guided by such wisdom, are simply boundless. What can he not do when he wills to do it?——The case is equally demonstrative of hislove. Mark how he bends the great powers of his infinite being to the production of good, to multiply the means of happiness. This view of his character is doubly, yea infinitely precious when studied in its developments in a world, or rather a universe,with sin in it. If the Lord were obliged to say—I must content myself with the co-operation of the good, the unfallen, turning their agency to best account for the promotion of happiness; but as to the wicked, they are beyond my reach; I can do nothing with them; the evil they do must be endured as so much dead loss to the universe, never to be of any service toward virtue and happiness—the case would be, so far, one of unrelieved sadness. We may bless the name of our God that his resources of wisdom and power and the outgoings of his love are not thus limited. No indeed; some good results will be extorted from even those horrible crimes of Joseph’s brethren. Even the devil’s wickedness in which he exults as availing tofrustrate God’s plans and to shake his throne, he will find at length to his everlasting confusion and shame, has been made, by the over-mastering wisdom, power, and love of God, to subserve the very cause he thought to break down, and to break down every thing he had vainly hoped to build up! For is not God wiser and mightier than the devil? The final result of the conflict will prove it.——But it is in place here to note that this story of Joseph’s brethren and of God’s over-ruling hand in their case was shedding some rays of light on these previously dark problems, and therefore was indicating progress in the revelations of God and of his ways with sinful men.
Nor let us overlook this one other point—that the case evinces the consummate skill of God in managing the free moral activities of men without the least infringement upon their free agency and moral responsibility. We see this in the way they went into their sin—purely of their own free purpose—after their own envious and proud heart, although God had purposes to answer by means of this very sin. We see it still more, if possible, in the means he used to bring them to repentance; how he put his great hook into their jaws and brought them down to Egypt; took the pride out of them; pressed them with one calamity after another till they came to feel very weak before Almighty God; aroused their long slumbering consciences and kept their thought upon that long past, almost forgotten crime against Joseph—till at length they seem to have become thoroughly penitent. Only by legitimate means and influences, and only by such a use of these as still left their moral activities under their own responsible control—were these grand results reached.——Thus we may take lessons in the masterly skill with which God’s agencies interwork with man’s, effective to the result he proposes because God is more and mightier than man.
III.Taking a broader range of view, we may next study the purposes of Godin locating the birth of the Hebrew nation in the land of Egypt.
Since God’s purposes never come to nought but are always accomplished perfectly, the ends he has in view being surely secured, it is safe to reason backward fromknown results to original purposes. It would amount practically to the same thing if we were to ask—What great results were actually secured by locating his people in Egypt when and as he did; by shaping their history as he did, and by bringing them out at length with his high hand and outstretched arm?
1. In answering these questions we may note that Egypt in that age stood at the summit of the world’s civilization, a fully organized kingdom, a great and highly cultured people. There is most ample proof that Egypt was then eminent above any other nation in learning, wisdom, science, and art; in jurisprudence, and in the administration of law; in industry and in wealth; in short, in all the main appliances and results of a high civilization. The antiquities of Ancient Egypt are the marvel of our times. Her temples, pyramids, and obelisks; her paintings and works of art, have come down to our age in most wonderful preservation, living witnesses to her ancient greatness. There was no other kingdom on the face of the earth where a man like Moses could have been educated and trained to become the law-giver of the Hebrew nation, or where such a system of civil law as God gave his people by the hand of Moses could have taken its rise and could have been understood, accepted, appreciated, and ultimately wrought into established usage and into the national life. We shall have occasion in its place to inquire how far the civil system given through Moses was borrowed from the Egyptian Code, and consequently how far the scenes of their Egyptian life prepared the way for the new national life instituted in the wilderness.
2. The plan of transferring his people from their nomadic, pastoral life in Canaan, to a settled residence in Egypt provided scope for all those developments which we have been studying in the history of Jacob, Joseph, and his brethren.
3. Yet more and greater developments of God’s mighty hand were provided for in the deliverance of his people from their bondage in Egypt; in his judgments on Pharaoh and his land; in the destruction of his hosts in the Red Sea; in the wilderness life of Israel during forty years; and at length in their location in the land of promise. All these points will come under review in their order.
IV.Some notice should be taken of ancient Egypt as affording confirmation to the historic accuracy and truthfulness of Moses in Genesis.
1. Moses assumes that Egypt had a king and a fully organized government. The evidence of this from Egyptian history and antiquities is too abundant and accessible to need citation.
2. Also that the people subsisted mainly by agriculture, not pasturage; that their soil was exceedingly fertile and the country one of great wealth. The facts on these points also are beyond question. The Nile has always made Egypt rich in soil and in agricultural productions. Its periodical inundations have sustained the fertility of that valley for thousands of years. Alternations of years of plenty with years of famine have been their common experience in all ages, though probably never so extreme and protracted as in the age of Joseph.
3. The history by Moses records the fact that in the early stages of this great famine the lands passed over largely to the crown, but were leased to the farmers for a certain portion (one-fifth) of the crops (Gen.47: 20–26).——Testimony from sources other than sacred proves these points. Herodotus was told by the priests of Egypt that the king gave each Egyptian laborer a square piece of land of equal extent and collected from each a yearly rent. Diodorus states that all the land of Egypt belonged either to the king, the priests, or the military caste. Strabo says that the farmers and tradesmen held their lands subject to rent. In the Egyptian sculptures as shown by Wilkinson, only kings, priests, and the military orders are represented as land-owners. [See “Hengstenberg and the Books of Moses,”pp.62–70.]
4. The history by Moses makes an important exception in the case of the priests. Being supported directly from the royal treasury, they were not obliged to alienate their lands during the great famine and consequently continued to hold them (Gen.47: 22). With this all profane testimony concurs.
5. This fact implies an organized priesthood as a favored and therefore powerful class in Egyptian society. Egyptian history confirms this and shows moreoverthat they were not merely priests, performing religious functions, but were the learned and scientific men of the nation; had charge of education; held in their body the art and the “wisdom” of the nation and performed largely the administrative functions of government. “The thirty judges (says Drumann) priests of Heliopolis, Thebes, and Memphis, were maintained by the king, and without doubt, the sons of the priests also, all of whom over twenty years of age were given to the king as servants; or, more correctly, to take the oversight of his affairs.” “The ministers of the court were in Egypt the priests, just as the state was a Theocracy, and the king was considered as the representative and incarnation of the Godhead.” (Hengstenberg,p.68).——It was by virtue of this usage that Joseph married into the class of the priesthood, Asenath his wife being a daughter of Potipherah priest of On (Gen.41: 50).——The reader will perhaps recall the striking analogy between the Egyptian system and the Hebrew Theocracy, particularly in the point that the ministers of religion were also ministers of civil law and prominent in its administration. The judges in the civil courts were taken chiefly from the tribe of Levi.
6. Joseph’s arraignment of his brethren—“Ye are spies; to see the nakedness of the land are ye come”—suggests an inquiry into the relations of Egypt to foreign powers. The suspicions of Joseph obviously assume a consciousness of great liability to foreign invasion. Such was the fact; and the reasons for it will readily appear. We have only to think of the powerful tribes scattered over vast Arabia, the Hittites and other tribes of Canaan and of the regions North and East—all stalwart men, all poor and subsisting on precarious supplies, yet possessed of fleet animals—horses, dromedaries, camels—with which they were able to move masses of men with great celerity. Let such men see the tempting bait of corn in plenty in Egypt, and the marvel is how Egypt could protect herself against sudden and formidable invasion. The monuments of her early history testify to her long and bloody wars with the Hittites and other tribes of Western Asia, often carrying the war into their country as a wiser policy no doubt than to stand behind her own walls on the defensive. Suffice it to say here thatwhen those Asiatic countries were famishing for bread and it was well known there was corn enough in Egypt, the suspicion expressed by Joseph that those ten men were spies was not only natural but perhaps even a necessary measure of policy to satisfy the Egyptians.Theymust naturally apprehend danger thoughhemight personally know that these men were harmless.
7. Sacred history drops this incidental remark—“For every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians” (Gen.46: 34). To some extent this feeling was a natural outgrowth of their relations to the nomadic tribes of South-western Asia—to which we have recently referred. But there is some reason to suppose among them a certain special antipathy against the sheep, more intense than against any other domestic animal unless swine be an exception. They had so much respect for the cow that they made her and her species objects of worship. Although they attained great skill in the manufacture of linen, cotton, and silk, I meet with no allusion to wool. Woolen cloths are never found upon Egyptian mummies; linen and cotton were used.——Some writers have supposed that shepherds were held in special abhorrence because their country had been conquered and ruled by a dynasty of shepherd kings from the North-east; but the precise date of their invasion and of their rule over Egypt is very much in doubt.
8. Both Joseph and his father were embalmed after death (Gen.50: 2, 3, 26)—a service performed by the physicians. The antiquities of Egypt furnish most conclusive testimony to their skill in this art—a skill far surpassing that of any other people known to history. Great numbers of those embalmed bodies (“mummies”) have been found in Egyptian tombs within the present century, in perfect preservation. On this point the coincidences between sacred and profane history are striking.——The practice was very ancient, some mummies bearing the date of the oldest kings. It was performed by a special class of physicians. In harmony with Moses, Herodotus and Diodorus state that the embalming process occupied forty days; the entire period of mourning seventy. Classic authorities give accounts similar to those inGen.50 of greatmourning for the dead. The monuments contain representations to the same effect. Funeral trains, processions, of such sort asGen.50 records, are represented abundantly in the oldest tombs at Elithias, also at Sagguarah, at Gizeh, and at Thebes. (Hengstenberg’s Egypt and Moses,pp.70–78).——Acoincidence so minute as this is noticed; that mourners forbore to shave their hair or beard; but none might appearbeforethe king unshorn. Consequently we observe that in the mourning scene ofGen.50, Joseph does not come before the king in person but “spake unto the house of Pharaoh” requesting them to speak in his behalf to the king (Gen.50: 4–6).
Quite in contrast with the usual oriental custom, women were exempt from seclusion and moved in society with apparently entire freedom. This appears in the family of Potiphar. The ancient sculptures and paintings found in their tombs give a very full view of the domestic life of the ancient Egyptians, no point of which is more striking than the high social position of woman and the entire absence of the harem system of seclusion. “The wife is called the lady of the house.” (See Smith’s Bible Dictionary,p.677). According to the monuments the women in Egypt lived under far less restraint than in the East, or even in Greece. Wilkinson’s Egypt is full of testimony to this point (Vol. II.,p.389). Hengstenberg’s Moses,p.24.
Sad to say there is abundant evidence from profane sources of a very lax morality among married women—of which the history of Joseph in Potiphar’s house is an illustration. Herodotus gives a fact in point: “The wife of one of the earliest kings was untrue to him. It was a long time before a woman could be found who was faithful to her husband. When at last one was found, the king took her without hesitation for his wife.”
Yet other points might be adduced of coincidence between the sacred and the profane records of Egypt as the former appear in Moses. The above may be taken as specimens. Most amply do they testify that the author of Genesis was entirely familiar with Egyptian life and manners. The sharpest and most unfriendly criticism has hitherto detected no point of discrepancy between these respective records—no point in which itcan be made to appear that Moses wrote without well understanding the Egyptian life of which he speaks.——The corresponding coincidences in Exodus will be suggested in their place.
Some special passages occurring in these latter chapters of Genesis should receive attention.
Jacob going down into Sheol to his son Joseph.
InGen.37: 35 Jacob, supposing Joseph to be dead, says—“I will go down into the grave (Sheol) to my son mourning.” The reader of the Hebrew text of Genesis has not met with this word before, and may reasonably expect to see its meaning discussed here.
In the outset it should be observed that these words can not possibly mean—My dead body shall go down into the grave proper, the sepulcher—there to lie by the side of Joseph’s dead body. He could not have meant this because the place of Joseph’s supposed dead body was entirely unknown to him. He had seen his bloody coat and inferred that Joseph was no doubt torn in pieces;where, he knew not; and whether devoured by flesh-eating animals he could not know. We must therefore reject this construction of his words.——Plainly the Joseph he thought of was the undying soul. He expected at his own death to meet Joseph in that state or place which the Hebrews indicated by the word “Sheol.”
What is the primary significance of this word? What were the views of the ancient Hebrews in regard to its location and the state of its occupants?
The noun “Sheol” is made from the verbShaal25having the sense, to ask, to demand; and conceives of the place as evermore demanding, insatiable; that which is never full; never has enough. The current Hebrew conceptions of the word may be seen inProv.30: 15, 16, andIsa.5: 14, andHab.2: 5. “There are three things that are never satisfied; yea four say not, It is enough: the grave” [Sheol],etc.——“Therefore hell [Sheol] hath enlarged herself and opened her mouth without measure; and their glory, and their multitude and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth shall descendinto it.” “Who enlargeth his desire as hell” [Sheol] “and is as Death, and can not be satisfied,”etc.
As to the location of Sheol it seems clear that they thought of it as anunder-world, as somehow beneath the surface of the earth. We see this in the case of Korah and his company (Num.16: 28–34), of whom Moses said:—“If the earth open her mouth and swallow them up with all that appertain to them, and theygo downalive into Sheol [Eng.‘the pit’], then shall ye understand that these men have provoked the Lord” ... “As he had made an end of speaking these words, the ground clave asunder that was under them and the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up,”etc.——We find the same view inDeut.32: 22. “For a fire is kindled in mine anger and shall burn unto the lowest hell [Sheol], and shall consume the earth with her increase and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.”
In regard to their conceptions of Sheol as a state of being for the righteous and the wicked dead, it is easy to see that holy men of the oldest time lacked the clear light of the gospel age. Then it had not yet been said—“In my father’s house are many mansions”; “I go to prepare a place for you, and I will come again and receive you to myself that where I am, there ye may be also” (Jno.14: 2, 3). They had not heard these words of Jesus—“This day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23: 43); those of Paul: “Having a desire to depart and to be with Christ which is far better” (Phil.1: 23).——But the patriarchs did expect to “be gathered to their people”—the good men who had gone on before. This is said of Abraham (Gen.25: 8); of Ishmael (25: 17); of Isaac (35: 29); and of Jacob (49: 29, 33). David said of his deceased infant child: “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” Job said of that little known world—“There the wicked cease from troubling, and there the weary are at rest” (Job 3: 17), and yet he sometimes thought of it as intensely dark, for gospel light had not then fallen upon it:—“Before I go whence I shall not return, even to a land of darkness and the shadow of death; a land of darkness as darkness itself; and of the shadow of death without any order, and where the light is as darkness” (Job 10: 21, 22). Conceptions of this state as well illustrating the falland doom of wicked kings and kingdoms, tinged, it would seem, with the spirit of poetry, may be seen in Isaiah 14, andEzek.31: 15–18.
How far these notions as to the locality of Sheol are to be ascribed to direct inspiration, and how far to a merely human speculation, following the leading thought that the bodygoes downand back to dust at death, it seems by no means easy to determine positively. We may be allowed to doubt whether the Lord intended to reveal definitely thelocationof human souls after death. It was a point of the least conceivable importance; and moreover our knowledge of celestial geography may be yet quite too limited to admit of any intelligible revelation on this point.
Jacob’s benedictions upon his sonson his death-bed—more or less prophetic—present some points that call for special notice. Remarkably they seem in most if not in all cases to start from the then existing present, and to build their allusions to the future upon it. We see it in the case of Reuben—noted for his outrage of his father’s nuptial bed; of Simeon and Levi, whose history suggested their cruelty toward the men of Shechem; of Judah, whose name bore the thought ofpraiseand whose record in the case of Joseph put him at once in the front among his brethren; of Joseph, whose relations to his father and indeed to all the family had been surpassingly precious. The special address of Jacob to each of these was closely linked to their past history. The prophetic feature in all these cases seems to have been suggested by these salient points of their history. Reuben as the first-born might have kept his supremacy—if he had been worthy of it—but he was not. Simeon never rose to any distinction, and scarcely held any well-defined territory in Canaan. Levi came into prominence as the ancestor of Aaron and of Moses, and redeemed himself also by the religious zeal and energy of Phineas in a great emergency during the wilderness life (Num.26: 6–13). The tribe were scattered in Israel, yet not in the bad sense. Judah and Joseph had each a future more resplendent and distinguished than any other of the twelve—their prominence in Jacob’s benediction being fully carried out through the history of their nation.
Some special passages and phrases should be briefly explained.
Inv.4, the phrase, “Unstable as water,” does not compare water to the solid earth or to more solid rock as treacherous to the foot and unsafe to stand on; but rather as bubbling, effervescing under heat or applied force—as therefore a fit image of ungoverned passion; of wantonness, impatient of restraint. Reuben had no moral stamina, and therefore could not hold his natural place of headship as the first-born—a moral lesson worthy of thoughtful consideration. A young man given to licentious indulgence can have no solid bottom to his character. The sagacious will never trust him.
v.5. “Simeon and Levi are brethren”—of kindred spirit; “instruments of cruelty are in their habitation”; better, instruments of cruelty their swords are. Most solemnly does the dying patriarch disavow all sympathy with their cruelty!——The phrase—“Mine honor” in the sense of myself—my nobler powers—is specially significant here, for their spirit was dishonorable, treacherous, basely cruel. Jacob had a sense of honor which utterly forbade all sympathy with them in this thing.——In the last clause ofv.6, the English margin gives the sense of the Hebrew: “They houghed oxen.” They slew not one man only but man as a species; and cut the hamstrings of their cattle.
The benediction upon Judah(v.10) stands unrivaled in importance and is not without difficulty. The main question is whether the word “Shiloh” signifies the Messiah, in the special sense of the Peace-giving One; or refers to the city of that name in Canaan. If it refers to the Messiah, the sense, the application and the fulfillment of the passage are facile and truly rich—thus: Judah shall head the tribes and give them kings until the Great Messiah shall come: then all the nations (Gentile and Jew) shall obey him—obedience rather than “gathering” being the best established sense of the word. It occurs elsewhere only inProv.30: 17.
No facts of Jewish history are better known than these—that Judah led the march through the wilderness,and that from David to Christ the scepter was in Judah—until the Messiah came, when it dropped from his hand. “We have a law,” (said the Jewish Sanhedrim in the age of Christ) “and by our law he ought to die”—i. e.for blasphemy. But under their law, capital punishment was by stoning (Lev.24: 15, 16, andMat.26: 65, 66, andJno.19: 7). Having lost the power of life and death over criminals, they were compelled to take the case to the Roman authorities.Theirmode of capital punishment was crucifixion. Thus the “cross” stands through all the ages to prove that the scepter had departed from Judah and that the Messiah had come.——But he came not only to die but to reign, and the nations of the wide earth are to bow to his scepter.——Such is the construction of this passage, provided the term “Shiloh” refers to the Messiah.
That it does refer to him may be argued on two grounds:
(a.) This construction is facile, natural, and supported by analogous prophecies;
(b.) The other which makes Shiloh the name of a town in Canaan, labors under serious, not to say insurmountable difficulties.
(a.) “Shiloh” is derived readily from the verbShalah,26kindred with Shalam, both words being in frequent use in the sense of being at peace and in rest; expressing good wishes for peace—i. e.for all prosperity—the noun from which might naturally mean the author of peace, as we see inMic.5: 4. Furthermore, this distinctive feature of the Messiah’s character and mission is the theme ofPs.72 and of many passages in Isaiah,e. g.9: 6, 7, and 11: 1–10, and 60: 18–22. These prophecies naturally follow the lead of this and therefore sustain the construction here given it.
Moreover, it is natural and highly probable that Jacob whose twelve sons were to found the twelve tribes of Israel and who knew that the Messiah was to come in the line ofsome oneof his sons, should indicate which. Noah had designated Shem: God had designated Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; now the choice is naturally made out of these twelve. That the long promised Seed was in Jacob’s thought is forcibly and beautifullysuggested in the midst of these dying benedictions by the words—“I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord” (49: 18). In the sustaining hope of a coming Savior he had waited and trusted through many long years; for these words express the precious experiences of a life. As Jesus himself testified of Abraham, “He rejoiced to see my day,” hailing it joyously from afar, so Jacob witnesses of himself, “I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord.”
(b.) Those who give “Shiloh” here the geographical sense argue that in every other case of its use in scripture, it refers to the town of that name. This name for a town appears first inJosh.18: 1, 8, 10, and often subsequently in Judges,1 Sam.,etc.But there is no evidence that in Jacob’s day it had come into use in geography. This usage, so far as appears, was long subsequent. Nothing forbids, therefore, that Jacob should use it simply for its significance—the Peace-giving One.
Again, the most marked supremacy of Judah beganafterthe nation had reached Shiloh. It is therefore bad history and very inept prophecy to represent Judah as holding the scepteruntilthe nation came to Shiloh; the fact being that he had not held it in the full sense previously to reaching Shiloh, but did hold it for many centuries after Shiloh had lost its pre-eminence as the religious capital. I see therefore no good ground for setting aside the Messianic interpretation of this passage. The argument in its defense is ably and fully drawn out by Keil in his Commentary, and yet more fully by Hengstenberg in his Christology,vol.1.pp.50–63.
The less readable portions of Genesis.
We have passed several portions of Genesis with little or no notice;e. g.the genealogical tables, and some of the less important sketches of family and tribal history;e. g.that of Abraham’s sons by Keturah; of Ishmael, Esau, Laban,etc.
Of these less readable passages, let it be noted:
1. They are such as never could find place in a tale of fiction, gotten up in some later age to interest and amuse the reader. The fact that nobody finds interestand amusement in reading them now proves conclusively that no writer of fiction could possibly have concocted such chapters from his own fancy and have foisted them into a professedly ancient history. The men who forge books of fiction to pass them off as truthful history are careful not to put in unreadable chapters—void of rational or even imaginative interest to the men of after ages.
2. Consequently these passages are incontrovertible proof of the genuineness and real antiquity of these writings. In their time they had interest—just that interest which attaches to sober truth: none more or other than this.
3. The Scriptures were written with special adaptation to their first readers, and must include therefore those matters which had real value and interestto them, whether they would continue to have interest and value many thousand years onward or not. This fact, often overlooked, has many important bearings.
4. By far the greater portion of these historic books has a permanent interest and value to us and will have to their readers through all future ages. We see in these ancient books not only the earliest developments of human nature in the primitive society of the race, but also the earliest manifestations of God to men, and can trace their progressive unfoldings step by step, age after age by new methods and with clearer light as we move on toward the great era when God became manifest in human flesh.
5. It may well reconcile us to the annoyance (if such it be) of some unreadable portions that precisely these above all others afford us the strongest evidence of the genuineness and high antiquity of these entire books. They constitute an internal mark of antiquity and genuineness which by the laws of human nature never could be counterfeited. The man who should attempt to counterfeit such proofs that his fiction is true history would not prove himself very sharp save in the skill of spoiling his book and frustrating the only conceivable object of a fiction—for the sake of what?
We lay down Genesis, profoundly impressed that this oldest volume of human history is unsurpassed in simplicity and beauty, and wonderfully rich in its revelations both of man and of his Maker.