Northern Kentucky's Evening Interdenominational Community Bible Study Text of Presentation, Lesson 21, Gen 39-40 Click Here for Lesson 21 Photos Click Here to return to GENESIS Home Page

Genesis 39:1-40:23
Slave and Prisoner: Performance under Pressure

In last week’s lesson, an arrogant Joseph was sold into slavery by his jealous brothers. The slave traders took him to Egypt, where he was sold “to Potiphar, one of Pharaoh’s officials, the captain of the guard” (37:36). Tonight’s lesson begins the story of Joseph’s 93 years in Egypt; we discuss chapters 39 and 40, covering about 11 of those 93 years.

The key to this story is 39:2: “YHWH was with Joseph and he prospered” (39:2). God’s provision is mentioned three times in this chapter (39:2, 5, 23). Potiphar recognizes Joseph’s natural organizational talents, and gives him more and more responsibility; eventually “Potiphar put (Joseph) in charge of his household, and he entrusted to his care everything he owned” (39:4). Furthermore, God’s blessing of Joseph carries over to “everything Potiphar had” (39:5), fulfilling God’s blessing of Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you” (12:3). It’s interesting that this is the first reference in the bible to YHWH’s blessing of Joseph; the bible does not say this in chapter 37, in which Joseph acts like an obnoxious, know-it-all kid.

With Joseph in complete control of the household, Potiphar is free to devote all his attention to matters outside the home, leaving his wife a desperate housewife. Joseph’s problem is that God has given him one too many blessings: he is “well-built and handsome” (39:6). “And after a while (Potiphar’s) wife took notice of (him) and said, ‘Come to bed with me!’” (39:7). Joseph wisely refuses her advances. He probably knows this can only lead to trouble in the end – but with incredible prescience he describes adultery as a “sin against God” (39:9). King David says the same thing later (2 Sam 12:13) – but he says it after God has given the 10 commandments, and this is hundreds of years beforehand. Joseph must have been communicating with God (even though the bible doesn’t say it).

As they say: “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned,” and when Joseph rejects the advances of Potiphar’s wife, she accuses him of attacking her when there are no other servants in the house. The bible says this makes Potiphar extremely angry (39:19) – but it doesn’t say angry at whom. Nevertheless, his honor is at stake, so he immediately has Joseph thrown in jail. Why doesn’t he have Joseph killed on the spot? A slave is a financial asset – and perhaps his wife has played around before!

Here we see how important it was that Joseph was sold to “the captain of the guard” (37:36): he is taken to a special prison for pharaoh’s prisoners, apparently on Potiphar’s estate (40:3). Potiphar is responsible for this prison (40:4), and although Joseph may have been punished with a period of unpleasant confinement, Potiphar probably tells the jailer about Joseph’s capabilities . . . and before long he is in charge of everything at the prison. Again God blesses everything Joseph does, so the jailer can take it easy (39:21-23). Who knows if this was Potiphar’s plan all along . . . if he allowed Joseph to live so he can manage the prison, Potiphar would be shielded from constant nagging little problems.

The plot thickens “some time later” (40:1), as chapter 40 opens. Two high-ranking officials are sent to the prison: pharaoh’s chief cupbearer, and his chief baker. There may be some probability one or both of them will be returned to pharaoh’s favor, so Potiphar tasks Joseph to make sure their stay is prison is as pleasant as possible (40:4). For this reason, Joseph is concerned when the two are “dejected” one morning, and he asks what the problem is (40:6-7). It seems both have had dreams – which were considered significant in ancient Egypt – but there is no interpreter of dreams in the prison.

Joseph may have told people that his success is due to the blessings of his God – and the polytheists around him would have no problem with that unless he claimed YHWH is the only god of the universe. And now he makes a comment that that verges on stepping on the polytheistic toes of these two important prisoners: “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (40:8). Joseph is again ahead of his time; because Jews believed dreams came from God, they never developed a class of “professional dream interpreters” like the Egyptians and other Middle Eastern cultures. The bible records only Joseph and Daniel – both becoming high-ranking officials of pagan kings – as Hebrew dream interpreters.

“Tell me your dreams,” Joseph says (40:8). Although not a “professional dream interpreter,” he’s the only thing available in prison; so that’s what the chief cupbearer and chief baker. We don’t need to go over them . . . the bottom line is Joseph interprets the chief cupbearer’s dream to mean that “within three days Pharaoh will . . . restore you to your position” (40:13). Then he asks for a quid pro quo: “When all goes well with you, . . . mention me to Pharaoh and get me out of this prison. For I . . . have done nothing to deserve being put in a dungeon” (40:14-15). Pharaoh can forgive all wrongs – even if done to Potiphar – so if Joseph can appeal to pharaoh, he knows he might well be on his way back home to Canaan!

Encouraged by this favorable interpretation of the chief cupbearer’s dream, the chief baker reveals his dream . . . but in this case Joseph tells him “within three days Pharaoh will lift off your head and hang you on a tree. And the birds will eat away your flesh” (40:19).

Joseph’s predictions come true. However, although Joseph asked the chief cupbearer to appeal his case to pharaoh when he was restored to his position, the guy is no dummy! He realizes he will offend Potiphar, “the captain of the guard” (37:36), if he does this; Potiphar doesn’t want to lose his has an efficient prison manager. For the chief cupbearer to appeal to pharaoh to release him . . . that’s not a smart thing to do. So as the bible says: “The chief cupbearer . . . did not remember Joseph; he forgot him” (40:19-23).

There may be another reason the chief cupbearer remains quiet: he may realize the meaning of the dreams was probably obvious without God’s inspiration, because “the third day was Pharaoh’s birthday, and . . . a feast for all his officials” was planned (40:20) when it was traditional to release some prisoners. So why should he mention this amateur dream interpreter to pharaoh? But the remarkable thing about Joseph is that God not only gave him the interpretation of the dreams . . . He did so with such conviction that he had the courage to reveal the meaning of the chief baker’s bad dream! If Joseph were wrong, he would have made an enemy of an important official of pharaoh!

Perhaps that’s why the chief cupbearer finally tells pharaoh about Joseph two years later when pharaoh has a bad dream – which we’ll discuss next week. Then we’ll see how all these unlikely events tie together to implement God’s plan, fulfilling His promise to Abraham – now His promise to Israel. If Joseph’s brothers had not sold him into slavery, he would not be in Egypt. If he had not been bought by Potiphar, he would not have gained access to pharaoh’s officials. If Potiphar’s wife had not tried to seduce Joseph, he would not be in prison. If he were not in prison, he could not have helped pharaoh’s chief cupbearer. If he had not correctly interpreted these dreams, he would not be asked to interpret pharaoh’s dreams two years later . . . in a remarkable story which allows him to save his family in Canaan from a severe famine that hits the entire Middle East.

Tonight we’ll close by trying to put the story of Joseph in Egypt into historical perspective – which is one of the objectives of these discussions. Neither Abraham nor Isaac nor Jacob/Israel ruled anything or wrote anything of lasting value, so not much is possible with them. But that’s different with Joseph because – as most of us know – he is ultimately elevated from manager of Potiphar’s prison to manager of the kingdom of Egypt, reporting directly to pharaoh. He oversees 7 years of abundance in Egypt, then 7 years of famine. A skeptic might say: “If Joseph had so much power and influence, there surely must be some secular evidence he was there!”

Good point. The truth is, little appears in a king’s records about a king’s lieutenants – and less than we would like about the king himself. As a case in point, for 1900 years there was no secular evidence that a man named Pilate was Roman governor of Judea at the time of Jesus; anti-Christian scholars had a field day. But in the 20th century, a reference to Pilate was found in Caesarea, showing the gospel writers were right: Pilate was real.

Joseph is nearly 2000 years before Pilate; but in the context of the story in the bible, there are interesting parallels in the records of two pharaohs of the 12th Dynasty: Senusret II and Senusret III – also known as Sesostris II and Sesostris III (since hieroglyphics are impossible to pronounce phonetically).

Senusret II is often considered the pharaoh whose dreams were interpreted by Joseph. According to Robert Clayton in his book, Chronicle of the Pharaohs: “his reign was a peaceful one, . . . he continued the expansion of cultivation in the Faiyum region and established good rapport with the provincial elites.” That doesn’t seem significant – unless we realize the Faiyum region is a large fertile depression located about 60 km southwest of Cairo, connected to the Nile River by a canal named the Bahr Yussef, which translates from Arabic to the “Joseph’s waterway.” The Bahr Yussef was a natural waterway, formed by overflow of the Nile at a very high flood stage, cutting a channel into the Faiyum depression and forming a body of water that became known as Lake Moeris. The importance of the Faiyum for agriculture was apparently first noticed by Senusret II’s father, Amenemhet II, but Senusret II developed it – most notably by improving its irrigation system by widening and deepening the Bahr Yussef.

Famines in Egypt occurred because of too little water or by too much water. There is some evidence that the final flood level could be predicted by measuring the levels occurring early in the flood process. Therefore, two earthen dams were build into the Bahr Yussef, to drain more or less water into Lake Moeris and regulate the flood level in the rest of lower Egypt – causing times of plenty or times of famine.

In other words, Senusret II expanded the agricultural production of Egypt by developing a fertile region, irrigated by a canal named after some guy “Joseph” – not an Egyptian name – and he cultivated good relations with the local landowners. It’s simple economics that commodity prices fall in times of abundance, so it’s possible Senusret II’s good relations with the local landowners came because he supported grain prices by buying surplus grain production – just as the bible says Joseph did on pharaoh’s behalf.

Senusret II was succeeded by his son, Senusret III. The Pharaoh is never named in the bible, so the text does not prohibit a succession of pharaohs – and there is much to argue in favor if it, since Joseph is in Egypt for 93 years. Senusret III is often considered the pharaoh of the 7 years of famine which follow the 7 years of plenty.

Clayton says Senusret III “is probably the best known, visually, of all the Middle Kingdom pharaohs with his brooding, hooded-eyed and careworn portraits. . . . Part of this stems from the realization that the king, although still a god on earth, is nevertheless concerned with the earthly welfare of his people. . . . He managed to curtail the activities of the local nomarchs, whose influence had . . . risen to challenge that of the monarchy.” The “nomarchs” were provincial governors – today we might call them “war lords” – who ruled private fiefdoms, and held pharaoh in contempt. Senusret III consolidated power in the central government. His “careworn” demeanor might come from dealing with 7 years of severe famine, and his “concern for the people’s earthly welfare” might be reflected in selling them grain from his storehouses to stave off famine. Moreover, the bible records that by selling grain at high famine-based prices to the landowners, pharaoh gained control of their estates (47:20-21). It’s hard to think of a better way to curtail the power of “war lords” than by taking their property!

Furthermore, in relating Senusret III’s military campaigns to expand the kingdom, Clayton notes: “there is also record of a campaign in Syria, but it seems to have been more one of retribution and to gain plunder than to extend the Egyptian frontiers.” The campaign was directed at Shechem: the place where Joseph’s sister Dinah was raped!

Amenemhet III becomes pharaoh after Senusret III, and his reign comes to an end within 10 years of Joseph’s death (if Clayton’s chronology is followed). The 12th Dynasty began to fall apart after Amenemhet III – which may imply God’s blessing of Egypt was taken away with the death of Joseph. According to Clayton’s chronology, Joseph would have been in Egypt essentially throughout the 19th century BC.

Another very popular theory for the pharaohs of Joseph is dated 200 years later, based on an invasion of Egypt in the 17th century BC by Semitic peoples called “Hyksos,” who ruled a part of Egypt for about 100 years as what is called the 15th Dynasty. Hyksos names are similar to Canaanite names. They have been called “shepherd kings,” but that may be a mistranslation; they were probably city dwellers from southern Canaan. According to this theory, Joseph rises to power under the Hyksos because, as a fellow Semite, he is more like them that the native Egyptians, who they had overthrown and were trying to control. Nevertheless, the 12th Dynasty Theory is much more compatible with the biblical narrative and chronology than the Hyksos theory.

Furthermore, history records Semitic peoples settled peacefully in the eastern delta of Egypt toward the end of the 12th Dynasty. Some scholars consider this the beginning of the Hyksos invasion, but others believe this was the Hebrew settlement recorded later in Genesis. If that is the case, the Hebrews were in Egypt before the Hyksos arrived, and conceivably collaborated with them ruling Egypt . . . and if that is true, the Hebrews might have been enslaved when the Hyksos were overthrown by the native Egyptians around 1560 BC (if we may skip over Genesis into another familiar story: Exodus). Other scholars take exactly the opposite view . . . that the Hebrews were enslaved when the Hyksos took power; take your pick!

I think it’s important to bring up this history, because – although much in the bible must be taken on faith – it’s equally true that if the bible claims a Hebrew son of Israel was COO for a powerful nation like Egypt for nearly a century and the bible describes conditions in Egypt under his leadership, there ought to be some degree of qualitative agreement with secular history. And there is!