Genesis 46

Updated
2001-05-26; 14:31:49utc

On his way to Egypt Jacob stops in Beersheba and he offers sacrifices to God at that place. Beersheba brings back the memories of childhood. Here Isaac had settled and here Jacob had grown up. It is the last sacrifice he brings to God in the land of Canaan. It may have been the last sacrifice he ever brought in his life. We do not read about any other. The fact that God is called here "the God of his father Isaac" indicates that Jacob remembers his father and thinks back over his life.

The news about Joseph's "resurrection from the dead" must have thrown a new light on the person of God in Jacob's thinking. He had received extensive revelations from God, but he had never entered this intimate, warm relationship with God that his grandfather Abraham had. He must have blamed God for the sorrow in his life, particularly the loss of Joseph. Now he sees that God was not who he thought He was. The sacrifice of Beersheba must have been one of the most meaningful sacrifices he ever brought in his life.

The sacrifice must also have been a prayer for guidance. Jacob was aware of God's prophecy to Abraham in Ch. 15:13, and he may have been aware of the dangers to which he exposed his descendants by going to Egypt. He had, of course, little choice. Apart from the joy of seeing Joseph again, the trip to Egypt meant staying alive. The alternative would have been starvation in Canaan. But, if Jacob knew his history, he remembered that Abraham had not done well in going down to Egypt (Ch. 12:14-20) and that God had specifically warned Isaac not to go (Ch. 26:2). So in spite of the fact that he yearns to hold Joseph in his arms again, he first asks God if it is all right. This attitude may have been the greatest spiritual victory in Jacob's life. It is a sure sign of a new relationship with God. He shows that he gives priority to loving God over the love for his son Joseph.

God answers Jacob during the night. He calls his name twice: "Jacob, Jacob!" In spite of the fact that it was Israel, the prince and conqueror, as he is called in vs. 1, who leaves Canaan, God addresses him here as Jacob, the tripper. Maybe God wanted to remind him of the fact that his old nature had not died. But God's words are reassuring. In vs. 3 God says: "I am God, the God of your father," he said. "Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make you into a great nation there." It is wonderful to go back to the place of your childhood and to go over your life and to meet the God of your father. If God is only a memory, connected with an earlier stage of your life, you have lived in vain. In this revelation memories and the reality of God's presence melt into one.

Reading vs. 4 - "I will go down to Egypt with you, and I will surely bring you back again. And Joseph's own hand will close your eyes," we would get the impression that God promises Jacob that he would personally return to Canaan. We know this did not happen. Jacob died in Egypt with Joseph at his side and only his remains returned to Canaan to be buried. The promise is given to the people of Israel, so they would have a Word of God to hang on to during the four centuries of slavery. We do not read in the book of Exodus that anyone ever mentioned this promise. Evidently the Word of God was no longer considered relevant at that period of history. Does not this sound familiar in our twentieth century ears?

So Jacob leaves Canaan in style on the wagons Pharaoh had provided for him and his family. Israel would return to Canaan even more in style. Pharaoh rolled out the red carpet for Jacob; God would roll back the river Jordan for His people. The gates of Egypt opened wide for Israel, the gates and walls and the whole city of Jericho would collapse and crumble when Israel entered there. Jacob left with a demonstration of worldly power, Israel returned with a demonstration of supernatural power. But in between would lay several hundred years of suffering, before God would call His Son back out of Egypt, as Hosea says in Hos. 11:1. But it was during this time of hardship and tribulation that the handful of people would increase and become a people of several million souls.

Vs. 8-27 give us a list of people who moved into Egypt, the total count of which is seventy. The list should not be taken as a statistical account. The Pulpit Commentary says about this list: "The phrase 'which came into Egypt' must obviously be construed with some considerable latitude, since in the appended list of seventy persons, 'souls of the house of Jacob which came into Egypt,' are reckoned Joseph, who undoubtedly came into Egypt, but not with Jacob, Hezron and Hamul, the sons of Pharez, as well as the descendants of Benjamin, who probably, and Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, who certainly, were born in Egypt." The list gives more a general overview of the beginning of the nation of Israel, than an actual body count of people who were in Jacob's company entering Egypt.

Adam Clarke says about this section: "It may be necessary to observe here. First, that several of these names are expressed differently elsewhere; compare Num. xxvi. 12; 1 Chron. iv. 24. But it is no uncommon case for the same person to have different names, or the same name to be differently pronounced; see chap. xxv. 15. Secondly, that it is probable that some names in this list are brought in by prolepsis or anticipation, as the persons were born (probably) during the seventeen years which Jacob sojourned in Egypt, see v. 12. Thirdly, that the families of some are entered more at large than others because of their peculiar respectability, as in the case of Judah, Joseph, and Benjamin."

There seems to be a discrepancy between this account and Stephen's in Acts 7:14, where he says: "After this, Joseph sent for his father Jacob and his whole family, seventy-five in all." Stephen quotes from the Septuagint, which adds the sons of Ephraim and of Manasseh, born from his Syrian concubine. That Moses did not intend to give an exact list of people entering Egypt is clear from the mention in vs. 12 of Judah's sons Er and Onan, who died in Canaan before this journey was engaged upon.

Getting close to the Egyptian border, Jacob sends Judah ahead to notify Joseph. Our text says "to get directions to Goshen," but from the following verses we gather that the intent was to be able to be met by Joseph half way and to celebration the reunion away from the crowd. Joseph probably would not have been able to be away from his duties for an unlimited number of days. So he could not have moved to Goshen to wait for his father. But he needs no prompting to go when he hears that Jacob is approaching. When they meet they fall into each others arms and weep for a long time an abundance of healing, cleansing tears. Nothing better to heal emotional wounds than tears.

When it says "Joseph appeared before him" a word is used that is commonly reserved for the appearance of God or His angels, according to The Pulpit Commentary . So the appearance of Joseph is a demonstration of glory. When Jacob saw Joseph last, some twenty years ago, he was wearing the robe of many colors. This robe seems a faded rag compared to what Joseph is wearing now. The Bible presents Joseph as an image of the resurrection body. Nothing we wear on earth, however expensive it may be, can compare with the glory to come.

Jacob seems to be unable to keep death out of his conversation. We read in vs. 30: "Israel said to Joseph, 'Now I am ready to die, since I have seen for myself that you are still alive.'" The KJV and RSV probably put it more correctly by saying: "Now let me die." There was something in Jacob's experience that could never be surpassed on earth. Anything else that would happen after this would pale in the light of this embrace. Jacob feels that in receiving his son back from the dead he has reached the fulfillment of his life. It is this taste of resurrection that makes him long for death.

Joyful anticipation of death has almost completely disappeared from our theology. When we hear Bach's music on the words "Come sweet death" (Komm susser Tod) we respond with gloom instead of joyful longing. The tendency in our time is to deny death instead of looking forward to it. Several years ago I visited Mrs. van der Leek, the lady who had taken me into her home after my parents died. Her husband had departed and she was in an Old Folks Home. I remarked that soon she would be united with her husband in glory. She agreed, but her sister who was present was shocked and told me not to talk about such things. Several people in that home lived to be a hundred, so she had no reason to anticipate dying in her eighties! Poor soul! Jacob says more than "I am ready now." He is willing, since nothing else in life will be able to top this seeing of Joseph in his glory.

Many theories have been advanced about the strong feelings the Egyptians seemed to have toward people tending flocks. Vs. 34 says: "All shepherds are detestable to the Egyptians." The KJV says: "Every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians." It is obvious that Joseph's instructions to his brothers are based on this feeling. It is impossible to determine from our distant perspective what the actual basis for this feeling was. There were probably religious as well as political reasons. The religious one could be that divine qualities were attributed to cattle, so that sacrificing cattle or eating beef would be a sacrilege. The fact that the Israelites in the desert made themselves a golden calf would point in this direction.

A political reason for the aversion could be the fact that the reigning Pharaoh belonged to the category of the shepherd kings, or Hyksos, a foreign power who had usurped the throne of Egypt. The Pulpit Commentary believes, though, that Israel's descent into Egypt occurred before the period of the Hyksos. It is also true that domestic shepherds were considered to be despicable too. Herodotus affirms this, as do some archeological finds of relieves where shepherds are pictured as lame or deformed, dirty and unshaven. But the feeling of contempt toward this class may have political reasons also. They could have been considered collaborators with the hostile regime. We have to conclude that we do not know. However, the fact that this kind of potentially explosive tension existed is stated emphatically several times throughout this story.