Stephen
Terry, Director
Joseph,
Master of Dreams
Commentary
for the June 11, 2022, Sabbath School Lesson
"Abraham had taken another
wife, whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian,
Ishbak and Shuah." Genesis 25:1-2, NIV
The story we are dealing with
this week is that of Joseph who went into slavery in Egypt but nonetheless rose
from the depths of an Egyptian prison to be second only to Pharoah. It is an
incredible story, mythological in its scope of villains and the heroic exploits
of the young Hebrew. Based on the literal account, these were exploits not to
be equaled for four hundred years when Moses finally arrives on the scene.
During those lost four centuries, the entire world of the Eastern Mediterranean
experienced the Bronze Age Collapse brought about by repeated droughts, a
profound change that even the story of Joseph reveals nearly brought Egypt to
her knees. Coupled with massive earthquakes throughout the region and waves of
invaders, referred to as the Sea People that leveled several cities, the
devastation destroyed major civilizations, including the Hittites and the Mitanni.
Those that survived, suffered so greatly that it took centuries for them to recover
any semblance of their former glory. The time is often referred to as the
Mycenean Dark Ages, a collapse greater than what was experienced with the much
later collapse of the Western Roman Empire. The loss of archival records as
royal record libraries were burned and their contents
buried for thousands of years under ash and debris meant a dearth of documentary
evidence to validate legends preserved for centuries in individuals' memories and
passed on orally between the Bronze Age Collapse and the Iron Age scribes who
wrote it all down. This is not much different than trying to construct what happened
to the Roanoke Colony's settlers in the late 16th century in what is
now the state of North Carolina based on the scant evidence available. Four centuries
later we still don't know what happened to the over one hundred settlers in that
colony.
This historical context becomes
important when we try to parse the story of Joseph. The confusion in the text
makes it apparent this is not an account to be taken very literally. Joseph as
the oldest child of Jacob's favorite wife, Rachel, is given preferential
treatment by Jacob over the children of Leah and the two handmaids. Joseph
preserved in his being the memory of Rachel after she died giving birth to
Benjamin. Joseph knew her. Benjamin never did. Jacob could look into Joseph's
face and see some of Rachel looking back at him. This relationship between the
two incited jealousy in the other children, and they decided to do something
about it. While tending the flocks near Shechem about 160 kilometers or one
hundred miles from Beersheba where Jacob had relocated, they surely discussed
their jealousies. Jacob sent Joseph to check on his brothers only for him to
discover they had moved even further north over twenty kilometers to Dothan.
Imagine their surprise when being so far from home they spotted the familiar many-colored
tunic Joseph wore coming across the fields toward them, the object of their
rage pursuing them even here. They decided to rid themselves of the problem and
toss Joseph into a pit. Then they sit down to eat and discuss what to do with
him. At that point, the problems with the text become apparent.
We are told they see an
Ishmaelite caravan and decide to sell their brother to make some profit while ridding
themselves of him. For some reason, although Reuben purposes to rescue Joseph from
the pit and send him back to his father, he knows nothing of the plot to sell
Joseph for he is surprised and shocked to find Joseph gone from the pit. All
sorts of reasons have been suggested for this ignorance over the centuries by
Talmudic scholars for this, but there is no definitive answer to be found in
the text, and even logical deduction fails to provide a reason that stands out.[i]
But this is only one of the
unexplained conundrums in the text. While they plotted to sell him to the Ishmaelite
caravan, we are told that they instead sold him to Midianites. Then when he
arrives in Egypt, we are told Potiphar bought him from the Ishmaelites. The
problem here is that these are not the same peoples. Ishmael was Abraham's
first born through Hagar, the Egyptian. He participated in the Covenant of
Circumcision with Abraham as he was entering his teens, a year before Isaac was
born. While Midian was also a descendant of Abraham, he was a son of Keturah, the
woman whom Abraham married after Sarah's death. Keturah is an enigmatic figure.
We are told nothing of her past or origin. This has resulted in much
speculation over the centuries, some even suggesting that Keturah, which means "Incense"
or "fragrant" was Hagar who had returned to Abraham's bed after Sarah's death.[ii]
According to Islamic sources, Abraham continued to assist Ishmael and that
interaction may have increased after Sarah's death, so it explains the
possibility of Hagar returning, but does not explain the name change. However,
Jacob (Deceiver) was eventually called Israel (One Who Prevails with God) so there
is precedent for exchanging a less than desirable name like Hagar (Forsaken) to
something more favorable like Keturah (Fragrant).
Adding to the confusion about
who bought Joseph and took him into Egypt to be sold to Potiphar, both the
Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch tell us in Genesis 37:36 that the Midianites
sold Joseph to him, but in 39:1 they tell us that Potiphar bought him from
Ishmaelites. Even modern translators have added to the confusion. For instance,
in an apparent attempt to deal with the problem, the NIV has Potiphar buying
Joseph from Medanites in Genesis 37:36. As is apparent from our opening text, a
passage repeated in 1 Chronicles 1:32, Medan and Midian are not the same
person, although they were brothers, both sons of Keturah.
One probable reason I can think
of for all these discrepancies would indicate why Hebrew scholars would propose
that Hagar and Keturah were the same person. When Abraham sent Hagar away at
Sarah's insistence, the only male she had to head up her clan was Ishmael. Therefore,
just as Israel became the father of the Israelites, Ishmael was the eponymous
head of Hagar's/Keturah's descendants from Abraham. Ishmael's name being used
interchangeably with Midian's would support that possibility. As far as the
substitution of Medan for Midian, the similarity of the two names could mean
simply that a scribal error was made at some point along the line. I cannot
help but wonder if we would have had more clarity were this not an Iron Age
attempt to reconstitute an earlier Bronze Age mythos. Sometimes I feel like the
paucity of the text causes us to be in a similar position to trying to
determine the type of proverbial cherry tree that George Washington cut down.
Was it pie cherries? Sweet cherries? Choke cherries? But as I said earlier, the
details are less important than the lesson. This is true all the way back to Creation
in the opening chapters of Genesis. There may be those who would die on the
cross of literalism over these things, but they miss the point and even much of
the beauty of these metaphors. I have dealt with some of this earlier in the
quarter, so I will not belabor the point here.
What then is the lesson to be
gleaned from the story of Joseph going into Egypt? I see two major points. The
first point is that Joseph epitomizes what it means to be an Israelite. Unlike
his brothers who were only looking out for themselves with dishonesty being
used to further their personal agendas, Joseph truly sought to be the humble
and honest servant to others. His honesty and faithfulness meant conflict with
those who had neither, first with his brothers and then with Potiphar's wife.
Joseph became acquainted with the injustice that selfishness brings into the
world. Unlike others who might lament their fate and drop into depression over
what they had experienced, feeling God had abandoned them, Joseph continued to
trust in God's providence and humbly served others where he could. His ultimate
rise to power was a narrative endorsing a radical departure from all the lying
and deception that had gone on for generations in his dysfunctional family.
Honesty, humility and faithfulness pay off in the end. When we look at the
world today, unfortunately we see a world that is shaped more by the values of Joseph's
errant brothers. Therefore, whether literally true or myth, we need this
reminder now as much as they did when it was written. This story was a light
written in a time of darkness with civilization striving to recover. The challenges
that brought civilization to its knees still confront us.
The second point that can be drawn from this story is related to those
challenges. The very disasters that may have us running around like Chicken
Little shouting "The sky is falling!" may be the means God is able to make use
of to elevate those who are his humble servants to positions of responsibility to
save many by their faithful and compassionate service. Joseph was not created
by those adversities. He was prepared for them before hand by seeking to
develop a character that would allow God to make use of him in ways beyond his
imagining. This begs the question, am I doing what I can to have the character
God intended me to have, or am I just drifting along like a leaf in the breeze,
going which ever way the prevailing societal wind happens to take me? Do I even
understand what my character is and what it could be? Stories like Joseph's are
not valuable because of exacting literalism, they are valuable because they
make us ask questions like these. Because of that, they are timeless.