A Tale of Two Temptations

Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance. And after a time his master’s wife cast her eyes on Joseph and said, “Lie with me.” But he refused and said to his master’s wife, “Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge. He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” And as she spoke to Joseph day after day, he would not listen to her, to lie beside her or to be with her.

-Genesis 39:6b-10, ESV

It is human nature to divide people into categories of “good” and “bad”.  Some passages seem to support this, such as God loving Jacob but hating Esau (Malachi 1:2, Romans 9:13).  But as we saw here, that was due to God’s purpose of election rather than their merit.  Scripture tells it like it is, including the failures and sins of those who we normally call “good”, showing that no one is good except for the Triune God.  This is especially evident when we examine the sons of Jacob, who all display sin and unfaithfulness to God until a climactic moment characterized by two contrasting temptations that point to the First and Last Adam.

The Failure of Jacob’s Sons

Throughout Genesis, we see not only the sin of the patriarchs regarded throughout the rest of Scripture as godly but also varying degrees of faithfulness in their offspring.  When examining how God builds His Kingdom through families, we saw that only Isaac was faithful to God out of all of Abraham’s children.  Jacob’s family appears to fair no better.  After cheating his brother, Jacob himself was cheated into polygamy that would cause tumult for the rest of his life.  We have previously seen that while polygamy was allowed in the Old Testament, it is always portrayed negatively —and the story of Jacob does much to reveal its folly.  As he and his father-in-law tried to out-cheat each other, the bitter rivalry between Leah and Rachel resulted in twelve sons.  As the boys became men, their sins are recorded, starting with Simeon and Levi.  Though they were right to be angry after their sister was defiled, they sinned by giving full vent to their anger in slaughtering the men of Shechem and leading their brothers in plundering the city (Genesis 34:25).  Like Lamech, they showed no remorse for their disproportionate vengeance (Genesis 34:31 cf. 4:23-24).  Worse, they like Eli’s worthless sons treated the sign of God’s promises with contempt.  In treating sacrifices as means of personal gain, Eli’s sons were simply following in the footsteps of their ancestor Levi who with his brother Simeon reduced circumcision (the sign of the Abrahamic covenant) to means to facilitate their revenge.[1]  At this point in their lives these two sons of Jacob were acting more like sons of Esau. 

Not long afterward, Jacob’s firstborn, Reuben, committed incest (Leviticus 18:8, Deuteronomy 22:30) by sleeping with his step-mother Bilhah, which was the same sin Paul vehemently condemns in 1 Corinthians 5.  This was an attempt to usurp Jacob—the exact opposite of the submission that adult children owe to their parents—and was specifically cursed in the Law (Deuteronomy 27:20).[2]  It is unsurprising then that Jacob cursed Reuben for this by transferring his birthright to Joseph (Genesis 49:4, 1 Chronicles 5:1-2).  Things get worse when Jacob’s preferential treatment of Joseph builds resentment in his other sons.[3]  Joseph stoked that fire by giving Jacob a bad report—most likely false or exaggerated—of Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher (Genesis 37:2).[4]  Finally, all of Jacob’s sons except for Reuben, Joseph, and Benjamin prove to be unrighteous by conspiring to kill Joseph but then ultimately selling him into slavery (Genesis 37:18-28)—which would later be a capital offense (Exodus 21:16).  Even worse, their reason for selling rather than killing him was economic gain and that they might be innocent of murder (Genesis 37:26).  And while Reuben was grieved by this, he joined his brothers in deceiving Jacob about what had really happened to Joseph (Genesis 37:21-22,29-31).  In this incident, Judah was the ringleader (Genesis 37:26), and the narrative continues to describe his moral decline.

Judah’s Temptation

The familiar story of Joseph is interrupted by the disturbing story of Judah after he led his brothers to sell Joseph.  Like his three elder brothers, Judah shows contempt for the covenant—this time by leaving his family, dwelling among the Canaanites, and marrying one of them (Genesis 38:1-5).  This would have grieved his grandparents Isaac and Rebekah just as when Esau did the same (Genesis 26:34, 27:46).  Judah also proved to be a poor parent, as both of his elder sons were so wicked that God struck them dead.  We are not told the sin of the Er the firstborn, only that he was “wicked in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD put him to death” (Genesis 38:7b).[5]  But Scripture is clear about what his brother Onan did.  He had a responsibility to care for Er’s widow Tamar by fathering a son in place of his brother—a duty that would later be commanded (Deuteronomy 25:5-10). Like the son Jesus condemns in the first of his Holy Tuesday parables (Matthew 21:28-31), Onan appeared to obey his father but actually disobeyed him by ensuring that whenever he slept with Tamar he would not father a child (Genesis 38:9).  In addition to despising his brother and the promise of God to bless future generations, Onan like so many people today wanted sex without responsibility.  They commit the same sin by preventing children from being conceived in unbiblical ways with unbiblical motives or by slaughtering them in the womb.  And he did it in such a way that he appeared righteous and dutiful while casting the blame on Tamar whom he was sinning against. This sin was especially abhorrent to God: “And what he did was wicked in the sight of the LORD, and he put him to death also” (Genesis 38:10).  Judah clearly viewed Tamar as the problem and swept her aside with a false promise of betrothal to his remaining son Shelah (Genesis 38:11).  When he failed to fulfill this promise, Tamar would take matters into her own hands, resulting in temptation that reflects the Fall. 

In the Fall, Adam’s sin began when he failed to intervene to prevent Eve from sinning.  Judah displays the same sin by failing to intervene (through marriage of Shelah to Tamar) to prevent Tamar from sinning.  Like Adam, Judah rationalized his decision.  With Judah’s wife now dead, Shelah was his last hope to continue his family line.  Tamar appeared to be the common denominator in Judah’s woes, so he couldn’t risk Shelah dying too.[6]  So like Adam and men ever since, Judah abdicated his responsibility.  His failure to provide for her caused her to hatch a shocking plan to secure his provision.  Rather than approaching local elders about Judah’s broken promise, she decided to act like a prostitute and seduce him so that he would father her offspring.  This suggests that Judah rendezvoused with prostitutes frequently and readily enough that Tamar believed her plan had a high chance of success.  After learning Judah’s itinerary and disguising herself, she like the adulteress of Proverbs 7 placed herself at the crossroads where she knew her “mark” would come (Genesis 38:13-14).  Just like the tree in the midst of the Garden, this setting was an ideal place for Judah to overcome temptation. Like Adam he didn’t make the slightest attempt to resist but immediately propositioned her.  And while Judah unlike Adam was deceived by Tamar in that he didn’t recognize her—and therefore didn’t realize he was committing adultery and incest which was later outlawed (Leviticus 18:15)—he like Adam in a sense was not deceived because knew full well what he was doing despite not knowing who with.  When the sin was found out, he like Adam blamed the woman until his own involvement became unmistakable.  In this incident, Judah and the entire family of Jacob hit a low point.

Joseph’s Temptation

The story of Judah’s temptation in Genesis 38 is contrasted by Joseph’s in Genesis 39.  After being taken to Egypt, Joseph was bought by Potiphar and was ultimately promoted to manager of his entire house.  Though his administrative talents, diligence, and trustworthiness were certainly displayed, Joseph was successful because God was with him (Genesis 39:2).  It was in this context that he like Judah faced temptation.  Judah was a successful man near his home while Joseph was a vulnerable slave far from home.  Like Judah he faced temptation from a forbidden woman, but unlike Judah who held the power, Joseph’s temptress held the power: Potiphar’s wife.  While it is possible that she was envious of the attention her husband gave to Joseph—in contrast his likely neglect of her, the narrative only points to Joseph’s handsome appearance drawing her eye (Genesis 39:6-7), so it is much more likely that she was seeking her own sexual gratification rather than trying to destroy him.[7]  Thus she like Tamar mimics the adulteress of Proverbs 7, positioning herself so that Joseph cannot avoid her while going about his duties.  Unlike Judah, Joseph makes no advances.  Instead, she propositions him continually while Tamar only approached Judah once.  She likely attempted to seduce Joseph at first, but when that failed she used her superior status as mistress of the house to command him to sleep with her (Genesis 39:7).[8]  Like Judah, he could have rationalized giving in.[9]  After all, as his master’s wife she had legitimate authority over him, not only culturally but also biblically (1 Timothy 5:14).  One of the wife’s God-given responsibilities is to manage her house, and responsibility cannot exist without authority.  Obedience is commanded of slaves (Ephesians 6:4-8, Colossians 3:22ff, 1 Peter 2:18ff), so shouldn’t he just obey? 

Instead of compromising and rationalizing, Joseph declines with a response which displays how to disagree with superiors.  He first reminded her of their common lord and how he placed great trust in Joseph—trust that Joseph would not betray: “Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge” (Genesis 39:8b).  He then referred to her dignified status—doubtless appealing to her not to disgrace herself: “He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except you, because you are his wife” (Genesis 39:9a).  Finally, he appeals to God: “How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” (Genesis 39:9b).  Regardless of local customs or her position over him, Joseph understood that God prohibited adultery always.  Here, Joseph actually eclipsed Abraham and Isaac, who had doubted the power of God over foreign nations and therefore out of fear for their own lives put their wives in vulnerable positions.  Joseph knew God was still sovereign in Egypt.  All authority exists for the purpose of obeying God, so no one has the authority to disobey God or compel anyone else to disobey God.  While Potiphar’s wife could legitimately command him to make her bed, she couldn’t command him to lie with her in it. 

Nevertheless, she persisted like a strong, independent feminist until she finally caught him alone and attempted to force herself on him.  With no other righteous option, he fled (Genesis 39:11-12), leaving her with a major predicament.  She may have sought nothing but her own sexual gratification earlier, but now in order to protect herself from disgrace she had to destroy him.[10]  Concocting a charge of attempted assault, she garnered sympathy from the rest of the household before accusing Joseph to Potiphar (Genesis 39:13-18), whose “anger was kindled” (Genesis 39:19b).  Potiphar essentially vindicates himself and washes his hands of the incident by throwing Joseph in prison without further investigation.  Interestingly, the text does not say his anger was kindled against Joseph, and the punishment seems too mild for the alleged crime, suggesting Potiphar was not entirely convinced of his wife’s story but needed to resolve the situation quickly to protect his own reputation.[11]  Joseph by his righteousness is therefore condemned to pay the penalty for a sin he didn’t commit, which he silently accepts.  How was Joseph able to endure?  Scripture supports only one answer: “Holy Joseph, therefore, must have been endowed with the extraordinary power of the Spirit, seeing that he stood invincible to the last, against all the allurements of the impious woman”.[12]

All of this means that Joseph foreshadows the last Adam, Jesus Christ just as Judah points back to the first Adam. Adam and Judah relied on their own strength and intellect, leading them to immediately fall into temptation under ideal circumstances. Joseph and Jesus relied on the power of the Holy Spirit and therefore held firm amidst prolonged temptation under very challenging circumstances.  Adam and Judah tried to shift blame and abdicate responsibility. Joseph and Jesus embraced responsibility and obeyed God rather than man.  Jesus like Joseph was falsely accused by an unfaithful bride (Israel) and therefore condemned by a foreign official (Pilate) to suffer the punishment the bride deserved.  Joseph was thrown in a dungeon and forgotten before being raised to prominence, just as Jesus was buried then raised.  Joseph and Jesus both knew that they underwent all of this to accomplish God’s purpose to save His people.  In this way, Judah and Joseph clearly typify Adam and Jesus respectively, proven by the fact that the Holy Spirit inspired Judah’s tale to precede Joseph’s.[13]

Conclusion: Salvation for God’s People

Scripture does not support the categories of good and bad people, but only bad people and Jesus.  So while we should all strive to imitate the faith and endurance of Joseph, we are much more like Judah.  Lest we lose hope, we must remember that Judah’s failure was not the end of the story.  When his sin found him out, he declared that Tamar was more righteous than he was (Genesis 38:26).  This was a turning point for Judah and likely his point of genuine conversion.  After that, Judah stepped up and took responsibility for his brothers.  He who had convinced them to sell Joseph later guaranteed Benjamin’s safety in Egypt (Genesis 43:8-9) and even volunteered to be enslaved in Benjamin’s place (Genesis 44:18ff).  And through the line of Perez, one of the twins born from Judah’s sinful liaison with Tamar, would come David and ultimately Christ.  In a family that was spiraling downhill, God used the lowest point for one of the worst sinners in order to bring about salvation for His people—and He does the same thing today.  So when we fail like Judah, there is hope in the one to whom Joseph points and who brought about salvation in Judah.  But for the grace of God the family of Israel born out of tumult and embroiled in scandal would never have become a mighty nation as the covenant people of God.  But for the grace of God we too would be without hope.  Our sin brings about the curse like Reuben, but like Judah by God’s grace in Christ we inherit His blessings instead.  So Judah is the heritage of the true people of God—a heritage of failure and salvation.  While Joseph foreshadowed Jesus, He is the Lion of Judah.  So when we fail like Judah let us repent like Judah and therefore enter the blessing promised to Judah: “Judah is a lion’s cub; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He stooped down; he crouched as a lion and as a lioness; who dares rouse him The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples” (Genesis 49:9-10).

NOTES:

[1] David Brown, A. R. Fausset, and Robert Jamieson, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Genesis–Deuteronomy, vol. I, London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited: 220–221.

[2]   John Calvin and John King, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, vol. 2, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2010: 245–246; Iain M. Duguid, Living in the Grip of Relentless Grace: The Gospel in the Lives of Isaac and Jacob, ed. Tremper Longman III and J. Alan Groves, The Gospel according to the Old Testament. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing: 2002: 156.

[3] Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 18–50, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.: 1995: 407.

[4] Iain M. Duguid and Matthew P. Harmon, Living in the Light of Inextinguishable Hope: The Gospel according to Joseph, ed. Iain M. Duguid, The Gospel according to the Old Testament, Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing: 2013: 4.

[5] Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 18–50, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.: 1995: 434.

[6] Ibid: 437.

[7] Ibid: 461.

[8] David Brown, A. R. Fausset, and Robert Jamieson, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Genesis–Deuteronomy, vol. I, London; Glasgow: William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited: 237–238; Iain M. Duguid and Matthew P. Harmon, Living in the Light of Inextinguishable Hope: The Gospel according to Joseph, ed. Iain M. Duguid, The Gospel according to the Old Testament, Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing: 2013: 51; Jan Douma and Jacob P. Tazelaar, Teacher’s Bible Commentary: Old & New Testament Lessons, trans. Frederika Pronk, vol. 1, Teacher’s Bible Commentary Series, Grand Rapids, MI; Mitchell, ON: Reformation Heritage Books; Free Reformed Publications: 2008: 74.

[9] Iain M. Duguid and Matthew P. Harmon, Living in the Light of Inextinguishable Hope: The Gospel according to Joseph, ed. Iain M. Duguid, The Gospel according to the Old Testament, Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing: 2013: 51.

[10] James G. Murphy, Notes on the Old Testament: Genesis, Boston: Estes and Lauriate: 1873: 453; John Calvin and John King, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, vol. 2, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2010: 299.

[11] Iain M. Duguid and Matthew P. Harmon, Living in the Light of Inextinguishable Hope: The Gospel according to Joseph, ed. Iain M. Duguid, The Gospel according to the Old Testament, Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing: 2013: 54; Arthur Walkington Pink, Gleanings in Genesis, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2005: 367.

[12] John Calvin and John King, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, vol. 2, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2010: 297.

[13] Arthur Walkington Pink, Gleanings in Genesis, Bellingham, WA: Logos: 2005: 366.