Genesis 42-50

<p>Genesis 42 connects to much of the material from earlier in the Joseph cycle. Many people reading the Joseph narrative in the modern west may see the Joseph narrative as climaxing with Genesis 41, in which Joseph rises to prominence in Egypt, and see chapters 42-50 as a long denouement. However, in a family-centered society like ancient Israel, one is more likely to see the climax of the Joseph narrative in Genesis 45, in which Joseph is reconciled to his brothers. In this reading, Joseph rising to prominence is a means to an end: the brothers being reconciled to Joseph and saved from famine.&nbsp;</p> <p>Genesis 42:1 states, &ldquo;Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another?&rdquo; This suggests that the brothers are uncertain about what to do, and are just looking at each other, waiting for someone to do something about the lack of food, but Jacob steps in and tells them to go down to Egypt to get food (v.2). So all Jacob&rsquo;s sons, except for Benjamin, go down to Egypt to get grain and find themselves there with many others from regions near Egypt who are starving (vv.3-5).&nbsp;</p> <p>As is the case in the English of the King James Bible, &ldquo;corn&rdquo; in this chapter is a generic word for grain and probably refers here to one of the grains commonly grown in ancient Egypt such as spelt, emmer, or einkorn wheat.&nbsp;</p> <p>Because Joseph oversees the process of selling grain, his brothers &ldquo;bowed down themselves before him with their faces to the earth&rdquo; (v.6), petitioning him for help. This is a fulfillment of Joseph&rsquo;s dream in Genesis 37, in which he sees his family members bowing down to him.</p>

<p>The brothers unknowingly say something significant in verse 13 when they state that one of their brothers &ldquo;is not.&rdquo; Rather than stating that Joseph is dead, they say he &ldquo;is not,&rdquo; as they are not sure whether he is dead or alive, as they sold him into slavery and it is possible that he is still alive somewhere. They allow the Egyptian bureaucrat they are speaking with (who turns out to be Joseph) to assume that one of the brothers is dead, even though he is the person they are speaking to. Joseph originally proposes that they send one brother back to get Benjamin, keeping the others in prison, but after keeping them in prison for three days, he instead sends all but one of the brothers back to get Benjamin so they can bring food to their starving family members (vv.16-20). Presumably this is why Joseph says he &ldquo;fears God,&rdquo; as he does not want to have the blood of the starving family members on his hands (v.18).</p>

<p>It is at this point that the reader discovers the that the brothers assume that this unfortunate turn of events is happening to them because of what they did to Joseph so many years ago (v.21). The reader also finds out the devastating detail, not mentioned in Genesis 37, that Joseph begged his brothers for mercy but they did not respond to him (v.21). In verse 22, Reuben takes the opportunity to remind them all that he tried to stop them, but they did not listen to him (Genesis 37:21-22), and now they are paying for what they did to him.<br />Joseph has used an interpreter so his brothers would not know he could understand them, but he overhears their conversation and must leave so his brothers do not see him cry (vv.23-24). This scene complicates an interpretation of the narrative in which Joseph is heartlessly punishing his brothers for what they did to him in the past. Although it is difficult to be sure because of the spare nature of biblical narrative, he appears to be weeping not from anger, but because of the pain his brothers have been experiencing for so many years, as they still feel guilt for what they did to him.</p>

<p>Joseph gives the brothers their money back, but when one of the brothers sees the money in his sack, they assume that God is punishing them yet further by returning his money to him which would cause Joseph to think he had somehow stolen back his money after paying for the grain (vv. 25-28). The term translated in the King James as &ldquo;bundle&rdquo; probably indicates a small bag (see Haggai 1:6). This fits the ancient Near Eastern context in which money consisted of pieces of silver, often stored in a small bag.</p> <p>The brothers then return back home and tell Jacob what happened, except that they left out the part where Joseph threw them in prison for multiple days, perhaps to make the situation seem somewhat less threatening to improve the chance that Jacob might let Benjamin come to Egypt with them (vv. 29-34).&nbsp;</p> <p>Things then go from bad to worse for the brothers as they see that it was not just one brother whose money was in his sack, but all of them had their money returned to them. When Jacob sees this, he seems to think that Simeon has now surely be killed, and that Benjamin will be killed as well if the brothers bring Benjamin down with them (vv. 35-36). Reuben swears on the life of his two sons that he will being Benjamin back home safely, but Jacob refuses (offering to have some of his grandchildren killed if some of his children are killed seems does not seem like an offer most people would accept in any case) (vv. 37-38).</p>