A bit later, “they
looked up and saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead” (37:25b).
We should note that “Ishmaelites” would have been family. These men would have been related to this
group through their great-uncle Ishmael, the brother of their grandfather,
Isaac. This adds an interesting kinship dynamic to the story to go along
with the honor competition. It is said that the Ishmaelites were heading
to Egypt, so Judah said “What profit is there if we kill our brother and cover
up his blood? Come, let’s sell him to the Ishmaelites, but let’s not lay
a hand on him, for after all, he is our brother, our own flesh”
(37:26b-27a). His brothers agreed to this and struck the deal.
Theoretically, by not killing him, and merely selling him as a slave, his brothers
believed that they would have not have his blood on their hands. We then
go on to learn that Reuben was not a party to this, with the narrative
indicating that he was quite dismayed upon learning that this had occurred.
Thinking back to the
connection between the lives of Joseph and Jesus, we can see that link in the
continuing demonstration of Joseph’s brothers’ animosity towards him.
When Jesus is betrayed by Judas, he is betrayed to Jewish leaders. Ethnically,
these would have been Jesus’ brethren. With
the honor and kinship model at play in the ancient world, it would indeed be
something of a rare occurrence for members of Israel to willingly turn a fellow
Israelite, and especially a messianic claimaint and potential king over to their
foreign subjugators. Thus, the honor
competition, and Jesus’ apparent unwillingness to align His movement (and
therefore His potential throne) with the powers-that-be of the day, trumped the
broad familial tie. Again, Jesus would
accrue too much of the limited good of honor to Himself, and Jesus had not
brought any of the ruling authorities into his circle of patronage and
clientage. Thus, He was not only of no use to them, but He also needed to
be removed from the honor competition altogether. Accordingly, they sought to kill Jesus.
With that desire at
play, they were able to successfully bring a charge of blasphemy against Him,
which would merit the death penalty. However, they did not carry out the
execution themselves. Yes, there were restraints on the execution of
capital punishment, but this was clearly a special circumstance, and Jesus’
blood was not going to be on their hands. Rather, they drew Jesus out of
the metaphorical (and possibly literal) pit into which he had been placed, and
carried Him to the Romans, in order to bring about His demise. In a sense
then, much like Joseph’s brothers believed to be the case when they handed
their brother over to those that were effectively foreigners (though related),
if the Romans also found Him guilty and carried out the sentence of death, then
Jesus’ blood was on them.
Changing gears a bit,
and fitting the two stories of Joseph and Jesus into the encompassing
Scriptural themes of exile and exodus, it could be said that the entrance of
Joseph into Egypt was the beginning of the people of Israel’s sojourn in
Egypt. His presence there marked the beginnings of the first exile from
the land of promise, which would be rectified by the exodus under the
leadership of Moses a few hundred years later. Just as Joseph was sold
into Egypt by the Ishmaelites, to whom he had been handed by his brothers,
Jesus was effectively sold into the exile of death by the Romans, to whom He had
been handed by His brethren.
Though sold into
Egypt as a slave, we know that Joseph did not remain a slave. He first
found favor in the house of Potiphar, and then found favor in the eyes of the
warden of the prison into which he had been unjustly cast. Finally, due
to what is said to be the Creator God of Israel’s gift to him of dream
interpretation, Joseph found favor in the eyes of Pharaoh. As the story
goes, owing to the Spirit that was to be found in Joseph, Pharaoh said to him,
“Because God has enabled you to know all this, there is no one as wise and
discerning as you are! You will oversee my household, and all my people
will submit to your commands. Only I, the king, will be greater than
you” (Genesis 41:39b-40).
Thoughts of Jesus
should not be too far removed from our mind upon reading these purported words from
Pharaoh. Bringing in some early post-Christ-era reflections on Jesus, what
do we find in the Ephesians letter? “And God put all things under
Christ’s feet, and He gave Him to the church as head over all things”
(1:22). This is thought to be so because the great and powerful Creator God
“raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly
realms, far above every rule and authority and power and dominion and every
name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come”
(1:20b-21). This is set forth alongside the idea that there was a people
of God, a household of faith, chosen “in Christ before the foundation of the
world” (1:4a)---a worldwide family of divine image-bearers that had always been
the intention of the Creator. It is these people, identified by their
adherence to the Gospel of Jesus, and their submission to its claim that Jesus
Christ is Lord of all, that faithfully submit to the commands of Jesus to love
one another and to preach the message of the Gospel, through the enabling power
of the Holy Spirit. There is a household
to be overseen.
No comments:
Post a Comment