Green Baggins

I am now going to start the exegetical challenge to Leithart’s article. I plan on covering most of the passages which Leithart deals with in any depth. I will cover them in the order in which they appear in the article. First up is Genesis 30:33. The immediate context has clear boundaries, stretching from verse 25-43. The setting is Laban’s trickery, and Jacob’s “honesty.” Laban is motivated by greed, as is clear from the entire context of the Jacob story. He is only in this relationship for himself. He wants to keep Jacob as a hired hand, since Jacob has done such a good job, and “the Lord has blessed (him) because of (Jacob)” (vs. 27). Then follows a deal-making discussion where Laban desires to keep Jacob, whereas Jacob wants to have his own property and provide for his own family, rather than taking care of someone else’s (vs. 30). Jacob makes a condition that allows him to start providing for an estate of his own, while still looking out after Laban’s property. That condition is that any sheep that was spotted, speckled, or black, would belong to Jacob, whereas all the white sheep would belong to Laban. This would be a very easy way to tell whose sheep were whose. This point is crucial, since it informs the meaning of “honesty” (tsedeq). Laban would be able to judge Jacob’s integrity by whether there were any white sheep in Jacob’s flock. It is as sure a method of differentiation as branding would be today. The evidence of Jacob’s integrity would be the differentiation of the flocks (vs. 33).

Now, Leithart argues (pp. 210-211 of _Federal Vision_) that this passage does not take place in a courtroom setting, an opinion which is not quite as evident as Leithart believes. Jacob is invisaging the possible accusation of Laban that Jacob had stolen sheep from Laban. Jacob could, at that time, point to his innocence by pointing to his sheep. He would then be in the right in the court of common opinion. Again, there is other evidence of courtroom language here as well. The word “stolen” often appears in a judicial context. Gen 31:19 is judicial, arguably (especially after Laban tries to police Jacob into humility), and Gen 44:8 is quite judicial, as is Exodus 21:16, and Exodus 22:11. This raises the question as to whether this passage really is “covenantal” or “ethical-social,” or whether it is judicial in Genesis 30:33. However, even if we were to grant Leithart’s point here, that still does not negate the fact that he uses improper hermeneutics to arrive at a broader definition of justification. He says quite explicitly, “‘Justification’ in these passages is flexible enough to include not only ‘counting someone as legally innocent’ but also ‘counting someone as a loyal friend/servant’” (p. 211).  This claim is demonstrably false. Jacob is concerned about his own integrity when accused of stealing by Laban (hardly an unlikely event, as the outcome proved). Jacob is not concerned here at all with being counted as Laban’s friend. Leithart has not proved his point with Genesis 30:33.  

 Genesis 49:28-50:26

In his book. Lee: The Last Years, Charles Bracelen Flood reports that after the Civil War, Robert E. Lee visited a Kentucky lady who took him to the remains of a grand old tree in front of her house. There she bitterly cried that its limbs and trunk had been destroyed by Federal artillery fire. She looked to Lee for a word condemning the North or at least sympathizing with her loss. After a brief silence, Lee said, “Cut it down, my dear Madam, and forget it.” It is better to forgive the injustices of the past than to allow them to remain, let bitterness take root and poison the rest of our life. Sometimes, however, it is hard to believe that we really are forgiven. Joseph’s brothers have a hard time believing that Joseph has really forgiven them. What is true forgiveness, anyway? We have a very clear picture of it in our last sermon on Genesis.

In the first part of our passage, Jacob dies. This sets the stage for the drama that will occur between Joseph and his brothers one last time in chapter 50. But before Jacob dies, he gives a charge to his sons. That charge is that they would not bury him in the land of Egypt, but would carry him back to the land of promise, so that he could be buried in the same tomb as Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebekah, and Leah. This command the sons will obey.

Joseph has the Egyptians embalm his father Jacob. Embalming was a long process of many days. It was designed to preserve the body for as long as possible. The Egyptians believed in life after death. Part of that belief was that the body was part of that life after death. So they preserved it in amazing ways. A mummy was found recently, as a matter of fact, that had almost no decay at all, though being at least 2500 years old. Well, it is that embalming that the Egyptians performed for Jacob. In short, the Egyptians treated Jacob like a king. They wept for him for 70 days. Just 2 more days is the amount of time prescribed for the mourning for a Pharaoh. The Egyptians were surely being grateful here for all that Joseph had done for the Egyptian nation.

Notice an interesting detail here in verse 4: Joseph speaks to the household of Pharaoh, not to Pharaoh himself. Joseph, having touched the dead body, was ritually unclean in the eyes of the Egyptians, and so he could not come directly into the Pharaoh’s presence. So, he talks with the household, rather than to Pharaoh himself. Joseph asks and obtains permission to bury Jacob in the land of promise.

All this sets the stage for the last encounter of Joseph with the brothers where all is finally made right. As a matter of fact, the brothers had never actually asked Joseph for forgiveness for what they had done to him. Joseph had been very kind to them. But the brothers were thinking to themselves that Jacob being alive had been the only restraint on Joseph’s vengeance. They thought that now that Jacob was dead, Joseph would have free rein to exercise every last ounce of vengeance on them. That’s what they say in verse 15.

So the brothers do a bit of inventing. Jacob never gave such a command to Joseph via the brothers. There are several reasons why verses 16-17 are a lie. First, Jacob did not mention what the brothers did to Joseph in the blessings in chapter 49. Given the fact that he did mention Reuben, Simeon and Levi’s shortcomings, it would be very hard to believe that Jacob would not have mentioned what the brothers did to Joseph. Secondly, if Jacob had had such a command, he would have given it straight to Joseph, not given it through the brothers. It is clear that Joseph had the most access to Jacob. He was there when Jacob died. For these reasons, I believe that the brothers are making up this command that Jacob supposedly gave to them. They were afraid, and wanted Jacob’s protection one more time from their brother Joseph. What they did not understand was the power of forgiveness.

Let’s think carefully through the implications of this situation. The implications are startling. If Jacob never gave such a command, and did not mention in chapter 49 what the brothers did, then we can come to only one conclusion: Jacob never found out! But we must go one step further: if Jacob never found out, then it is equally true that Joseph never told him!! There is the power of forgiveness put on a billboard for the world to see. Not only had Joseph really forgiven his brothers, but he did not mention to his father what they had done. Is that not an amazing forgiveness? It is truly of God, truly a divine forgiveness. It was a true forgiveness.

The brothers, on the other hand, could not really believe that Joseph had truly forgiven them. That’s why they dream up this lie about what Jacob said. They forgot what Joseph had said before, or else they thought he didn’t really mean what he said. They appeal on the basis of this lie, but also on the basis of the fact that they serve the same God that Joseph does. Ironically, the brothers fall on their knees, just as they thought originally that they would never do. You might remember Joseph’s dreams where the stalks of wheat belonging to the brothers bowed down to Joseph’s stalk. The brothers were indignant, and yet here they are, bowing down to Joseph, just as they thought they never would!

Notice Joseph’s response. He says, “Am I in the place of God?” One writer has remarked about this statement that Genesis starts with Adam trying to take the place of God, and Genesis ends with a man in an amazing place of power refusing to take the place of God. Genesis ends with a redemption of a kind. However, that redemption is not final. We need someone in a far higher place of power who refuses to use His deity for his own advantage. Philippians 2 helps us out here: “Have the same attitude among yourselves as Christ Jesus, who, though being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking upon Himself the form of a servant.” Can we see then how Joseph’s divine forgiveness and refusal to take revenge points us to what Jesus Christ would accomplish on the cross? It is Joseph’s not-grasping after divine power that points us to Christ’s own humility that He showed during His entire life, but especially on the cross.

Do you really believe that God has forgiven you? Sometimes we doubt the Word of God, don’t we? We can see plainly enough that those who believe that Christ died for their sins are forgiven. However, we just have a hard time believing that sometimes, don’t we? We are just like the brothers of Joseph. Sometimes we think that our sins are too great for God to forgive. If that is so, then remember that Christ’s blood is more powerful than all sin. To say that God cannot forgive is to say that God is not God, and that He is not powerful enough to erase sin. It is to sin against Christ, because it is His blood that says “what you meant for evil, God has turned into good at the cross.” God has taken His vengeance out on His beloved Son that we might not have to face it. He did that so that He might speak words of comfort to us, just as Joseph comforted his brothers in verse 21.

We must always connect forgiveness of one another with our forgiveness from God. That is the point of the ungrateful servant, you remember. Joyce Baldwin puts it this way: “Only a deep sense of gratitude for the wonder of our own experience of forgiveness in Christ, and for the provision he has made for others to be forgiven, can break down the barriers we put up between ourselves and others, both those we have wronged and those who have wronged us.” If you are having trouble really forgiving someone else, ask yourself this question: “Do you realize that if you are not forgiving someone else, then you are taking the place of God?” It is idolatry of self not to forgive someone else. It is to take the place of God. That is something Joseph would not do. Jesus Himself would not take vengeance on those persecuting Him, but said rather, “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

Supposing you are the one who needs to ask forgiveness. Beware of putting the other person in the place of God. What do I mean? Matthew Henry explains: “When we ask forgiveness of those whom we have offended we must take heed of putting them in the place of God, by dreading their wrath and soliciting their favour more than God’s.” Don’t fear others more than God. Don’t make up a lie like the brothers did in order to solicit favour with the person of whom you are asking forgiveness. Tell the truth, and be humble. But ask for forgiveness. The brothers waited all this time, and never asked forgiveness. Such things should not be swept under the rug, but should be brought out and resolved. This is the unity of the body of Christ. This is true forgiveness.

Genesis 49:13-27

At age 16 Andor Foldes was already a skilled pianist, but he was experiencing a troubled year. In the midst of the young Hungarian’s personal struggles, one of the most renowned pianists of the day came to Budapest. Emil von Sauer was famous not only for his abilities; he was also the last surviving pupil of the great Franz Liszt. Von Sauer requested that Foldes play for him. Foldes obliged with some of the most difficult works of Bach, Beethoven, and Schumann. When he finished, von Sauer walked over to him and kissed him on the forehead. “My son,” he said, “when I was your age I became a student of Liszt. He kissed me on the forehead after my first lesson, saying, ‘Take good care of this kiss–it comes from Beethoven, who gave it to me after hearing me play.’ I have waited for years to pass on this sacred heritage, but now I feel you deserve it.” The power of that blessing made its way through many generations. I myself come from that heritage, since my teacher studied with a student of a student of a student etc. of Liszt. I know then, what it is like to experience the power of a blessing that comes through many generations. We will look at how that happens in the blessings of Jacob here today.

First up is Zebulun. Zebulun is difficult in some ways, because the prophecy is all about the sea, and yet Zebulun was a land-locked tribe. How to explain this? One commentator says that they eventually possessed a portion of the shoreline. This wasn’t for a while, but in the meantime, they did trade on the sea-shore. Matthew 4 has the ultimate answer for us: Jesus was to live in Capernaum, which was by the sea of Galilee, and hence the Gentiles were to come into port there, as it were. We have then a prophecy here of the coming of Christ. Have you settled your ship into the port of Jesus Christ?

Secondly, we have Issachar. Some people think that this “blessing” is really a curse. However, I believe that it is not a curse. The blessings both before and after are really blessings. That would lead us to believe that this is also a blessing. Secondly, there is no record of a particularly shameful deed being done by Issachar except for selling Joseph into Egypt. However, that deed was shared by all the brothers, and Jacob doesn’t mention it. Thirdly, all the other animal comparisons are positive in the blessings. It would be odd if this one were not. Maybe we should translate it this way: “Issachar is a sturdy donkey lying down between two saddlebags. When he sees how good is a resting-place and how pleasant the land, he will bend his shoulder to bear, and he will become a body of workers that work the land.” So we see that Issachar is a tribe of strong workers. Issachar did not sell its freedom for peace with the Canaanites, as some propose.

Thirdly, we have Dan. In Dan, we have a serpent by the roadside. We are not to think of Satan the serpent, as if this were a curse on Dan. Verse 16 clearly implies that Dan is a just tribe, a good tribe. Rather, this prophecy probably refers to the time of Samson. Samson the judge was from the tribe of Dan. He certainly was a poisonous serpent to the Philistines, whom he slew by the thousands. Samson is also a type of Christ, who slays His enemy by the thousands as well. Don’t get bitten by that snake!

In verse 18, we have this one verse that does not seem to be connected with anything around it. However, Jacob is looking forward here to the time of Christ. That is what he is looking for, the time of deliverance. It is the prayer of Simeon before he held the baby Jesus in his arms. Simeon then says, “Now my eyes have seen your salvation. You can let me go in peace now.” Do you look for the deliverance of Jesus Christ?

Fourthly, Gad was one of the three tribes that settled east of the Jordan river. As such, their position was always precarious regarding the raiders that constantly harassed people in the desert. As a result, the Gadite tribe became very good at fighting. The prophecy is fulfilled in their constant defense of their homeland against invaders. In the same way, Jesus constantly fights on our behalf against the demons, and against Satan, so that the temptations that come our way will not be unbearable. He gives us the victory, as is prophecied here.

Fifthly, we have Asher. The name “Asher” means “happy,” you might recall. And their prophecy is bright with hope. They will be rich. Their tribal allotment was far to the north, and on the coast. They traded much, and were thus providing many delicacies for kings, as the text says. Moses says this about the tribe: “Asher is the most blessed of sons; may he be the favorite among his brothers and bathe his feet in oil. May your bolts be of iron and bronze and your strength last as long as you live.” The richness of the food reminds us of the wedding feast of the Lamb. There, the food will be rich, and Jesus Christ Himself will provide the richest of fare for us. Will you let Him feed you, not just then, but now, with the Holy Spirit?

Sixthly, we have Naphtali. Naphtali was born from Bilhah, Rachel’s maid. Rachel named the boy, saying “I have wrestled mightily with my sister, and have prevailed.” Napthali’s name means “wrestling.” Moses’ comment on the tribe goes like this: “Naphtali is abounding with the favor of the Lord, and is full of his blessing.” Full of blessing is much like what Jacob says here, “bears beautiful fawns.” So also, Jesus Christ is so full of blessings that bear fruit. Christ especially gives the Holy Spirit to His church. Do you have the Holy Spirit of promise that bears much fruit? Do you have so much blessing that others are blessed by your blessing?

Seventhly, and climactically, we have Joseph. Now, Joseph’s sons already received the blessing of being first-born in chapter 48. However, Joseph could be left out of this blessing, and so Jacob gives him a long blessing. In fact, this blessing is as long as Judah’s blessing in the earlier part of the chapter. Jacob was aware of the resentment that the brothers exercised against Joseph, although Jacob does not seem to be aware, even now, of the insidious plot that the brothers unleashed against him. We will see more on that in the next sermon. But here, certainly, Jacob recognizes that Joseph has been attacked without cause. One remembers also the incident of Potiphar’s wife, where Joseph was slandered. Slander is called by the name “arrows” in Scripture. Joseph had his full share of arrows shot at him. However, the Lord strengthened him. In fact, the Lord helped him so much that the help turned into blessing. Joseph wound up being blessed far beyond his brothers in this respect. We see the same pattern in Jesus Christ. He was shot at with many arrows of slander. People said that He blasphemed. People covered Him with undeserved abuse. And yet, the Lord sustained Him to the point of death, where that sustaining power was taken away that the Lord might have all the bitterness of hell’s punishment laid on him. This was for our sins. Those arrows turned into blessing however, when Jesus was raised from the dead. Then those blessings “rested on the head of Jesus,” as He was taken from the grave, and exalted to the position of highest honor. We therefore have all spiritual blessings in Christ in the heavenly realms, as Ephesians says. We have these blessings of Joseph through Jesus Christ. Are you blessed in that way?

Eighthly, and lastly, we have Benjamin. We naturally think poorly of wolves. However, here is a positive mention of wolves. Benjamin is called a wolf because he is such a ferocious fighter. In the book of Judges, Benjamin fights all the rest of the tribes, and holds out for quite a while before they can be conquered. Paul was from the tribe of Benjamin. Matthew Henry has this comment on Paul: “Blessed Paul was of this tribe; and he did, in the morning of his day, devour the prey as a persecutor, but, in the evening, divided the spoil as a preacher.” Ultimately, our Lord is the ravening wolf, greedily devouring His enemies, but dividing the plunder with His people.

We have seen that Jesus is the true Israel. He fulfills or reverses (in the case of the curses) all of these prophecies. These prophecies came down through many generations, again like the blessing that Beethoven gave to Liszt, who gave it to one of his students, and so on. The blessing had a way of making itself felt. How have you blessed the next generation? Have you given them the Word of God? Have you catechized them? Have you taught them the truth about Christ? These things you can still do, even if you did not do them so well before. Don’t let any opportunity slip by you for telling the next generation. Then you can have your last words be ones of hope for the future, not words of regret. You can have words of hope, like Jacob had.

In Genesis 49-50, we see the brothers still fearful of Joseph’s retaliation. But we also have Jacob giving blessings. What is most conspicuous by its absence is any mention of how Joseph was taken by the brothers into slavery. Since Jacob had mentioned Reuben’s sin, Simeon’s and Levi’s sin, etc., it is unthinkable that Jacob would have left unmentioned something which threatened to take him down into the grave. Therefore, Jacob must not have known about what the brothers did! This is not so amazing in and of itself. Nor is the fact that brothers did not mention it. What is so amazing is that Joseph did not mention it to Jacob either! And there was no lack of opportunity, since Jacob was in Egypt for 17 years communing with Joseph before he died. That is not only amazing love for his brothers on Joseph’s part, but also an amazingly forgiving spirit. “As far as the East is from the West…”

Genesis 49:1-12

We come to a very difficult portion of Scripture. In fact, there is more written on this part of Genesis than on almost any other portion of Genesis. There is quite a bit of strange imagery, unusual words, and prophecy that is dark and unfamiliar to us. What does it all mean? And how does it affect us? Those are the question we will address. The main point here is the promise of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and the prosperity that Jesus will bring with Him at the second coming.

Jacob is giving us his last words, as we saw last week. He has now adopted Ephraim and Manasseh as his own sons. Now, he has a word to say to every one of his sons. First, he calls his sons together around him in order that he might be able to tell them what will happen in future days. In saying this, Jacob claims a revelation from the Lord. We will see that Jacob’s predictions are right on target, and that the future history of the tribes bears out these prophecies.

The first son to receive a word is Reuben. At first, it seems like it will be a favorable blessing. After all, Jacob seems to praise him for being the first-fruit of his strength, being the first-born with the birth-right, having the most physical power and dignity. That is in verse 3. However, what happens next is that Jacob remembers 35:22; “While Israel lived in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine. And Israel heard of it.” When Jacob heard of that event, he didn’t punish Reuben at the time. However, he never forgot what Reuben had tried to do. Remember that Bilhah was the maidservant of Rachel. Reuben had wanted to make sure that his mother Leah would be the favored wife of Jacob. Furthermore, he was probably challenging Jacob for the position of patriarch of the tribe. Well, as we can see here, that plan backfired seriously. Instead of retaining the position of first-born, he gets rejected. Later on, in Israel’s history, Reuben plays very little part. They are part of the tribes that were on the east side of the Jordan. No ruler for Israel ever came out of the tribe of Reuben. Eventually, Reuben is completely forgotten.

Next up is Simeon and Levi. Jacob minces no words here, either. They are mentioned together, because of their actions against the city of Shechem. Simeon and Levi were cruel and heartless. Jacob does not even want to worship with them. He says literally in verse 6, “Let no my soul come into their council.” The word “council” is something like “worship service.” Jacob cannot worship with Simeon and Levi because of their violent tendencies. So verse 7 tells us their fate: they will be divided and scattered throughout Israel. That is in fact what happened. Simeon eventually got absorbed into the tribe of Judah and ceased to be an independent tribe. The Levites were scattered all over Israel. They had various cities given to them, but not any one territory. However, God exercised grace on the tribe of Levi by making their portion to be the temple service. And so God can even turn a curse into a blessing. The curse of being scattered resulted in the blessing of leadership in worship from the Levites.

However, to Judah, who was up next, Levi’s “blessing” didn’t sound too much like a blessing. In fact, the previous three brothers sounded much more like a curse. I’m sure you can imagine that he must have been somewhat nervous in receiving a “blessing” from his father! After all, he was far from perfect. He had slept with his daughter in law, and had gone along with the plot to send Joseph down to Egypt. What made Judah so different that Jacob gives him this ringing blessing? The answer is solely God’s grace. God had worked in Judah’s life to change him, so that he even made himself into a sacrifice for Benjamin’s sake. Yes, God had worked an amazing change in Judah’s life, a change which Jacob had certainly noticed. This blessing is what is going to take up the rest of our time. It is difficult in its imagery. Let’s unpack it a bit.

First of all, Judah is shown to be a victorious lion. This is what verses 8-9 are about. The lion is the king of beasts, and so the brothers will bow down before such royalty. If one’s hand is on the neck of one’s enemies, that means that the enemy is defeated. In verse 9, a lion rises from eating his prey, and takes the remainder of it home to his lair. That is what “stooping down” or “crouching down” means. The lion in his lair with his prey: who is going to try to disturb that? Maybe people should just let sleeping lions lie.

Secondly, Judah is described as a Ruler over people, in verses 10-12. First it says that the scepter will not depart from Judah. This means that there was always a descendant of David in existence. They didn’t always rule. But there always was a scepter, even if that scepter was hidden for a time.

The scepter is always there until he comes to whom it belongs. Literally, in the original, “Until Shiloh comes.” Shiloh is a name meaning “peace.” What we have here is a prediction of Jesus Christ coming to earth. Now we must understand that the text is not saying that there will always be a ruler until Shiloh comes, and then there won’t be a ruler. Rather, the text is saying that there will always forever be a ruler in Judah, and the one who is coming is the premier example of that. In other words, the word “until” does not have any idea of cessation attached to it. When the ruler comes, the scepter will still belong to Judah.

Verses 11-12 describe the conditions of this Messiah’s rule. A person could tie his donkey to a grape vine, and not even worry about the donkey eating the grapes, since he has so many other grapevines that this one doesn’t matter. There will be so much wine available, that it can be used as detergent for laundry! His eyes will be dark from wine, and his teeth will be white, because there is much milk. In short, this describes a very prosperous time. It is a time when there is so much of everything good that what we used to think of as precious and rare is so common that it can be used for common purposes.

We see the beginning of this time of prosperity in John 2, where Jesus turns the water into wine. It is 6 barrels full of wine. These jars, by the way are huge. They hold many gallons apiece. But notice that even that miracle at the wedding doesn’t really measure up completely to what we’re talking about in Genesis. That is because Jesus did not fully complete the kingdom of God with His first visit to earth. He inaugurated the kingdom by His death and resurrection. However, He did not finish the kingdom such that the curse of the Fall would be completely reversed. We are still waiting for that when Christ comes back. What Genesis describes is in fact a reversal of the curse of the Fall. Instead of thistles, the myrtle will grow, as Isaiah 55 says. We are dealing with not just a return to the garden of Eden, but our entrance into something far better even than Eden. In Jesus Christ, we have the hope of a completely renewed and restored universe. There will be no more death, sorrow, or evil. There will be no more sin. There will be no more alcoholism, despite the fact that wine will be so amazingly plentiful.

Do you look forward to that time? It seems far off right now, doesn’t it? That’s because we have a hard time recognizing that it has already begun. As 2 Corinthians 5:7 puts it, if we are in Christ, that is proof that there is a new creation. Yes, we are part of that new creation. And it is in us that the newness is most evident right now. However, the start of the new heavens and new earth was in the resurrection of Christ from the dead.

So, are we sunk down in depression? Are we aching for something, but don’t quite know what it is? Are we aching for things to be made right? Well, what we are really looking for, then, is something that we already have in seed form. God gave us the seed of the new heaven and new earth right in our very persons. The Holy Spirit is that seed. It is planted in us when God gives us faith. Do you have this faith? If it is a small as a mustard seed, still God can buoy you up with it, and accomplish amazing things in your life through it. Faith in God makes great optimists. Over in Burma, Judson was lying in a foul jail with 32 lbs. of chains on his ankles, his feet bound to a bamboo pole. A fellow prisoner said, “Dr. Judson, what about the prospect of the conversion of the heathen?”, with a sneer on his face. His instant reply was, “The prospects are just as bright as the promises of God.” Are your prospects as bright as this promise of God for a Messiah to come, and reverse evil in the world?

Genesis 48

Here are some famous last words of people on their death-bed:
“Our God is the God from whom cometh salvation: God is the Lord by whom we escape death.” Martin Luther “Live in Christ, live in Christ, and the flesh need not fear death.” John Knox “Thou, Lord, bruisest me; but I am abundantly satisfied, since it is from Thy hand.” John Calvin “The best of all is, God is with us. Farewell! Farewell!” John Wesley “I shall be satisfied with Thy likeness–satisfied, satisfied!” Charles Wesley.

George McDonald wrote to his sorrowing wife when their daughter died. He began by telling her that she wouldn’t find consolation in lovely but empty sentiments that he called “pleasant fancies of a half-held creed.” He then pointed out that the Great Shepherd had gone before and prepared the way for their daughter. McDonald reminded her that they were both moving along day by day toward that same destination. In closing, he said, “We seek not death, but still we climb the stairs where death is one wide landing to the rooms above.” The faith of a dying man is what we have here in Genesis 48. Hebrews 11 describes it this way: “By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.” What we are about to look at this week and the next two weeks is the climax of Jacob’s faith, the high point. Jacob is never more faithful to his God than he is right here. And that is a great testament to the grace of God.

First of all, however, we must begin by noticing the faith of Joseph. Joseph wants his two sons to be blessed by Jacob. In doing so, he is forever letting go of any possible advantages from Egypt for his two sons. He could have promoted them up through the Egyptian hierarchy until they stood ready to inherit Joseph’s position. But Joseph does not allow them to do that. He sees with the eyes of faith. And what he sees is the land of Canaan, the inheritance promised to them. So the promise and blessing of Jacob is worth more to Joseph than all Egypt.

Next, we notice that Jacob adopts Ephraim and Manasseh as his own sons. Jacob is remembering the promises of God given to him, who was the younger son. Now he wants to do the same thing for Joseph, a younger son. And further than that, he will eventually bless Ephraim, the younger son, over Manasseh, the older son. But what Jacob is really doing here is turning the past into the future by means of blessing. Let me repeat that: Jacob is turning the past promises of God unto future hope by means of blessing. Verse 5 states that Ephraim and Manasseh are going to replace Reuben and Simeon as the two oldest sons. What is happening here is a formal adoption process. But it is not merely an adoption. It is also giving the birthright to Ephraim and Manasseh. So Ephraim and Manasseh actually replace Reuben and Simeon. Another thing that is going on here is that Joseph is receiving the double portion of the inheritance. Joseph has the birthright, and, through his two sons, now receives a double portion of the blessing.

Jacob cannot give such a blessing without remembering Rachel, and how much he misses her. He could perhaps have benefited from George Macdonald’s words quoted earlier. The Great Shepherd had indeed gone before Rachel to prepare the way for her.

Then we come to the blessing proper in verses 8 and following. Jacob asks the question, “Who are these?” just to make sure that he is blessing the right people. His eyesight isn’t so good, and he remembers well what happened with his father Isaac. He wants to make sure that there is no mistake. He wants to make sure that they are Joseph’s sons. We know this because Joseph does not have to give the actual names of Ephraim and Manasseh. Joseph knows what Israel needs to know: namely, that they are in fact his sons.

What happens next is quite curious. Joseph knows that the oldest son gets the better blessing. He also knows that the right hand is the more powerful hand. And so he makes sure that his first-born Manasseh is going to be blessed by Israel’s right hand, and Ephraim, the younger, will be blessed by Israel’s left hand. However, it does not turn out that way. Israel may have lost his eyesight, but he never lost his insight. He did what God told him to do. And we see yet another part of that pattern that we have seen so often in Scripture: the younger is preferred to the older. We have see it with Cain and Abel, Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, Joseph and the brothers, and now Ephraim and Manasseh. Joseph either doesn’t see the crossing of the hands, or else he is too speechless to do anything about it until it is too late. In any case, the blessing is done, with Ephraim receiving the right hand blessing, and Manasseh the left hand blessing. They are both blessed by Israel, however. In that respect, this relationship is different from the other older/younger son combinations. In those the older son didn’t receive any blessing, and was outside the covenant. Here, however, both sons are in the covenant.

What is the blessing of the covenant? It is the blessing of God on Adam and Eve in chapter 3, the promise of the Seed to break the head of the serpent. It is the promise of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Look closely at the text, and you will see Jesus there. Notice that God the Father is the subject of verse 15, but the Angel is the subject of verse 16. Grammar is sometimes important for us. Here it is vitally important. God the Father and the Angel blesses the boys. The verb in Hebrew is singular. God the Father and the Angel are one and the same. The Angel here is Jesus Christ before He became incarnate, not a created being, but the preincarnate Christ. They share the same verb here. They both bless as one God.

Well, Joseph finally gets around to reacting to this, which, to him, seems like someone saying the wrong name at a baptism, and he remonstrates with Israel in verse 18: “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.” Israel has a very interesting response to that: “I know, my son, I know.” What Israel is saying there is that he knows the world’s way of doing things. He knows that the rule is that the firstborn gets the lion’s share of the blessing. However, he knows that the Lord has revealed this to him. This again shows Israel’s great faith: he believes in the Word of God revealed to him. Jacob is here a prophet, just like Abraham was before him.

The last pointer to Israel’s faith is in his gift to Joseph of the land of Shechem. That is literally what Israel says here. It could be that he is remembering the incident of Simeon and Levi in decimating the town of Shechem. He acquired it through those sons, but he is giving it to Joseph. Israel’s faith is seen in that, though he certainly does not live in the Promised Land, he believes in the promise of God that it will one day belong to Israel again. He even thinks it will be in Joseph’s lifetime. And, as a matter of fact, Manasseh possesses Shechem when they return

We have seen Christ in the blessing. But we also see Christ in the chapter as a whole. What happens in this chapter is again what God usually does in salvation history: He chooses the foolish things of this world to shame the wise. He does not pick the first-born, but the younger and weaker. This is so that God’s glory will shine all the brighter. God chose that Jesus, choosing the weaker way of death, would be highly glorified in His resurrection from the dead. We can see then the light on the other side. A few days before his death, Dr. F. B. Meyer wrote a very dear friend these words: “I have just heard, to my great surprise, that I have but a few days to live. It may be that before this reaches you, I shall have entered the palace. Don’t trouble to write. We shall meet in the morning.” That is the hope that we have. The hope of the other side. Death is not extinguishing the light from the Christian; it is putting out the lamp because the dawn has come. What we have seen is Jacob’s last words. They are words full of faith and hope for Israel’s future, both his own future, and the future of his offspring. As Jesus says, God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is not God of the dead, but of the living.

Do you expect the worldly way to work? Do you expect, as it were, the first-born of the world to get all the blessing, while the younger son, the Bible’s way of doing things, not to work? Where is your faith? Is your faith such that you believe in God’s promises that if you obey the law, you will be blessed, and that if you disobey the law, you will be cursed? Do you believe that Jesus took that curse of the law on Himself so that you could have the blessing? Where is that belief when you refuse to read God’s word everyday? What about Titus 2? Where is that belief when you fight, fight, fight for your supposed rights? Where is the belief in God’s promises when you ignore Biblical teaching on a host of issues? Do you run your life by the Bible? Do you trust God’s Word as Israel did? Then you need to use only the Bible as your guide, trusting in the Angel of the Lord, namely, Jesus Christ.

Here is the ESV: “And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed.” In Hebrew,

וַיִּטַּע יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים גַּן־בְעֵדֶן מִקֶּדֶם וַיָּשֶׂם שָׁם אֶת־הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר יָצָר׃

So, the problem is the liberals who say that there is a contradiction in this passage, when compared to the previous context. The order of creation was plants and then mankind in the first chapter. Here, it seems to be that mankind was created first, and then plants and animals. There are two ways to answer this. The first is to translate it the way the NIV does: “Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east.” The pluperfect “had” indicates that the plants were planted before mankind was created, or at least allows the possibility. This is a perfectly acceptable position to take. There is nothing in the grammar to forbid it. A second way to answer it is simply to note that the planting that God did was solely in the realm of the Garden. The planting in verse 9 does not refer to all plants, but merely to the Garden plants.

While we’re at it, we might as well notice the supposed contradiction of 2:5-6 with chapter 1. The issue is the same: were plants created first, or were humans created first? Kline helps us here, even though I reject his Framework View conclusions. He says that there was a two-fold problem that accounted for the lack of vegetation described in verses 5-6: there was no rain, and there was no man to work the ground. That two-fold problem is rectified in verses 6-7. First the rain-cloud comes up (he argues for this translation: I am convinced by it) giving rain, and then God creates man to work the ground. In other words, the vegetation spoken of in verse 5 is cultivated plants, not all plants. Otherwise, the reasons given in verse 5 have no bearing at all.

We continue our discussion of the creation days in Genesis by looking at the Day-Age view. This view, briefly stated, asserts that the word “yom” (”day”) in Hebrew can mean more things than a 24-hour period of time. They point to such expressions as “Day of the Lord.” Furthermore, they base their argument heavily on the purported old age of the earth. Since the earth is obviously much older than 6,000-12,000 years old, then we must interpret the Bible in such a way that harmony can exist between natural revelation and special revelation.

It must be admitted at once that the word “yom” can indeed mean more things than a 24-hour period of time. However, that is not really the question. The question is, “What meaning of ‘yom’ does Genesis 1 evince?” Day-Age advocates often seem to think that their job is done when they prove that “yom” can mean something other than a 24-hour period of time. However, proving that it is possible, and proving that it is are two different things. TWOT is the only lexicon that argues for a meaning other than 24-hour day here. That leaves NIDOTTE, KB, BDB, and TDOT, who say otherwise, as does ISBE I, pg 877, IDB, and most commentators (except for Waltke, Young, Collins, Augustine, and a few others) to say that “yom” means 24 hours in Genesis 1:5.

The main criticism that I have with the Day-Age view is that they cannot seem to avoid using science to trump interpretation of the text. This was utterly obvious in the book The Genesis Debate, where Archer and Ross did almost zero exegesis, and wrote almost entirely about science. But science cannot prove anything. At most, it can theorize. Furthermore, as I indicated in one of my comments on the Hubble entry, scientific evidence is also ambiguous. There is no proof that the world is old, since there are no eye-witnesses except God, and He seems to think in the other direction, in my opinion.

There are four main views on the length of the creation days. Some people hold to the literal six-day creation week (I am in this category). Some hold to a day-age view, where each day in the creation week equals an age (Archer and Ross hold to this view). Others hold to the framework view (that the six days are a literary framework, and are not to be taken literally: Meredith Kline, Lee Irons, and Mark Futato hold to this position). Lastly, there is the analogical day view (this is similar to the day-age view, but not so precise; Vern Poythress and Jack Collins hold to this view). What I am going to do is briefly outline the four positions and the arguments for each. I will probably do this in several posts. I will start with the Framework view (mostly since this view is the most interesting to me of the non-literal views).

The Framework view is not the easiest to understand. I will try to be clear and fair. Their argument is that there are three or four indications that the days are not meant to be taken in a literal sequential way. The first argument is that day one and day four look alike. In fact, they look so much alike that they are really describing the same thing. The light created on day one seem to have the exact same function as the lights on day four. They were created for the same purpose. It would seem to be a duplicate. Maybe (according to them) days one and four are really the same, and the whole of the seven days is a literary framework constructed to organize the creation account. It should be stressed, by the way, that Framework advocates claim to hold to the infallibility of Scripture and its authority in all of life. Whether they can consistently hold to that is another question.

The second argument for the Framework view is the absence of the morning/evening formula after the seventh day. They argue that the seventh day is therefore eternal (they go to Hebrews 3:7-4:11 which does seem to have implications of God’s eternal rest). If the seventh day is not a literal day, then the rest of the week isn’t either, so the argument runs.

The third argument is taken from Genesis 2:5-6. This is a somewhat complicated argument, but I will try to state it clearly. If the literal view is to be correct, then there needs to be a generally supernatural providence at work in the creation week (light without the sun, for instance). However, the reasons given for why there was no bush of the field yet; these reasons are natural reasons. 2:5-6 therefore assumes a natural providence at work in the creation week, whereas the literal position requires a supernatural providence.

To anwer the first argument (and this is an original contribution to the debate: I’ve not seen this answer anywhere), the Framework view assumes that there is only possible explanation of the similarity of day one to day four. But supposing there is a different reason for the similarity? In Genesis 1, there is fairly clear evidence of apologetic intent (witness Moses’ calling the sun “the greater light” when the Hebrew word for “sun” is also the ANE word for the sun-god Shemesh. Supposing, instead of indicating identity of creation days, the similarity actually indicates apologetic intent? Moses, wanting the people to avoid the worship of the sun-god makes it a point to indicate that the sun was not always in existence, but only had its origin on the fourth day. Furthermore, the purpose of the sun was to rule only over days and years, seasons and signs. That is as far as it goes. The sun rules over no one’s destiny. God created it that way to show that He alone was God. The needs of the people at the time included knowing that the sun was not the creator. That dispenses with their first argument.

The second argument does not prove their position, even if the inference is correct. Could not there be an eternal rest for God, but also only a temporal day for man? Even saying that the seventh day has no end for God does not mean that it is eternal for man. Even bringing Hebrews into the picture does not prove their point, since it is explicitly God’s rest of which we are exhorted to enter now, not at the time point of creation. Indeed, the fourth commandment in Exodus would seem to point in the direction of literal days. Plainly, the fourth commandment makes the most sense on a literal understanding of the creation days.

The third argument neglects to take into account that natural providence simply does not rule out supernatural providence. Just because there is natural providence at work in 2:5-6, that does not prove that God had to work only in that way on every other issue in creation. What way of natural providence could God have used if He wanted to delay the creation of the sun until the fourth day? Is it not plain that supernatural providence would be the only answer? God works in many ways, not just one. In short, their arguments are not convincing. Even the literary framework can be appreciated in the literal view. The first triad of days and the second triad of days can be recognized (though it is not nearly as airtight as the Framework advocates would have us believe) while still holding to the literal view. One has to wonder if the desire to have science inform our understanding of Scripture has not trumped exegesis.                                                                                             

Genesis 47

Donald Grey Barnhouse once related this story about culture: Some years ago, musicians noted that errand boys in a certain part of London all whistled out of tune as they went about their work. It was talked about and someone suggested that it was because the bells of Westminster were slightly out of tune. Something had gone wrong with the chimes and they were discordant. The boys did not know there was anything wrong with the peals, and quite unconsciously they had copied their pitch. So we tend to copy the people with whom we associate; we borrow thoughts from the books we read and the programs to which we listen, almost without knowing it. God has given us His Word which is the absolute pitch of life and living. If we learn to sing by it, we shall easily detect the false in all of the music of the world. The world’s musical smiles are more dangerous than its attacking frowns. Its bells are more dangerous than its bullies. What we are going to see today is that we are to be in Egypt, but not of Egypt, in the world, but not of the world. We need to recognize that the world’s influence over us is oftentimes unconscious, like the boys influenced by the chimes.

Joseph’s brothers and his father are now all in Goshen. They are all in the land of Egypt. Goshen, however, is as close to the land of Canaan as it is possible to get in the land of Egypt. Joseph had a very good reason for wanting his people to settle so far out of the mainstream of Egyptian life. He wanted them to be in Egypt, but not of Egypt. Notice something very interesting about Jacob’s presentation to Pharaoh: Joseph does not push his family to have high positions in court. He simply does not do it. He could have. He could have said a word to Pharaoh, and each of his brothers would have had a posh job at the top of Pharaoh’s court. But that is not what Joseph does. Instead, he works hard to get them their own land in Egypt, separated from the influence of Egypt. What this shows is Joseph’s faith. He believes in the promises of God to his people, that Canaan is their real home. Yes, they are here for awhile. However, this is not their permanent rest. This is not their promised land. They are in Egypt, but not of Egypt, in the world, but not of the world.

It is evident from verse 4 that the brothers also understood this. They said that they are there to live there awhile. Another way to say it is that they are there to sojourn for awhile. They are pilgrims. They know that this world is not their home. They are just passing through. Their plea to Pharaoh is heard and approved.

After this, we see something unusual in the text. We see Jacob and Pharaoh meeting. Obviously, Moses is thinking of his own meetings with Pharaoh as he is writing this. He is comparing and contrasting the very different meetings that Jacob had with Pharaoh versus his own meetings with Pharaoh. The Scriptures say that the better person is the one who blesses the inferior person. That was true of Melchizedek and Abraham. Here it is true of Jacob and Pharaoh. Jacob blesses Pharaoh. This is in fulfillment of the promise of God to Abraham all the way back in chapter 12, verse 3, where God promises that Abraham will be a blessing to the nations. Here is Jacob being a blessing to the nation of Egypt.

The next section of our text shows us Joseph being a blessing to Egypt. Now, many people think that Joseph is acting like a tyrant here, enslaving the people, and taking everything away from them such that Pharaoh owns everything. That, however, is not true. First of all, Joseph only taxed the people’s grain %20 during the plentiful years. The people themselves would have had plenty of opportunity to build up for themselves grain in abundance. Secondly, the people themselves ask for Joseph to take the livestock. But Joseph always gives them something in return. He gives them fair market value for that livestock in the form of grain. Then, the next year, Joseph gives them again the fair market value of the grain in exchange for their servant-hood. What do the people think about it? Verse 25 has the people saying, “You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants of Pharaoh.” So the people wanted this to happen, since the famine was so severe. Desperate times sometimes call for desperate measures. Thirdly, the language for how Joseph treated the people is more like the language of shepherding rather than tyrannizing. In verse 21, the Hebrew says that he placed the people in the cities, probably for easier grain distribution. This was grace on Joseph’s part. In fact, Joseph was a complete blessing to the nation surrounding him, just as God had promised to Abraham that in him all the nations of the earth shall be blessed. In doing so, he did not compromise his faith. He was in Egypt, but not of Egypt, in the world, but not of the world. He never viewed Egypt as his final rest, or the final answer to life’s problems.

Ultimately, Joseph points us here to Jesus Christ, the Ultimate Blessing to all nations on earth. The nations of the world were about to perish in the spiritual hunger that sin brings with it. We were sold body and soul to the law. But Jesus bought us and redeemed us, not with grain, but with His precious blood. Then He gives us the seed to sow among all nations. Remember that you were bought with a price, and that we are all farmers of God’s seed, the Word. Our problems are never solved in an Egyptian way, in a worldly way, even if we have power in the government. Our solution always lies in the Promised Land, for us: heaven, where Jesus is.

The third section of our chapter shows us in the last days of Jacob. Jacob requires that Joseph bury him in Canaan, and not in Egypt. The reason for this is that Egypt is not their final resting place. It is Jacob’s concern, just as much as it was Joseph’s concern earlier in the chapter. In fact, the time period in Egypt was an incubation period for the people of God. It was not an interruption of the covenant promises. They needed to become large, even under persecution, just as we see the church today in China, for instance. This passage here sets the stage for the Exodus. Right now, they are the prosperous ones. But we know that as soon as a Pharaoh arose who did not know Joseph, the situation would completely change, and Israel would become persecuted. That is God’s way of bringing them to their promised rest. As God did with them, so also does He do with His church. He sets the church in a place where it will be tested and persecuted. In Egypt, in fact, in the world, but not of the world.

How is it sometimes that we are in the world and of the world? So often is this the case, that it is often very difficult to tell the difference between the Christians and the non-Christians. Divorce is only 1% lower among Christians than among non-Christians, and that rate is about 50%. Christians lie, kill, steal, commit adultery, and every other sin just about as much as non-Christians these days. Why is that? It is because we have lost sight of our Promised Land, lost sight of our pilgrimage status, lost sight of the fact that this world is not our home. We have lost sight of Christ. We should not ever lose sight of Christ. Instead, we should be in the world, but not of the world, in Egypt, but not of Egypt.

What is our hope ultimately? We find it in verses 29-30. Jacob tells Joseph to bury him in Canaan, and not in Egypt. Why is that? Well, to continue our theme, it certainly is because he saw the Promised Land as the real stopping place, the real place of rest. However, there is more. Jacob did not need to worry about his soul. Instead, he believed that having his body in that place meant something. Well, it would only mean something if he believed in resurrection from the dead. Ultimately, that is where Jacob’s hope is. It is in the resurrection. Is our hope in the resurrection of our body, just as Christ’s body was raised from the dead? If that is not our hope, then we are still in our sins. We should not be fixed in false hopes. Our hope must be in the resurrection of Christ, being the first-fruits of the resurrection harvest when Christ comes back. Then, we will truly be of the new heavens and the new earth. Then we will be in the world, and of the world, the changed world.