Lessons from the Story of Abraham & Isaac

 

This enigmatic story, from Genesis 22:1-19, has puzzled more than a few thinkers. I referred to this story where God ostensibly asks Abraham to sacrifice his son. Over the centuries, millennia even, readers have wondered, Why would God ask Abraham to sacrifice his own son? Of course, those of us who know the story, know it has a ‘happy ending.’ Well, happy for Abraham and his only son, but not for the ram that God pointed out to Abraham at the last minute to offer instead of his son.

 

I titled this essay, “Lessons…”, not singular, indicating there has been more than one understanding drawn from this tale. So, what might they be?

 

There are at least two common meanings that have been derived from the story since it first entered Hebrew consciousness. Actually, I should more accurately say, not having studied Judaism to any extent, these are lessons Christianity has taken from this saga. 

 

The first is concerning religion of the time in a general sense. Apparently, many of the peoples surrounding Abraham at the time, and perhaps even more so when his descendants came on the scene after that 400-year sojourn in Egypt, offered infant and child sacrifices in an effort to appease their gods, to gain their gods’ ear in their accompanying supplications. The line I was thinking here goes that God was testing Abraham. God wanted to see if Abraham would indeed offer his son as a sacrifice as his contemporaries were want to do. We understand that Abraham was one of the original monotheists, i.e. believing in only one God ultimately, and perhaps God was testing him here to see if he still also would continue to worship other gods in the way his contemporaries and perhaps ancestors had done

 

In the first place, with regards to this interpretation, we should first of all note that Abraham was obedient to his God. He followed the instructions he apparently received and took several days journey with his son, servants and firewood, to the mountain where God had indicated this sacrifice was to take place. This is just another example of where Abraham obeyed God. That was one of Abraham's strong points, and something we can learn from in itself. 

 

As we have already mentioned, ultimately, Abraham was not required to sacrifice his son. This leads us to a second understanding of this story. Some see it as a ‘type’ or an example of something that was to come, namely the sacrifice of Jesus. Some might say that the sacrifice of another human would be ineffective to the extent to which what has been viewed as another sacrifice some 2000 years later was viewed. I refer, of course, to Christ's death on the cross. There is a degree to which the traditional and generally accepted understanding of Jesus' death is that it was a sacrifice, a sacrifice to end all sacrifices, as is described, at least in first reading, in the book of Hebrews in the New Testament.

 

There are many though, who still are uncomfortable with this story, and at the same time are uncomfortable with the traditional understanding of Jesus' death. Increasingly, over the last half-century and more, theologians have begun to seriously challenge the long-standing understanding of Jesus' death as a ransom, paid to free us, a substitute for us. In that understanding, humanity was viewed as under a curse ever since "the fall", the story in Genesis 3, and only Jesus' death could remove that curse, not a human, such as Abraham's son, because only Jesus, as both all-powerfully divine and all-human, was capable of accomplishing that.

 

Even if we stopped to think about the word ransom, to whom was this ransom owed? To whom was it paid? If we contend that the human race had fallen into the domain of Satan ever since our ancestors' disobedience to God, was this a ransom paid to Satan to obtain our freedom? This is absurd. Our all-powerful God owes nothing to Satan. Why would he sacrifice - his son - to Satan?

 

Others understand it slightly different, seeing Jesus' death as taking on our penalty for disobedience and giving his life to atone for that, as we, imperfect as we are, could never achieve that. Again, the question is asked, would the God of love, grace, light, truth and mercy scheme to send his only son to earth to die for us in such a horrible way?

 

Some of those who question these understandings maintain that holding to those beliefs is what has led over the centuries to what they would see as a distorted belief in the value of suffering and ultimately even in suffering abuse, such as a spouse from her husband. How often have we not heard of clerics telling their female parishioners to go home and stay with their abusive husbands, as that is their duty, or by so doing they may witness to their husbands and stop the abuse. With this really be what the God we described in the last sentence of the last paragraph would want? Those who have really been oppressed and suffered, over the centuries, such as women and Blacks, who are now writing their own theologies, cannot accept this. This is entirely understandable.

 

Then there are those of us who have long had difficulty reconciling what appears to be a judgmental God who even orders genocide, as might appear to be described in the Old Testament, with a God who is otherwise described as Love, with a God who was exemplified by the life that Jesus lived. The life that Jesus lived, the picture he gave us of God, seems so different from what many have understood as representing "the God of the Old Testament." 

 

This understanding is something that has increasingly come under the scrutiny of my co-religionists, anabaptists, who firmly believe that Jesus taught us away of peace and nonviolence. They, plus those thinkers and writers described in the second to last paragraph above, are leading us in a new understanding of the nature of Jesus' death that does not require us to accept all those other views of God and explanations of Jesus' death that have become unacceptable.

 

I am not going to flesh out what these new understandings are. That would be the subject of further writing. However, I think it can point back to our original subject story and give it a third even more important meaning. If we can accept that God did not offer Jesus as a sacrifice, a ransom, a substitute, with all the negative connotations those interpretations bring, we can see that this story of Abraham and Isaac is indeed typology, but in a different way than I mentioned above.

 

According to what I am introducing here, this story points not to the belief that the death of Jesus was required as a sacrifice over and against a human sacrifice. It points to the even more fulfilling understanding that such a death, a sacrifice, is not necessary at all. Again, the full understanding of this point would only be gained by further reading of the texts of those anabaptist, black and female writers I referred to above (One good place to start though, as far as that is concerned, would be J. Danny Weaver's The Nonviolent Atonement, particularly as he critically summarizes any of the writings of those other camps).

 

Just a footnote here: Some might still ask, what about the ram? To that, my simple comeback would be, as Jesus and the subsequent New Testament writers themselves made clear, animal sacrifices are no longer required either. Indeed, there are some hints in the Old Testament, Jeremiah 6:20 and 7:21-23 come to mind, that they might never really have been demanded by God. Again, that is another subject.

An Open Letter to the Jews

Given some of my recent involvement, including writing, with what some would refer to as the Israel-Palestine issue over the last three months, I believe it is timely that I write this letter in terms of my understanding of certain aspects of this topic and also clarify some things in terms of definition.

In the first place, let me define what I understand by the word Jew. Historically, I believe this refers to anyone who can trace their biological lineage to the ancient clan known as The Children of Israel. These individuals identify their progenitor as a certain “wandering Aramean" initially named Abram, although technically, according to Deuteronomy 26:5, that reference was initially made, at least in this passage, to Jacob. It is interesting that Jacob, after he, his grandfather Abraham and father Isaac , all having lived in this land, now divided between Israel and Palestine, for some time, is still referred to here as a wandering Aramaean and not somebody connected to this land.  Then, according to the record of this history, which I, as a Christian, would describe as the Old Testament portion of The Bible, the God who called him from "Ur of the Chaldees" (Genesis 11:27-12:3) to what we often now refer to as The Holy Land, changed his name to Abraham, as recorded in Genesis 17:5. Again, according to this passage, Abram actually already began this move with his father and siblings and when this call came, he was no longer living in Ur.

Jump to 2016 and we have some difficulty still with this definition of Jew. This has come about in particular since the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. Politically, it is appropriate to call all citizens of this state Israelis. Not all citizens of Israel are Jews though. However, there are a number of people of Jewish origin who would like to establish this state as one inhabited only by Jews. For some Jews, there is another element of identity that can be fractious. There are those who wish to identify themselves as Jews culturally and ethnically, because of their heritage, but no longer actually practice the faith that is historically identified with the name Jew. More Orthodox Jews, the purists, need to have Jews identified by their bloodline. Then, there are those who are Jewish by faith, proselytes to this religion, who are not Jewish biologically. I don't know whether these would be acceptable citizens of a Jewish state to the ultra-Orthodox.

However, my main purpose in writing this letter is not to discuss these issues further. I am writing as a Christian. This means I follow as Lord a religious leader who lived on this earth as a Jew some 2000 years ago, namely Jesus, the son of Joseph, who Christians also identify as Christ.

Furthermore, I am writing as part of that branch of Christianity known as Anabaptism. To narrow it down still further, I am a member of the Mennonite division of this group, in particular a member of Mennonite Church Canada and its British Columbia arm, Mennonite church British Columbia. Locally, I am a member of Peace Mennonite Church in Richmond, BC.

I am writing this letter to clarify where I and many of my co-religionists stand with respect to the Jews today. Christians have rightfully been accused of anti-Semitism, both in the past and present. There were times when Christians killed Jews who identified as such, during times of religious persecution in Europe in the Middle Ages. This was especially so during the times of the Crusades. Ironically, this was in spite of the fact that the Crusaders were ostensibly going to the land from which the Jews had been expelled to claim it back for Christianity, a religion that started with the Jews.

I and my fellow Mennonites do not agree with these past actions. Just the same, we are not entirely blameless in this area. There were Mennonites who supported the Nazis doing World War II, which is unfortunate. Mennonites have their share of jokes about Jews. Growing up, a familiar expression was "he Jewed me" when one referred to being taken advantage of financially.

However, we as Mennonites also have much in common with the Jews. We lived side-by-side in Eastern Europe and in Russia, in what is now mostly the Ukraine. We were both persecuted by the Bolsheviks and some of the other terrorists that roamed the countryside in the unstable days prior to the establishment of the communist regime. Sometimes we supported one another. We both also struggle with this identity issue of ethnic versus religious identity. When our ancestors settled in Southern Manitoba, Jewish businesses often got set up in our communities and we supported them. Some of the first professionals we had to deal with in terms of dentistry, optometry and medicine in our rural communities were Jewish. I saw a number of these individuals into my adulthood.

Over the last number of decades, Mennonites have gotten a bad rap from a certain quarter of the Christian community whom we would describe as Zionist. They generally exhibit unqualified support of the state of Israel. Israeli leaders, on the other hand, are very happy for their support, and therefore very unhappy with our lack of support. To be sure, there are many Mennonites who would subscribe to the Zionist understanding. However, and not to put this too negatively, these are more the rank-and-file members of our community, not the educated and leaders.

Having grown up among leaders of the Mennonite church, with my father being first missionary and then pastor and finally Bible school teacher, as well as myself having been educated in a Mennonite college and a lifelong adult member of the church, I believe what follows is what most real Mennonites who are more informed about the situation would understand and believe.

We do not have anything against Jews. Personally, my wife and I in particular, still often look at Jews with fondness and certainly respect. How can one not, given their success in so many areas of life from financial, to medical to media? To me, this is simply fulfillment of God's promises to their ancestors that those who did follow him would see their children blessed for 1000 generations, as recorded first in Exodus 20:6. I have been a fellow student, then professional colleague, and even teacher of many wonderful, intelligent and capable Jewish people who have contributed a lot to the world. Regardless of what one might think about them historically, ethnically and currently with respect to what goes on in the nation-state of Israel, we still cannot help but acknowledge that in some way they are still God's chosen people. I don't believe God is "done with" them.

I am not going to go into the theology and history of what has happened with the Jews over the millennia, what the Christian Church has thought of their place in God's plans, and how the Jews themselves have changed their own  self-understanding. Of course, there is divergence of opinion even amongst themselves on this. There are those, generally the more orthodox, who support the Israeli state. The more extreme ultra-Orthodox do not support a modern state structure, but would like to return to the theocracy of the Old Testament. Then there are the more liberal, according to the definition of some, who do not support the state of Israel because they do not see the need for it in terms of their understanding of where they are at in relation to their God at this point. This understanding is further supported by their antipathy to what they see happening in the state of Israel. Indeed, this is the area where we as Mennonites agree with Jews in this last group.

We are not against Jews having a homeland. I think it is something they can rightfully be thankful for, even though the way it came about is anything but peaceful. To be sure, there were political and international moves which resulted in The United Nations carving out this piece of land that has, since 1948, been referred to as the State of Israel. However, it is the cost to the people who were living in the land then that disturbs us. Some of them still live there, but many more are now living in what we would like to identify as the state of Palestine, in refugee camps both in Israel and Palestine, and in neighboring countries, or dispersed around the world.  The state if Israel has been founded at the expense of the Palestinians. Even before the state of Israel was established, militant Zionists were beginning to carry out their plans to establish a Jewish only state of Israel.

It is what has been involved in carrying out these plans that we as Christians and Mennonites cannot accept. From the beginning, Palestinians, as we shall name those who are resident in the land besides the Jews who were already moving in, were forced out of their homes and in many cases massacred. Harassment and legal moves against the Palestinians continue unabated. In fact, these actions have increased in the last 20 years in particular. This is especially so since the infamous Six-Day-War of 1967, in which Israel invaded the Jordan-administered Palestinian territories and has continued to occupy them and in effect rule them ever since. This is something that is illegal according to all international law, but the state of Israel has never been called to account for this or forced to reversed that action. This is in part because of continued support from Uncle Sam. Israel is probably the largest recipient of aid from the US, particularly when it comes to the military. Again, particularly since 1967 and seemingly increasingly, as Israelis and Jews opposed to this will both tell you, the government continues to propagate a narrative of the Arab world and all Palestinians being in favor of wiping Israel out. Therefore, all Palestinians are branded as terrorists. This is in spite of the fact that the Arab world and even the Palestinian community has largely abandoned that stance. Indeed, the Palestinian leadership, although they sometimes still appear to make unhelpful pronouncements and perhaps at times thus seem to support terrorism, has generally come to the conclusion, at least the people have, that nonviolent opposition to this treatment at the hands of Israel is the only way to go.

This also appears to be the stance of most of the Christians in the region. Unfortunately, far too many Christians in Western Europe and America, including Canada, in their support of Israel, have left these Christians feeling abandoned. They are puzzled at how their Christian brothers and sisters can treat them this way. It is this stance which has made us as Mennonites identify with the oppressed Palestinians, as part of our religious tradition is also a nonviolent lifestyle. We believe that as Christians, it is our duty to help liberate the oppressed. This is according to what Jesus said in Nazareth, his hometown, at the beginning of his ministry, as quoted in Luke chapter 4, quoting from Isaiah 61, in saying that he was fulfilling that prophecy in their midst. That is why we must support the Palestinians. It does not mean that we are against the Jews or the state of Israel. We are only against certain of their unjust actions which, in our understanding, also go against the commands God gave them through Moses and the prophets as recorded in their own Scriptures. I refer to those many passages where they are enjoined to look especially after the widows, the orphans and aliens in their midst, remembering that they were at one time oppressed aliens in Egypt. That is the Old Testament biblical narrative. That is not being practiced by many Jews, let alone the state of Israel today. We are simply asking that they re-examine their scriptures and act as we believe their God has commanded them in their own scruptures, as we believe he has commanded us.

V. The People’s Stay in (Joseph) and Delivery from Egypt (Moses) [HOW DID WE GET HERE? OUR* CHURCH IN THE 21ST CENTURY *Mennonite/Anabaptist]

V. The People’s Stay in (Joseph) and Delivery from Egypt (Moses)

2016 4 3 Part 1

-        God’s people preserved

-        God hears his people’s cries and responds

Genesis 30:1-2, 22 The birth of Joseph to Rachel

We have now looked at the stories of God creating a good world and filling it with plants and creatures that he called good, including humans. However, as we saw, the first humans started to take their own directions and God's good world was spoiled. Things got so bad that God planned to destroy the world and its inhabitants but did end up saving one family and representatives of all the animal life.

Then we came to the story of Abraham, where God really try to make a new start with humans by choosing this family to be his people. He made promises to Abraham which were passed on to his son Isaac and grandson Jacob:

i. One of the promises was to make of Abraham's descendants a great people. Jacob had 12 sons, so things were certainly moving in the right direction that way in terms of a growing number of descendants. However, as we shall see, although that could have been interpreted as a blessing, there certainly was not unity in the family and we will see more of the outcome of that as the story progresses. That can certainly be seen as a negative, but we will see what becomes of it in the future.

ii. The other major promise was that Abraham and his descendants would be given the land that Abraham settled in. However, both of those promises become threatened again in the stories we will look at today.

The story of how God rescued this people so they could continue to fulfill his promises is one of the major stories in the Bible, namely, the exodus from Egypt. However, to appreciate that story and put it into context, we should look at why and how the Children of Israel, as Jacob came to be called, ended up in Egypt.

Now, the story here actually takes some very interesting turns. We are all aware that there seems to be a widespread tradition in our world in many cultures of the importance of the firstborn son. We saw what happened with Cain and Abel. We won't go into details, but Abraham's son Isaac, was tricked into blessing the second son born to him, Jacob, not the elder, Esau, although they were twins.

In this story, it is not Jacob's eldest who is the main figure either, nor the one that seems to get the most blessing. That would appear to be because he was the son of Jacob's first wife, whom he was tricked into marrying by his father-in-law.

Jacob's wife by choice, Rachel, was the one he really loved, but as we see in this passage, she was barren or infantile; she could not have children. This is another of those examples in the Bible where even those people that are supposedly under God’s special attention, his care, still experience things that rob them of the good life God wants to give them. In spite of God’s overall good plans, some details are not always that good.

Rachel complains to Jacob about this and he appears to remind her that it is God who might have a hand in these things, not himself. After all, he has had other sons already. That obviously led her to call upon God, inspired her to pray to God, as in verse 22, we read that "God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her," in other words heard and paid attention to her, “and opened her womb," made it possible for her to get pregnant after all. Jacob's firstborn son by Rachel was Joseph.

Genesis 32:22-32, 35:1-15

With regards to the passing of the covenant from Abraham to Isaac and now Jacob, these two passages 24-25 are significant. In the first, Jacob has a meeting with a divine being who wrestles with him, injuring him, and then changing his name to Israel, "one who strives with God and human beings" and overcomes. In the second passage, when Jacob reaches the promise land on his return from Paddan-Arram where 1 he has gone to meet and marry Rachel, and her sister Leah, God tells him to go to Bethel, where God had appeared to him on his way out to Paddan-Arram, and make an altar to him there. When he does

9-12 so, God appears to Jacob again, repeats the change in name to Israel and says "I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and the company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall spring from you. The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you." Thus, the promises of the nation and land are carried on and confirmed with the third-generation.

Genesis 35:16-21, 27-29

The first passage here records the death of Jacob's favorite and beloved wife Rachel while in childbirth with their second son, whom Jacob names Benjamin. He would be the younger brother to Joseph. The second passage records the fact that Jacob actually did meet his father Isaac again after all these years away when he journeys as far south as Hebron. As with Abraham, whose estranged sons Ishmael and Isaac both buried him, Jacob and his estranged brother Esau also come to together to respectfully bury their father Isaac.

Genesis 37 Joseph sold into Egypt

1 So here we read that Jacob did settle in the land where his father still apparently was seen as living as an alien. Then we read, "this is the story of the family of Jacob," but the first thing we read in the next verse is about Joseph. Now, as we will see, Joseph was not highly regarded by his older brothers. In the 2 first place, as it says here in verse two, he "brought a bad report of them to their father." Then it says

3 that "Israel loved Joseph more than any other of his children… and he had made him a long robe with sleeves. But when his brothers saw that the father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him, 4 and could not speak peaceably to him."

5-11 It did not help any either when Joseph began to have dreams where it was obvious that his brothers 8 and father were subordinate, were bowing down to him. His brothers said, "Are you indeed to reign over us? Are you indeed to have dominion over us? (And) hated him even more because of his dreams 10 and his words." Even his father rebuked him after he told them his second dream, saying, "Shall we indeed come, I and your mother and your brothers, and bow to the ground before you?" So his brothers were jealous of him, but his father “kept the matter in mind." Jacob had significant dreams of his own in the past, and he probably thought he better not say too much about this dream.

12-17a Joseph is sent on an errand by his father, to find out how his brothers are doing with their flocks away from home. This was not wise on Jacob's part, knowing how his brothers hated him, in part for already having brought him back a bad report in the past. It also showed some lack of understanding on Joseph's part, that he went along with this request to go alone to the brothers who hated him.

17 B-24 The brothers see Joseph coming and their hatred of him causes them to conspire to kill him. Here we do see the eldest, Reuben, showing some maturity and leadership, showing some respect for life and his father, some attempt to make peace. Instead of killing him, he persuades his brothers to simply throw him into a nearby pit, thinking, according to verse 22, that he could rescue him later and send him back to his father.

25-28 Reuben appears to have been absent for the next part of the story, and this time another brother who is also to figure prominently in the story of this family, Judas, persuades the brothers present to sell him to some Midianite traders passing by. In that sense, Judas also shows some leadership, some respect for his father and for life, some attempt to keep peace. Mind you, it also seems he was interested in earning a profit from the sale of Joseph. Perhaps Judas was acting under the influence of the Holy Spirit when he came up with this plan, as we know from how the story progresses, this was ultimately a good move for the family. The brothers thought they were getting rid of this annoying half-brother of theirs, but it didn't turn out that way. Now, according to 25:2 and 4, Midian was a stepbrother of Isaac. It is not clear then why they are called Ishmaelites, unless Isaac's half-brother Ishmael had teamed up with his stepbrothers, and being the elder, they all went under his name.

29-35 When Reuben returns and finds his brother gone, he is very upset. However, they all scheme together to tell their father that his favorite son has been killed by wild animals. So, by now they have carried out 3 bad actions – putting Joseph into a pit, selling him and making up a lie to tell their father about his favourite son. We will see what the outcome of their choices, based on their hatred for this brother, are in the future.

36 This part of the story ends with the simple statement that "the Midianites had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, one of Pharaoh's officials, the captain of the guard." So, we know where Joseph ended up, but the rest of the family was still in Canaan.

A theme that we can see surfacing here is that of favoritism, referring to Jacob's choice of Joseph as his favorite son. As we can understand, which is not the same as saying we agree with this, this was because he was the firstborn son of Rachel, the woman Jacob really loved and wanted to marry. Jacob’s feelings in this way had no doubt also been strengthened by the fact that Joseph’s mother had died in giving birth to his younger and only brother Benjamin. Joseph would have reminded him of his beloved mother. In this part of the story we can see how it causes negative reactions on the part of those not favored, i.e. Joseph's brothers. Later, we will see in the story of Joseph, how being chosen, being favored, can also lead to being given and then showing acceptance of more responsibility.

Genesis 42:1-45:15 Joseph’s brothers meet him in Egypt

In the interests of time, let me just summarize that after Joseph got to Egypt, his dreams and ability to 41:37 interpret them eventually led him to become the Pharoah’s right hand man, perhaps you could say the Prime Minister. He was in command went as severe famine struck that whole area. However, Joseph 41:48-49 had also shown that he had superior wisdom. Under his instruction, the Egyptians had built 41:57 granaries so large that they had supplies for themselves as well as enough to sell to their neighbors.

42:1-5 This famine also affected Joseph's father and his brothers and their families back in Canaan. When things got quite desperate, Jacob told his sons to go to Egypt to get some grain for themselves, fearing that they would all starve otherwise.

42: 6-9 When Joseph sees his brothers coming to buy grain, he realizes that they are now in his control. Indeed, just as his dreams had predicted, we read in verse six that his "brothers came and bowed themselves before him with their faces to the ground. When Joseph saw his brothers, he recognized them, but he treated them like strangers and spoke harshly to them." When they tell him they came to buy food, he accuses them of coming to spy on how well Egypt might be doing under the stress of the 42:15 famine. In some ways he takes advantage of her exploits that situation and causes his brothers a lot of suffering, which they had, of course, caused him years before. So, in some ways, this broken family 42:21 saw some revenge being played out here. In the midst of this, the brothers actually realized that these negative experiences that Joseph is inflicting on them are “the penalty for what we did to our brother; we saw his anguish when he pleaded with us, but we would not listen. That is why this anguish has come upon us."

42: 17, 22, 43:3-10, 44:14-34 Again though, we see some showing of leadership by Reuben and Judas as they try and navigate these situations that Joseph traps them in.

45:1-15 Ultimately, finally, Joseph cannot contain himself and keep the secret that he has been holding ever since he first saw his brothers bow down to him when they came to Egypt to buy grain for the first 45:9-20 time. He tells them who he is. Moreover, he tells them to go back to Canaan and bring his father and all the rest of the family and their possessions and livestock. He does this with the support of King Pharaoh when Pharaoh finds out what is going on. Joseph obviously knew his brothers. Perhaps he was still testing them even further by showing favoritism to his full brother Benjamin with all that he gave Benjamin 45:24 compared to the rest of them. So, when they leave to get the rest of the family, he makes an interesting statement. He tells them "Do not quarrel along the way." Knowing what had happened to him, he could probably understand that what he was doing to Benjamin could cause problems amongst the brothers, but he took that chance.

Here we see the ultimate wisdom, leadership and generosity of the man who had previously been thought of only as a spoiled child. Now, he turns out to be the savior of the family. Indeed, he tells his brothers 45:7-8 that "God sent me before you to preserve for you a remnant on earth, and to keep alive for you many survivors. So it was not you who sent me here, but God; he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and Lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt." Again, we see how what looked initially to be some very negative planning and action on the part of Joseph's brothers, was utilized by God for good.

Genesis 45:25-46:4, 47:21-25 Jacob and his descendants move to Egypt

45:27 Jacob, who had never ceased to mourn the loss of his favorite son, was revived in his spirit with the report that came back from Egypt that Joseph was still alive and ruler over all the land of Egypt and 45:28 resolved to go with his family to "see him before I die."

In all of this, we do not read much about God or his being consulted or having an active part in all of what 46:1 goes on. However, when Jacob sets out on his journey to Egypt, he “stopped at Beersheba and 46:2-4 offered sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac." Then God speaks to Israel, again in "visions of the night" and says, "I am God, the God of your father; do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make of you a great nation there. I myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I would also bring you up again; and Joseph's own hand so close your eyes."

Again, on the face of it, this seems to be a good outcome at this point in the story. Due in no small part to the leadership and peacemaking, forgiving and reconciling work of Joseph, who had previously caused division in the family, the family is once again united, evidently with God's blessing. Their needs will again be met in the midst of the famine. They are being looked after by the God who provides. God also here repeats the promises made to Jacob's ancestors, that he will make of him a great nation and that, even though they are now going to be in Egypt, he will remain there with them and return them to Canaan.

47:21-25 another noteworthy development occurs here as the famine continues. People ultimately run out of money to buy grain and even run out of other produce and livestock with which to buy grain. As a result, Joseph ends up buying all the land and even making the people slaves in order to provide them food and keep them alive. This is something that people here again about later.

Genesis 47:29-31, 49:1, 8-12, 50:24-26 The promises/covenant remain

Now, the whole family of the Children of Israel are in Egypt, now numbering 66 persons in all (46:6). This is where the promised descendants of Abraham are at in terms of number and place. However, as Jacob illustrates in his instructions to his sons, he knows where his place is, where the land is that God promised to this family. Therefore, he gives, first to Joseph (47:29-31), then to all of the brothers together (49:29-33), instructions to take him back to Canaan and bury him with his ancestors. This wish is carried out in 50:4-14.

We have mentioned a couple of times the role of Judah, Jacob's fourth son by Leah, his first wife. If you read the whole book of Genesis, you will see that Judah was by no means a perfect man. However, he, more than any of the other brothers, stood up at the right time and made some important decisions, both in his own family life and that of the life of the larger family, that helped preserve the lives of all and make it possible for God to continue to show his blessings to them. Perhaps this is what causes Jacob to give Judah the largest and most significant blessing of his 12 sons in 49:8-12. Jacob tells Judah that "your brothers shall praise you… Your father's sons shall bow down before you… The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and the obedience of the peoples is his. Binding his foal to the vine and his donkey's colt to the choice vine, he washes his garments in wine and his robe in the blood of grapes; his eyes are darker than wine, and his teeth whiter than milk."

Indeed, later on, when the children of Israel became a nation, Judah was the tribe from which King David came and we know that David was promised a never-ending line of regal descendants, of which Jesus was the final one, and he rules forever. As it says here, his descendants will continue to rule until everyone obeys his descendant. One even has to wonder about the references to this foal and donkey's colt, whether these connect to what we know about Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, which we celebrate as Palm Sunday. Perhaps the references to washing his garments in wine and his robe in the blood of grapes also refer to giving his body, his blood, in instituting the sacrament of communion and dying for us. Even Judah had offered to die for his brother.

The world, our basic human nature, wants to tell us that bad choices result in bad consequences, something some religions refer to as karma. However, as we have alluded to several times, these stories tell us that this is not always the case. Indeed, there are some negative consequences, but they are less than the positive ones in the form of redeeming rescue, the repair of relationships, the forgiveness and reconciliation that God brings about in spite of our bad choices. Moreover, God does this through people that he has created and who are obedient to him, such as some of the heroes of these stories. As the writer of our Anabaptist commentary on Genesis says, sometimes our gracious, loving God surprises us with good. Joseph teaches us to see and wait for God's visitations when they come, knowing that they come in God's timing, and sometimes far in the future.

Finally, Joseph, like other Old Testament characters, is seen as a ‘type’ or foreshadowing of Jesus. Like Jesus, he gave up his life, in a sense, when his brothers threw him in a pit and then sold him to Egypt. Again, like Jesus, even though he had been given up for dead, he appeared again, as if he was resurrected, in a saving role in the lives of his people.