But the Lord was with Joseph in the prison and showed him his faithful love. And the Lord made Joseph a favorite with the prison warden (Genesis 39:21).

Someone might ask, "Why didn't God expose the deception of Potipher's wife? Wouldn't that be a better outcome then Joseph's arrest?" It could have made Joseph's life easier, for in spite of God's blessings, Joseph recounts his life as one of trouble and affliction (Genesis 41:51-52).

Yet, such an outcome was not part of God's purpose and plan. God would use Joseph's sufferings to redeem his brothers' treacherous hatred of Joseph and save the as-yet small house of Israel (75 people when they enter Egypt, Acts 7:14) from perishing in a severe famine (Genesis 50:20).

One might argue that God could have prevented the famine, so that Joseph's sufferings and eventual rise to power would be unnecessary. 

If we go down this road of what God could have done/should have done, we would only show ourselves to be the greater fool, for we would inadvertantly be second-guessing God and trying to make ourselves, who are mere creatures, out to be a better god than God our Creator.

Rather than defending or criticizing any particular act of God, the wiser perspective would be to recognize that God works everything out according to His sovereign and good will to achieve the greatest glory for His Name. This is essentially what Paul writes in Ephesians 1:11-12,

In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

The chief end of man is not our good but God's glory. It is not for us to simply enjoy greater and greater benefits from God but for us to enjoy Him, our greatest benefit, forever. When will we understand that we were not created for our glory but His? When we will recognize that our calling is not to fulfill our dreams and aspirations but to faithfully serve His perfect and holy will?

Let this be food for thought as we embark on another new year, graciously granted to us by God. 

Yet the chief cupbearer did not remember Joseph, but forgot him (Genesis 40:23).

The cupbearer forgot about Joseph for two full years (cf. Genesis 41:1). When we read this account, we may feel some consternation at the injustice of Joseph's lot. Up to this time, and for about thirteen years, he experienced nothing but bad luck (cf. Genesis 37:2 and 41:46). His brothers hated him and sold him into slavery. He was sold again to Potiphar. He was falsely accused of rape and imprisoned. Then, he was forgotten and left in the jail by the one that he helped. 

But the Scriptures make clear that these misfortunes must not be explained as simple coincidence or bad luck, but the hand of God was present in every aspect of Joseph's life. The LORD was with Joseph at Potiphar's house (cf. Genesis 39:5). The LORD was with Joseph in the Egyptian prison (cf. Genesis 39:21). And it was the LORD that revealed the interpretation of the cupbearer's and baker's dreams. 

When Joseph is elevated to power, he acknowledges God's providence in the years of suffering that brought him to the place, where he could save Israel:

You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives (Genesis 50:20).

Friends, I am reminded again that God sometimes, even often, uses suffering to accomplish His good purposes. He certainly did so in bringing Christ to glory. So then, in spite of the suffering, God is in control. He always accomplishes His purposes. Therefore, we ought not to fret or despair when we encounter trials. We know who is Lord over trials. 

And it came about at that time, that Judah departed from his brothers and visited a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua; and he took her and went in to her (Genesis 38:1-2).

I somewhat commented on this in a previous year, but I want to highlight this event because some of you may miss its significance. Judah chose a Canaanite woman as his wife!

Do you recall what Abraham said to his servant when he sent him to get a wife for Isaac? He made his servant swear by God that he would not get a wife from among the Canaanites:

Please place your hand under my thigh, and I will make you swear by the Lord, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live... Beware that you do not take my son back there! (Genesis 24:2-3,6).

Remember how Isaac and Rebekah responded to Esau's taking Canaanite wives?

When Esau was forty years old he married Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite; and they brought grief to Isaac and Rebekah (Genesis 26:34-35; cf. 36:2; 28:8).

What is more, they forbade Jacob from getting a wife from among the Canaanites:

You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan (Genesis 28:2).

And we know that when Israel was finally given the land of Canaan in keeping with God's covenant promise, God's chief command was that they exterminate them and be careful never to intermarry with them. There was no restrictions on their marrying Egyptians, Moabites, Ammonites, what have you, but not the people living in the land of Canaan. Even before God issued this command the patriarchs of Israel understood that this was forbidden, from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob.

However, Judah violates this understood restriction. As a result, at least the first two of his sons are killed by the LORD. Now, the text says that they were killed because Er was "evil in the sight of the LORD" and Onan committed an evil deed that was "displeasing in the sight of the LORD" (Genesis 38:7,10); however, there were others that perpetrated much worse deeds, but God did not take their lives. Now, this is only conjecture, but perhaps beyond the evil deeds, God was dispeased with these sons because they were the offspring of a Canaanite woman.

You know the rest of the story. Judah ends up having children by his daughter-in-law Tamar, presumably a Hebrew woman. Though this was incestuous, perhaps the union with the Canannite woman was a greater sin in the eyes of the LORD.

Consider how this story fits into Moses' overall narrative given to the children of Israel about to enter the Promised Land of Canaan. They were the immediate audience for the books Genesis through Deuteronomy. This account of Judah and Tamar would have supplied a vivid example of God's displeasure over intermarriage with Canaanites.

Now his master saw that the LORD was with him and how the LORD caused all that he did to prosper in his hand (Genesis 39:3).

I find this amazing. How does this Egyptian officer know anything about the LORD? Later on Pharaoh's wife recognized that Joseph was a Hebrew (Genesis 39:17). Now, the Ishmaelites, who consequently were "brothers" to Joseph by a common great-grandfather Abraham, sold Joseph to the Egyptian. They may have told the officer and his wife that Joseph was a Hebrew. Along the way, perhaps even by Joseph's own testimony (Genesis 39:9), they may have learned that he worshipped the LORD as God. 

I bring this to your attention because while Abraham was given the covenant in Genesis 12:1-3 to be a blessing to the world, apart from the testimony of personal faithfulness to the LORD, there is little indication of active preaching or evangelizing by these early partriarchs. In other words, the primary way that God would bring the knowledge of God to the world throughout the Old Testament would be through His dealings with His own people Israel. 

Now, I bring this up to contrast the primary means by which God chose to make Himself known to the world in the New Testament, which is through active preaching, teaching and evangelism. 

You cannot be a student of the Old and New Testament without seeing this distinction, namely, that at least according to the biblical record, God chose to reveal Himself in different ways at different times. 

And you may say, "Okay. So what?!" 

This is the "so what." Many believe that we must evangelize or else people will not come to know Jesus as their Savior. Nothing in the New Testament supports this. And I think I have clearly shown that the one passage, namely Romans 10:14-15, that suggests this, has been completely misconstrued (see my comments on reading on Romans 8-10). I think this is a wrong way to think. God made Himself known to the extent He wanted to be known even apart from active evangelism in the Old Testament. 

The reason we actively evangelize and preach and teach God's Word to the world since the New Testament is because we are commanded to do so in the New Testament. There was no such command in the Old Testament. Their witness was primarily to draw attention to themselves as the world looked on, yet God was still made known through this. On the other hand, our witness since the New Testament has been primarily to bring attention to God by going out into the world.

Let me reiterate, we don't witness, preach and teach because these are essential to people's savation. As Paul wrote, "So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow" (1 Corinthians 3:17). And as John the Baptist told the Jews, who were so caught up in their biological connection to Abraham:

"And do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham" (Matthew 3:9).

Just as the Jews misunderstood the Scriptures in thinking that God could only bless through their identity connected with Abraham, it would be a mistake for Christians to think that God could only save through our preaching and teaching the Gospel. God is the one who saves, and He can save in any which way and with whom He desires at any time. Let us not think so highly of ourselves such that we believe that God needs me to save others, or that God needs my witness for others to be saved. Our witness is not a matter of God's need but rather of our privilege. God has allowed us to be co-laborers with Him through our witness. And we witness not for necessity - as if people would die without the LORD because of our failure to witness, as some preach - but for obedience - that those whom God has chosen for salvation might also come through our witness to the Gospel. 

Some may think that this is just a matter of semantics and that the end is just the same. People are saved. That may be so in part; however, if you stop to think about it, understanding the means, understanding the "why" of our witness, and having a clear view of God's preeminent significance and our insignificance in this matter of salvation, will ensure that we have a proper view of God, of ourselves, the nature of saving faith, and the reason for our witness.

Genesis 39:2-4 illustrate how someone who faithfully follows God can appear to others. We have heard how being a Christian can cause us to stand out like a black sheep. However, Joseph stood out in a good way. To the unbeliever he appeared to be good luck or someone to have in your corner. Although over might say this is a self-serving purpose as in Joseph's case it was for much greater purposes.

Thinking about being a fly on the wall & watching Joseph, I wondered how I would have seen Joseph. Would I want to be around a guy like that? I hope so. It made me think about whether I was anything like Joseph in that respect. Do people want to be around me because of how I live my life or just what I can do for them? In the end one's testimony lies in the eyes of those who see our actions & hear our words. We are all here for a reason. Why not try & make an impact like Joseph.

One of our members asked, "Why is this disturbing story of Judah and Tamar included in the Genesis account?" Here is my response:

The story of Judah and Tamar is a fascinating interlude in the Genesis narrative that would otherwise move naturally from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob to Joseph. Originally, I thought that this story was included to show how God was sovereignly preserving the Messianic line by keeping the bloodline pure; however, then I remembered that even Rahab, the Cananite harlot, and Ruth, the Moabitess were part of Jesus' line.

As I read this passage again, another thought comes to mind. This entire history from Genesis to Deuteronomy was written by Moses for the immediate guidance to the generation of Israel about to possess the Promised Land, the Land of Canaan. God's strict warning to Israel was that they completely destroy the inhabitants of this land and never intermarry with them. The reason given was that such intermarriage would corrupt Israel, causing them to follow after idols (cf. Deut 7:1-5). We saw this kind of corruption of the godly line in Genesis 6, after the men of the godly line of Seth married the women of the ungodly line of Cain. And in that day God was moved to destroy the whole world. Again, Abraham made his servant swear not to get Isaac, his son, a wife from among the people of Canaan. Jacob too was displeased when Esau took Canaanite wives and even sent Jacob away to find a wife among their Hebrew relatives. While the Mosaic Law was not yet revealed, there may have been some pre-Law understanding of God's will regarding intermarriage with the inhabitants of Canaan.

Yet, here we see Judah taking a Canaanite wife. Before she died, she bore him three sons, and two of them died because of their wickedness.  Tamar is not given to Judah's last and only son Shelah because Judah is afraid that Shelah may perish as well. This is in violation of the Levirate law, which required the nearest living relative to bear offspring for his dead relative. Tamar understood this and even posed as a prostitute to force even Judah, her father-in-law, to fulfill this duty. In so doing, Judah gains two more children, through one of whom would come King David and eventually Jesus the Messiah.

Could Moses have included this detailed description to once again highlight the negative consequences of intermarriage and more generally of disobedience to God? By Moses' day Judah was already recognized as the chief and largest among the twelve tribes of Israel, and how poignant an example it would be to show how that chief tribe may have ceased to exist save for God's grace in preserving the line even through the deception and prostitution of Tamar. If Judah would have obeyed God, such an ignoble heritage may have been avoided. Even in the generation past, if Isaac would have obeyed God's decree rather than favoring his firstborn son Esau over God's chosen Jacob, the deceptions of Jacob and Rebekah may too have been unnecessary. Moses' assessment of Israel in his day was that "they had been rebellious against the LORD from the day that he knew them" (cf. Deuteronomy 9:24). The seeds of this rebellion could have been sown through some of the actions of their forefathers.

Another question was asked, "Why was such a detailed account given of the birth of Perez and Zerah?" Here's my response...

Isn't it interesting that throughout the genealogy of Abraham, there is such conflict among brothers: Isaac with Ishmael, Jacob with Esau, Joseph with his brothers, and here also in the birth of Perez and Zerah. Remember, in the birth story of Jacob and Esau, the younger Jacob was holding onto the feet of his older brother Esau, and Rebekah was told that the older would serve the younger. So also, even though Zerah came out first (had a scarlet thread tied on his wrist to verify it), Perez ("breach") becomes the heir. All these events seem to reveal that God can sovereignly break into human events to ensure His will is accomplished. He is God. He is not subject to human traditions and affairs. And none can thwart His plans. As we read in Isaiah 14:27,