Read Genesis 29:31-35; 34:25-31; 35:22-26.
Judah is not the oldest of the brothers. Why might Reuben, Simeon, or Levi not be in a position to offer leadership to their brothers?
In the account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Genesis 37:12-36), what role do the brothers who are named play in the drama that unfolds?
Which of the brothers emerges as the leader?
What do you suspect was motivating the named brothers?
What is Judah's attitude to his father's favourite brother, Joseph?
Read Genesis 38.
Do you think that Judah and his offspring are a promising family in which to find the serpent crusher promised in Genesis 3:15? Why or why not?
How would you describe Judah's character and behaviour at the beginning and throughout the story of the birth of Perez and Zerah, when compared to that of his brother Joseph in Genesis 39?
Are we meant to have a positive or negative view of Judah?
What lesson should Judah have learnt by the end of the story?
Why do you think this story is placed in Genesis from the point of view of the search for the serpent-crusher?
Read Genesis 42:18-43:16.
In the crisis about purchasing food during the famine, who has the most influence with Jacob and the family?
Read Genesis 44.
Why do you think Joseph sets up Benjamin, his father's favourite, with the apparently stolen cup?
What does Judah offers Joseph regarding the stolen cup to save Benjamin?
Why does Judah suggest this?
How has Judah progressed and matured in his attitude to (a) his father and (b) the beloved son, since his involvement in the kidnapping and sale as a slave of his brother Joseph?
How does Judah's leadership in Genesis 44 provide a model for the coming leader of God's people? (Mark 10:45; Romans 5:8-9; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 4:10)
Read Genesis 49.
How are Jacob's blessings on Reuben, Simeon and Levi appropriate given the behaviour that Genesis records them engaging in?
What does Jacob promise the line of Judah?
According to the New Testament, where do we see the blessing upon the line of Judah being fulfilled? (Matthew 2:6; Luke 3:33; Revelation 5:5)
Why does the leadership of the brothers go to the tribe of Judah and not Joseph?
Reading Genesis 44:1-34, 49:1-28.
Who’s seen the whole “Lord of the Rings” trilogy? At one level, it is the story of how Stryder leaves off being a ranger and becomes King Aragorn of Gondor. Yet there are many tests he must pass before he is crowned King. He must protect the ring bearer, Frodo. He must provide leadership for the free people of Middle Earth. He must defeat their enemies, Sauron and the host of Mordor. He must grow into the King he was born to be. So Elrond says to him on the eve of battle. “Put aside the ranger. Become the King you were born to be.” Only then can he marry the beautiful Elven Lady Arwen.
The story of Judah is the story of a man who must grow into being King. At first glance, it is surprising that Judah is destined to become King. Because in Genesis 37-50, so much seems to be said about Joseph.
Undoubtedly, Joseph (under God) is the hero of those chapters. Joseph is the one chosen by God to rescue his brothers. Joseph is the one before whom all the brothers bow. Joseph is the one with all power and privilege in the land of Egypt.
And as we hear Jacob’s blessings in Genesis 49, we feel it fitting that Jacob blesses Joseph abundantly. Just before Jacob dies, he calls all his sons to him. Jacob calls them so he can bless them (Genesis 49:28). So we read in chapter 49 verse 28:
28 All these are the twelve tribes of Israel. This is what their father said to them as he blessed them, blessing each with the blessing suitable to him[1]. (Genesis 49:28 NIV)
So Jacob blesses each son with a special blessing. Notice that he is including all his sons. Jacob did better than his father Isaac before him. For Isaac only called the first born, but Jacob calls them all. And the blessing is a special blessing[2]. The blessing is, as the NIV says, appropriate to the brother. The blessing fits with who they are and what they have done Now the blessings are also a prediction as well. So we read in Genesis 49 verse 1:
Then Jacob called his sons and said, "Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what shall happen to you in days to come. (NIV)
They are not just a blessing saying, ‘May God be with you!’ Like the little prayer the minister prays to close a church meeting. Jacob’s blessings are predictions and prophecies. This is what God says is going to happen in the future. These are the destinies of the 12 sons of Israel. And they are based on what the brothers have done in the past.
Now, Joseph’s blessing is found in part in Chapter 49 verses 24-26.
…[H]is [ie Joseph’s] arms were made agile by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob (from there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel), 25 by the God of your father who will help you, by the Almighty who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that crouches beneath, blessings of the breasts and of the womb. 26 The blessings of your father are mighty beyond the blessings of my parents, up to the bounties of the everlasting hills. May they be on the head of Joseph, and on the brow of him who was set apart from his brothers[3]. (Genesis 49:24-26 ESV).
You get the feeling that Jacob wants to bless Joseph. Jacob the man of blessing -- who lied for it, tricked his brother out of it, suffered for it, wrestled God for it, now he passes it on – and Jacob blesses Joseph with a six fold blessing. Jacob does not use the word ‘blessing’ of any other of his sons. So Joseph is being singled out for blessing. Jacob said it was going to be a big blessing. Bigger even than the blessing that he received deceptively from his father Isaac. And so it is. Six times the word is used. And we see in Chapter 48, Jacob gives Joseph a double inheritance. Jacob adopts Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (Genesis 48:1-22). By doing this, Jacob will give Joseph through his two sons a double portion of the promised land (see for example, Numbers 1:5-15). That is why Ephraim and Manasseh are included as tribes of Israel in their own right. That is the way Joseph receives a double blessing from Jacob. And Levi is removed from any inheritance of the land. But that’s OK, because Levi will have a special role in Israel. And that job will be given to the tribe of Levi in the book of Exodus, and it’s requirements spelt out in Leviticus and Numbers.
Now, if you were paying attention I have read from the ESV. Notice that in chapter 49 verse 26 it said that Joseph was ‘set apart’ from his brothers. The King James version, and many others, are the same. They say, literally, that Joseph was separated from his brothers. The NIV takes this ‘separateness’ to mean that Joseph was ‘a prince’ among his brothers. But that is not the best translation. There are other words for ‘prince’[4].
Joseph is literally ‘a nazrite from his brothers’. A nazrite in the Old Testament is one who is separated out from the people of God. And Joseph was separated and set apart from his brothers in three ways.
First, he is separated geographically. He was kidnapped and exiled from his homeland. The brothers lived with their father in the promised land. Joseph lived in Egypt, first as a slave, then a prisoner, then prime minister. So he would not be their leader. They would be led to Joseph, but not by Joseph. To lead people, you need to be one of them, and pull them along. His brothers didn’t want Joseph as leader in his youth. So neither would they have him as leader in his adulthood. Humanly speaking, the brothers expelled him from their family. And from God’s point of view, he was sent ahead of them. So there is a geographic separateness between the brothers and Joseph. Even after they are reconciled in Egypt, there is some distance between Joseph and the rest of the brothers. After Jacob dies, the brothers fear that Joseph holds a grudge. They are afraid. So they send a messenger to Joseph. The messenger says, ‘Jacob said before he died to forgive your brothers their crime’ Then they come before him in person and fall to the ground before him. They offer to be his slaves. (Genesis 50:15-19) So little do they understand Joseph. They are afraid of him. They don’t believe his repeated assurances of kindness. No, the brothers will be led to Joseph. They will not be led by him.
Second, Joseph is separate from his brothers morally. Joseph is more righteous than his brothers. His big brothers are not ones to copy. Reuben and Judah are adulterers, sinning sexually. Simeon and Levi are portrayed as vengeful, lying murderers. But Joseph is portrayed as free of both adultery and murder. He had opportunity for both. But he steered clear of both.
And third, Joseph is separated from his brothers in rank and power. They are shepherds and immigrants. He is prime minister.
So Joseph receives the birthright and the blessing. But he is not the King.
It is clear that Jacob blesses Judah with the Kingship[5].
Now, Judah is not the actual first born. He is in fact the 4th in line, if order of birth is to be considered. But Jacob passes over his first three sons, as chapter 49 indicates. And Jacob gives the reason why he passes over them.
Reuben is the oldest. The birthright should go to him. But it doesn’t. Genesis Chapter 49 verses 3 to 5:
3 "Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, the first sign of my strength, excelling in honor, excelling in power. 4 Turbulent as the waters, you will no longer excel, for you went up onto your father's bed, onto my couch and defiled it.
Reuben committed adultery with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Genesis 35:22). This was not just sexual sin, in context. It was a statement. It was a premature claim to kingship. Absalom did a similar thing in 2 Samuel 16:20-22 when he wanted to take the Kingship from his father, David.
Now after Reuben sinned in this way, he tried desperately to get back into his father’s good books[6]. But his Father always remembered this offence. And consequently, he lost the position of excellence. No prophet, no judge, no king, ever came from this tribe[7].
Simeon and Levi are second and third in line respectively. Yet, Kingship doesn’t come to them. Genesis 49 verses 5-8:
5 "Simeon and Levi are brothers-- their swords are weapons of violence. 6 Let me not enter their council, let me not join their assembly, for they have killed men in their anger and hamstrung oxen as they pleased. 7 Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their fury, so cruel! I will scatter them in Jacob and disperse them in Israel. (Genesis 49:5-8 NIV)
Jacob has in mind here what Simeon and Levi did to Shechem. That’s what Genesis 34 was about. One man, Shechem, sinned against Dinah. So Simeon and Levi deceived the city of their peaceful intent, then slaughtered all the men in the city. And then they with their brothers took all the women, children and possessions as booty[8].
Well, at the end of his life, Jacob wants it known that he had nothing to do with it. Jacob curses their anger. And consequently, they will be scattered throughout Israel. We see this come true in Israel’s later history. Levi was scattered throughout Israel as the priestly tribe (Joshua 21). So the curse actually turned into a blessing. And Simeon was absorbed into Judah. So as a tribe Simeon ceased to have an independent land or identity.
So we come to Judah. But when we look at Judah himself, he too is an unlikely recipient of kingship. For Judah’s sins, too, are dropped in our laps for us to read.
We first meet Judah selling Joseph as a slave. The idea of selling Joseph, not killing him, is Judah’s brainchild. While he’s eating his lunch, with Joseph down the well, he sees the slave traders pass. So ….
26 Judah said to his brothers, "What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? 27 Come, let's sell him to the Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him; after all, he is our brother, our own flesh and blood." His brothers agreed. (Genesis 37:26-27 NIV).
He leads them from murder and fratricide into kidnapping and slave trading. A little better than murder. At least he recognizes that Joseph is his brother. But still it’s not a good start for Judah. He is presented as a cold, calculating opportunist, who wants to profit from the sale of his brother (Gen 37:26-28). At least then there is no body to dispose of!
Then we meet Judah as a failed, fornicating father in chapter 38 (38:1-26). While Joseph is avoiding adultery in exile, Judah is falling headlong into it at home.
Judah’s friendship with the Canaanites leads to him foolishly marrying a Canaanite woman. And it seems (possibly as a result), Judah has two wicked sons, Er and Onan. So wicked that the Lord puts both of them to death. Er dies for unspecified wickedness, leaving his wife, Tamar, a widow. Onan the second born, wants the privileges of marrying Tamar without the responsibilities. He doesn’t want to have children by her. This was a sin not only against Tamar, but also against his brother, father and grandfather. Because he was not wanting to perpetuate their name. So God puts Onan to death.
Now the right thing for Judah to do was to give his younger son, Shua, to Tamar in marriage. But now Judah gave way to fear. He said he would give Tamar to Shua. But Judah renigs. He had seen his two older sons die. He must have thought the problem was Tamar. So Judah went against his word, the custom that was later enshrined in Israel’s legislation, and the promise to Abraham. Judah refused to give her to his living youngest son. He thus deprived Tamar once again of the possibility of having a family.
And while Joseph is fleeing Potiphar’s wife’s sexual advances, Judah is propositioning a lady working the street. Now Judah thinks he is receiving the favours of a prostitute. But he is really impregnating his daughter-in-law. It is Judah who, ironically, is committing adultery, which he denounces as worthy of death.
But what Judah meant for evil, God mean for good. For we see that it is Tamar, not Judah, who cares about the family name. It is Tamar, not Judah, who wants to see the promise to Abraham fulfilled. So in the fullness of time, Tamar has twins. Twin boys, Perez and Zerah. And it is Tamar who is vindicated. Not only by Judah, who says that she is justified, rather than him. But by the fact that the name Perez turns up again and again in genealogies of the Christ, both in the Old Testament and New Testament (Genesis 38:27-30; compare Ruth 4:18; 1 Chronicles 2:3ff; Matthew 1:3; Luke 3:33). Jesus Christ is a descendant of Perez. And that honour goes to Tamar.
Perhaps Judah’s confession of wrongdoing was good for him. Because from this unpromising introduction, Judah grows as a man. When we meet him next, Judah shows strength, firmness, wisdom, and concern as he speaks with his sometimes irrational father (43:1-10). Where Reuben had failed before, Judah persuades Jacob. And Jacob entrusts Benjamin into Judah’s care.
And it is Judah who shows that he is the leader among his brothers when the situation is at its worst. It is at the hour of need that the true leader and rightful king steps in to save his people.
Benjamin has been caught with Joseph’s cup. [Of course it is all a set up and a test, but only we and Joseph know that. For Judah and Benjamin, this was the real thing] Before his brothers, Joseph condemns Benjamin to slavery. The very thing that happened to him. But in the longest speech in Genesis, Judah passionately pleads with Joseph to take him as a substitute (Genesis 44:18-34).
Genesis 44:33-34:
‘Now then, please let your servant remain here as my lord’s slave in place of the boy, and let the boy return with his brothers. How can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? No! Do not let me see the misery that would come upon my father.” (Genesis 44:33-34 NIV)
Judah offers his own life as a ransom for Benjamin. This is servant leadership. Servant leadership is to take the place of a brother, that the brother might go free.
Judah sets up the pattern for the true King of Israel. The true King of Israel is a Servant King. He leads by serving. And when Judah’s greater descendant Jesus came, He led the twelve to Jerusalem where he would give his life for them. For Jesus came to give his life as a ransom for many.
So Jacob recognises that Judah is the leader among the brothers. Jacob sends Judah ahead of the brothers to get directions to get to Goshen (Genesis 46:28).
Judah’s leadership culminates in the blessing in Chapter 49:
‘Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons will bow down to you. You are a lion’s cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness – who dares to rouse him? The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs[9] and the obedience of the nations is his.’ (Genesis 49:8-12 NIV).
Judah provided leadership for his brothers. So it will be in the future. Judah’s brothers will praise him for taking the lead. And Judah, not Joseph, will rule the brothers. Judah took the lead, so he will be a leader. He will be the ruler and prince, and King, for that is what the scepter and the staff signify. They are signs of royalty. And now Jacob is promising Judah a dynasty. Houses of Kings will come from Judah. And Judah will rule until one who will lead not just the brothers in Israel, but also the nations of the world.
He will rule all the nations with his iron scepter. This is the one who John in Revelation calls: ‘The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David’ (Revelation 5:5). Our King, the Lord Jesus Christ, who leads, like Judah, by offering himself as the substitute for his brothers, so that his brothers might be returned to their father, safe and sound.
Let’s pray.
[1] Lit, ‘And this is that which their father said to them, and he blessed them, each according to his blessing he blessed him.’
[2] Wenham’s translation.
[3] nə·zîr: While the first definition of nə·zîr in BDB is ‘prince, ruler, as consecrated’ (translated ‘prince among his brothers in the NIV = Deut 33:1 and cf Lam 4:7, so taken by Wenham, 2:487), a more common usage means ‘Nazarite’, that is, one separated or consecrated from his people. Craigie takes it as ‘the foremost among his brethren’: Craigie, Deuteronomy, 397. It is translated ‘him that was separate from his brothers’ in AV, ERV, ‘set apart from his brothes’ in ESV and ‘distinguished among his brothers’ in NASB. The NASB captures both notions of separation and exaltation. With the idea of separation it is used in, eg, Nu 6:2,13,21, also Am 2:11-12. It is thus used of Samson (Judges 13:5,7,16:7). The verb from which the noun is derived means dedicate, consecrate, separate in a religious and ceremonial sense: BDB. The LXX translates the phrase using a verb, thus ‘of whose brothers he was chief’. Calvin helpfully comments on Genesis 49:26, ‘At length he calls Joseph nə·zîr among his brethren, either because he was their crown, on account of the common glory which redounds from him to them all, or because on account of the dignify by which excels, he was separated from them all. It may be understood in both senses. Yet we must now that this excellency was temporal, because Joseph, together with the others, was required to take his proper place, and to submit himself to the scepter of Judah’: Calvin, Comm Gen, 2:470, and note translation given in the footnote, ‘one separated from his brothers’. Kidner comment ‘The final phrase, separate from his brothers, speaks of one singled out, not left out: the word is later used of the Nazirite, set apart for God.’: Kidner, Genesis, 222.
[4] Eg, of Abraham, = ‘My Lord... a prince of God [among us]’ (Genesis 23:6), of the 12 tribal leaders that come from Ishmael (Genesis 17:20) and of Midian (Numbers 25:18) and of the tribes of Israel (Numbers 2:3), alternatively = ‘son of the king’ (eg Judges 18:8), = chief, captain (eg of Phicol, captain of Abimelech: Genesis 21:22,32; 26:26; of Potiphar: Genesis 37:36, 39:1; of the captain of the prison: 39:21-23, of the chief cupbearer and baker throughout Genesis 40; also Ex 2:14, of Moses, chief and judge).
[5] I originally thought that Joseph received the blessing and Judah the birthright of the first-born. However, it would appear that this distinction cannot be made as 1 Chronicles 5:1-2 says, ‘The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (he was the firstborn, but when he defiled his father's marriage bed, his rights as firstborn were given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel; so he could not be listed in the genealogical record in accordance with his birthright, 2 and though Judah was the strongest of his brothers and a ruler came from him, the rights of the firstborn belonged to Joseph’. Note that the LXX substitutes ‘blessing’ for ‘birthright’ (which BHS suggests to read), which von Rad, Rudolph and NEB substitute follow. However, Williamson says that more problems are created: H G M Williamson, 1 & 2 Chronicles, 63. Deut 33:17 says of Joseph: ‘A firstborn bull - he has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox; with them he shall gore the peoples, all of them, to the ends of the earth; they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh."’
[6] Eg Genesis 37:21-22, 29-30, the attempt to return Joseph to his father. Reuben is the one who leads the brothers in confession of their sin (Genesis 42:22), although there is some self-exculpation in it. Regarding the return journey to Egypt, Reuben makes a foolish offer to Jacob, ‘Then Reuben said to his father, "You may put both of my sons to death if I do not bring him back to you. Entrust him to my care, and I will bring him back." (Genesis 42:37 NIV)’. This is naturally rejected, though Judah’s is accepted, foreshadowing what is to come.
[7] Wenham, 2:473.
[8] Which may well explain where the sons of Jacob obtained their wives. They may have indeed married the women of Shechem, but they did not intermarry with the people; the marriages were on their terms only.
[9] The interpretation of this verse is difficult. The only interpretation that doesn’t require emendation is that of the NASB, AV, ERV. ‘until Shiloh comes’. However, the spelling of ‘Shiloh’ here is different to that of the place. RSV and NIV take it to be ‘which belongs to him’. Compare Ezekiel 21:32 (EVV) 27 (MT), ‘until he comes whose right it is’. Others read ‘until the ruler comes’. The ESV (among others) repoints to it mean ‘tribute’. I think in light of Ez 21:32, the NIV, RSV is to be accepted. Such is also the judgment of Kidner, Genesis, 218.
Regarding Genesis 38:26, and Judah’s statement vindicating Tamar with respect to him, almost every English translation takes it as a comparison, that Judah was saying that Tamar was more righteous than him. Representative is the ESV, which renders it, “She is more righteous than I (צָֽדְקָ֣ה מִמֶּ֔נִּי), since I did not give her to my son Shelah”. However, the adjective with preposition should be taken with GKC §133b fn 2 to express “not a comparison, but only a relation existing between one person and another”, and that in Genesis 38:26 should be translated rather “she is in the right as against me” (GKC in 1910 edition as 430). Hence a better translation would be “she is righteous rather than me”. The LXX rendering, Δεδικαίωται Θαμαρ ἢ ἐγώ, which uses the perfect passive verb form rather than the adjective, might be translated, “Tamar has been justified rather than me”, or as Brenton rendered is, “Thamar is cleared rather than I”. The LXX thus also supports GKC's syntactical observation. This is likewise the view of Wenham, Genesis 16-50: WBC, 2:362-3.