Last week, we began studying Genesis 37 and the life of Joseph and his family. We looked at Joseph’s coat of many colors, and how his brothers were jealous and envious of him and hated him, because their father loved Joseph more than them. We learned that his brothers hated him so much that they threw him into a pit and sold him to Ishmeelite traders, who then, in turn, sold Joseph into Egypt where he wound up in Potiphar’s house. We looked at all of this in Genesis 37, then we moved directly into Genesis 39. So, in Genesis 39, we find the story of Joseph picked up again, and we find Joseph in Potiphar’s house as a slave.
In picking up this story in Genesis 39, we skipped over Genesis 38. This is because the historical account of Joseph’s life starts in Genesis 37, is picked up again in Genesis 39, and skips right over Genesis 38. Genesis 38 seems like an interlude; it does not seem to relate to the historical account of Joseph in any way.
Genesis 38 begins by discussing Judah and Judah’s sons. Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. Then, Genesis 38 gets into a very unusual story—and let us remember that all of this is absolutely true—where Er was wicked before the Lord and the Lord slew him. Then Onan, his brother, went in unto Tamar, who had been Er’s wife, because he was to raise up seed to his brother. He did not, however; so the Lord slew Onan also. Judah had only one son left at this time, Shelah. Shelah must have been much younger, because Judah told Tamar to go to her father’s house and wait for Shelah to be grown, at which time he would be given to her. Shelah would then become Tamar’s husband, and he would try to raise up seed. However, in Genesis 38:11, we read:
Then said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father's house, till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren did. And Tamar went and dwelt in her father's house.
This reveals to us what Judah’s real plan was. He had no intention of giving Shelah to Tamar to be her husband so that Shelah could raise up seed. There was a law that the sons of Jacob apparently lived by that stated that when a son died, the next son would raise up seed to the dead son; however, Judah is just looking to delay and avoid this law.
We do not really know how old Shelah was. He could have been 15 or 16, or he could have even been older than that. Maybe he was a young man of 18 or 20; we really do not know. However, Judah wants time for Shelah to mature. So the waiting begins, and we read in verses 12-14:
And in process of time the daughter of Shuah Judah's wife died; and Judah was comforted, and went up unto his sheepshearers to Timnath, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold thy father in law goeth up to Timnath to shear his sheep. And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife.
Judah’s plan worked. He had no intention of giving Shelah to Tamar, because his other two sons had died while they were married to her. All that we know about their deaths is that the Lord slew them. We do not know how the Lord slew them—they could have had heart attacks, or they could have died from natural causes. Whenever anyone dies, who is it that really takes their life? It is God Himself. Whenever anyone dies in this world, it is God’s plan to take that person’s life. So, it was the Lord who had taken Judah’s sons.
Judah does not want his last son, Shelah, to die also. He is fearful of having this happen, so he has decided that he is not going to give him to Tamar. Judah believes that there is something strange going on, something that he does not understand. His sons just keep dying; he knows that much. He had three sons. Now, he only has one, and the other two were married to this woman, Tamar. Therefore, he is going to keep Shelah as far away from her as possible.
Yet, Tamar also develops a plan where she is going to have seed raised up to her dead husband. She is going to have justice done, and that is by pretending to be a harlot—putting on the clothing that would indicate that she is a harlot, and going to the place where she knew Judah would be. She will not have seed by Shelah, but her plan is to have the seed by Judah himself. She goes there and feigns herself to be a harlot, and Judah thinks that she is.
We need to keep in mind the character of Judah. Judah was one of the brothers that we read about in Genesis 37 that had murder in his heart. He wanted to kill Joseph, and he was a willing participant in finally selling Joseph into Egypt. Therefore, we can determine that Judah was not a highly moral person, at all. He was someone who was capable of murder, and we find that he was also capable of fornication as we see him planning on going in unto this harlot. We find that he does go in unto this harlot (who happened to be Tamar, his own daughter-in-law, but he was not aware of that). We read about a deal that Judah made with this harlot in verses 15-18:
When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him.
We can see that a deal was made between Judah and Tamar where a kid from the flock would be sent to her; but until the kid from the flock could be sent, Judah left a pledge, his signet. A signet was something that could seal letters. It would have the sign of the individual who sealed the letter. For example, this signet would indicate that the letter came from the house of Judah, or that a certain signature indicated that it was Judah’s signature, in a sense. Judah also left bracelets and a staff—things that would identify him as the one who had gone in unto her.
So, Tamar takes this pledge. Judah later has his friend, the Adullamite, go back with the kid from the flock to search for that harlot in the city, but he cannot find her. We read in verse 21:
Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place.
There was no one there who matched the description of the harlot. Then we read in verse 22:
And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place.
This is how it stands until three months later, when Tamar, who conceived at that time by Judah, began to show that she was with child. It says in verse 24:
And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.
It was going to be the death penalty for Tamar. She was going to be burned. She was going to be killed for this transgression of harlotry. Being with child by whoredom was a wicked thing, and Judah had a couple of laws to back up his decision to have her burned alive. Certainly, adultery was a sin. Remember that in the New Testament, the Pharisees wanted to stone a woman for the sin of adultery (John 8:3-5). If it had not been for Jesus saying, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her,” they would have stoned her to death (John 8:7). This kind of sin would have carried grave consequences in Judah’s day.
As Genesis 38 progresses, however, we read that Tamar produces the pledge. Just at the point where she is about to be burned, just at that moment, she pulls out the pledge that Judah had given to her—his signet, the staff, and the bracelets. We read in verse 25:
When she was brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff.
In verse 26, Judah acknowledges them, and says:
…She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
This information is letting us know that Tamar acted righteously. She acted righteously and justly in doing this, which is very unusual by itself. According to the statement that Judah made, “She hath been more righteous than I.” Judah was the one who did not do the right thing. This was not insofar as going in unto the harlot—that is not what he was referring to when he said, “She hath been more righteous than I”—but, in that he did not give Shelah, his other son, to be her husband to raise up seed. This is what Judah was referring to.
This is the historical setting of Genesis 38, and it is a very unusual story. It seems like it is out of place, so we think, as it is right in the middle of this account of Joseph. God just places it right in the middle. But in doing so, God is certainly highlighting this story. He wants us to take a closer look at it—but, of course, God wants us to take a close look at everything in the Bible. So, we will examine this further and see what we can learn.
The first thing that we need to do is to go back to verse six in Genesis 38. We read in Genesis 38:6-7:
And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar. And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
The name Er is derived from Hebrew words that mean “naked” or “chaff.” He was like the chaff; his name means that. In slaying Er, God sets up this historical situation where He is going to teach us about raising up seed unto the brother. We continue in verse 8, which says:
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
There is a Law in the book of Deuteronomy, in Deuteronomy 25, that was given to Moses about 400-450 years after the time of this historical situation of Judah and his sons and Tamar, because the Law was given to Moses as they were coming out of Egypt, which would have been many hundreds of years later. We are in the timeline of history in Genesis where they have not yet gone into Egypt, and we know that they would be in Egypt for 430 years. Therefore, the Law that we are going to read in Deuteronomy is a later Law that God gave; but we can see, as they lived their lives, that they were living in accordance to this Law, even though God would not yet officially write it down until He gave it to Moses. The Word of God was known; the Law of God was known. This is another indicator to us that the people of that day did have laws that they lived by that were in accord with the Law of God. Let us read Deuteronomy 25:5, which says:
If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.
God very clearly lays out the Law. This is the Law: if there are two or more brothers and one of them is married, and the other brother, or brothers, are not married, and something happens to the married son, the next son in line is to go in unto that wife and raise up seed unto the dead brother. I think this would only be the case if they had not yet had children.
Tamar had not yet had a child by Er, so seed, or a son, needed to be raised up. Or, maybe they could have had a daughter, but no son, and they needed to carry on the line of that particular individual. Therefore, God establishes this Law. It would also be a Law that would give great security to people who were marrying into families, given that at that time, if you became a widow without a son, you would become very desolate. This Law would have provided protection for the woman who was entering into a marriage, whereby she could have another son come and marry her if something were to happen to her husband, and she could raise up a son and not be a widow for very long at all.
If you remember, this is the Law that the Sadducees in the New Testament made reference to when they came to Jesus. The Sadducees wanted to prove that there was no resurrection. In three of the Gospel accounts, the Sadducees came to Jesus and gave an account of a woman who had an husband that had seven brothers who all died without children (Matthew 22:23-28; Mark 12:18-23; Luke 20:27-33). Let us read this in Mark 12:18-23:
Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed. And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise. And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also. In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife.
In verse 19, The Sadducees were referring back to the Law that was given in Deuteronomy 25. The Sadducees thought that they had come across something that would prove that there was no resurrection. Obviously, all of these sons were the husband of this one woman; therefore, if there were a resurrection, she would have to be the wife of all of them, which would break the Law of God. Since this would be contrary to the Law of God, they thought this proved that there was no resurrection. It was not a very well thought out attempt to prove that there was no resurrection, but this is what the men of that day, these Sadducees, came up with. Christ points this out to them in verses 24-25, where we read:
And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
This is how Christ answers them. He explains to them the situation that will take place once believers enter into Heaven. It will have nothing whatsoever to do with who was married to whom. The family relationships that we have in this world, in this life, will not be carried over into the next world, into the eternal Kingdom of God. So, we know that they had no understanding at all of these issues. They were referring to that particular Law that we read about in Deuteronomy 25, where if the husband died, the brother was to go unto the wife and perform the duty of the husband’s brother unto her. Let us look at the reason for this in Deuteronomy 25:6:
And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
This is the reason that God has given for the seed to be raised up for the brother who has died, “that his name be not put out of Israel.” We will take a look at the spiritual application of this a little later.
Let us return to Genesis 38:9-10. We read there:
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.
Onan knew the Law. The Law was for Onan to go in and raise up seed unto his brother, whereby that seed would not be considered Onan’s son, but his brother’s son. This would raise up the name of his brother, and Onan did not like this idea at all. He wanted his own children. He wanted his children to bear his name. This was an act of pride; he was being selfish and wanted things to be done his way rather than God’s way. He did not like God’s idea in the matter of raising up seed to the brother. He did marry Tamar and he did go in unto her, but he spilled his seed on the ground.
By the way, I think that we can learn a moral lesson from this. God is very displeased with Onan to the point that He slays him; He kills him. We could apply this to our modern day, where many practice birth control. Birth control is available to a great extent in our day. The reason for God slaying Onan has other implications involved with raising up seed to his brother; however, this does hinge on the fact that Onan tried to prevent conception. He tried to prevent Tamar from conceiving and having a child, by spilling the seed.
We can see that God is very displeased with this. Believers realize that once we enter into a marriage and once we become married to a wife, God has given us the Law to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 9:1). As such, believers never want to do anything to prevent childbirth. We would certainly never want to be involved in abortion; most believers recognize this. Believers recognize that God has created the baby in the womb and to abort that baby would be murder. But also, in addition to abortion, we would never want to be involved in any kind of contraceptive or birth control or anything that would prevent the birth of a child.
God has laid out the Law that we are to be fruitful and multiply, and He indicates that when a husband and wife have children, it is a great blessing from God. This is something that God looks upon as being fruitful, as far as humanly speaking is concerned. When a man and a woman try to interfere with that, they are entering into God’s area of control. This is God’s will for His people. He is the One who creates the baby in the womb, and it is not for the husband or the wife to decide. It is not for anyone to decide that they are not going to have any more children, saying “I have two, and that is enough,” or, “I have four, and that is enough.” It is not for a couple, when they first marry and review their finances, to decide that they are not going to be able to afford having children for maybe five years down the line, and because of that decision, use a method of birth control whereby they think that they can prevent conception.
I think, as we look at this passage in Genesis 38, we can get the moral teaching that this type of behavior is contrary to the will of God. It is totally contrary to the Law of God. We are to simply just trust God and leave the matter of childbearing in His hands, completely. If He gives us two children or five children or fifteen children, we are not to worry about how we are going to pay for their educations or clothe them or feed them. God will take care of that. He takes care of that, and we are not to start placing ourselves in the position that is owned by God, by trying to look into the future to determine how certain things will develop and take place. We leave all of this in God’s hands. This is a part of trusting God, and believers will desire to do that. In their marriages, they will leave childbearing completely in God’s control.
Well, Onan spills the seed and God kills him. Then we have the rest of the account where Judah hides his son, Shelah, from Tamar. Judah does not want Shelah to also be slain. We understand this historical situation, even though it is a bit unusual. We also understand some of the moral teaching of this passage. But what is the spiritual meaning? What is the spiritual meaning of this? What does it mean that when a brother dies, the next brother is to raise up seed unto his brother? Where is the Gospel in this account?
Let us go back to Deuteronomy 25:6, and read it once more. We read there:
And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
This language reminds us of the language of Revelation 3:5, which speaks of having one’s name blotted out of the Lamb’s Book of Life—and that is dealing with salvation. The one son dies. Now the next son goes in, and he dies also. This is because they are a picture of mankind, and mankind is spiritually dead. Mankind cannot raise up seed that will be everlasting. Therefore, they need someone to come and be their kinsman redeemer. They need someone to come and to raise up seed unto them, because man cannot do it. Wherever we find this Law, we find that man is not capable of accomplishing or fulfilling or obeying this Law. We see this in Genesis 38, but where else do we see it? Does it sound familiar? What about the book of Ruth?
Let us turn to Ruth 4 where we will read about Boaz, who we already know is a type of Christ. He is seeking to marry Ruth. He is seeking to be the kinsman redeemer. If you remember, Ruth had a husband who died, and Boaz is going to raise up seed unto her; at least, that is his plan. But, there is a nearer kinsman—one who is in a closer relationship to Naomi than Boaz. That is what we find in Ruth 4:1-5:
Then went Boaz up to the gate, and sat him down there: and, behold, the kinsman of whom Boaz spake came by; unto whom he said, Ho, such a one! turn aside, sit down here. And he turned aside, and sat down. And he took ten men of the elders of the city, and said, Sit ye down here. And they sat down. And he said unto the kinsman, Naomi, that is come again out of the country of Moab, selleth a parcel of land, which was our brother Elimelech's: And I thought to advertise thee, saying, Buy it before the inhabitants, and before the elders of my people. If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it: but if thou wilt not redeem it, then tell me, that I may know: for there is none to redeem it beside thee; and I am after thee. And he said, I will redeem it. Then said Boaz, What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance.
Here, we have an exact situation. Boaz must raise up the name of the dead, just as the account in Genesis 38, just as that Law in Deuteronomy 25. We continue in verse 6, which says:
And the kinsman said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance…
Interestingly enough, the word “mar,” here, in this verse, is the same word as the word “spilled” in Genesis 38, where Onan spilled the seed on the ground. This word “mar” is that identical Hebrew word.
We can see that Onan cannot do it. He cannot raise up the seed, or he will mar his own inheritance. Onan could not do it. He was not capable of doing it. He did not want to do it. So, he spilled his seed.
Mankind cannot raise up seed unto life everlasting. He cannot raise up the seed of his dead brother; man is dead in sin. It takes the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Remember, Christ is the Brother of mankind. He entered into the human race. He became man. He became related to mankind; He became mankind’s Brother. So, the Law is really pointing to the Lord Jesus Christ, who is to go into the marriage relationship to raise up seed that will cause the one not to be put out of Israel, that their name not be blotted out.
This is the spiritual picture. Jesus is going to save His people. He is the kinsman redeemer that Boaz is typifying. Therefore, He is the only one that can perform the duty of the brother to the woman. Nobody else can. This man here in Ruth cannot do it. Er and Onan could not do it. No one that we read about in the Bible, outside of Boaz, is capable of doing it, and that is only because Boaz is a type of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Then we go on to read in Ruth 4:7-8:
Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbour: and this was a testimony in Israel. Therefore the kinsman said unto Boaz, Buy it for thee. So he drew off his shoe.
Now this is a strange thing, is it not? He took off his shoe. He took off his shoe to confirm this, and it was a testimony in Israel. This was the manner of that day. But, why was it the manner of that day? Let us go back to Deuteronomy 25:7-10, where we read:
And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders…
Remember, in Ruth 4 this was done before the elders of the people. Boaz made sure that he sat all of the elders down. The passage continues:
…go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother. Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and if he stand to it, and say, I like not to take her; Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house. And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.
We can see how this all fits in, and how God, definitely, in the book of Ruth, is looking at the kinsman redeemer in the matter of Boaz and Ruth—how it is all tying in to this Law in Deuteronomy 25, just as Genesis 38 is. We even have the man taking off his shoe in Ruth 4, even though it seems that this Law was watered down. Remember, the story of Ruth took place a couple of hundred years after the Law was given in Deuteronomy. So, we can see that they were not being completely faithful to this Law, as this man just simply takes off his own shoe but fails to spit in the face of the man that would not build up his brother’s house.
Actually, it is quite fitting. It is a perfect picture of how the church does change the doctrines of the Bible, the Law of God. This was the manner of Israel. To have the woman come and pull off his shoe and spit in his face was a little bit much for the people of that day, so they modified the Law of God just a little bit to have the man himself take off his shoe in the presence of the elders. But really, it was related to the Law that was given in Deuteronomy 25. Why then does he need to take off his shoe?
In Isaiah 20, Isaiah was given a commandment by God to walk barefoot and naked for three years (Isaiah 20 is a small little chapter, with just six verses). This was to be a sign and a testimony that was pointing to spiritual nakedness. Whenever you find nakedness in the Bible, it is pointing to our sin condition. It points to the fact that we have no covering for our sins. In verse 3 of Isaiah 20, God links barefoot with nakedness. Isaiah walked barefoot and naked for three years.
Is that not something? In a little chapter like this, God has His spiritual meaning involved. God actually had His prophet, Isaiah, walk naked and barefoot for three years in order to prove this point. I hope, for Isaiah’s sake, that we do not dismiss this quickly. We should certainly spend time checking out the importance of this. If Isaiah the prophet walked naked and barefoot for three years, it certainly must contain an important truth.
God is letting us know that to be barefoot deals with being naked. They are one and the same. That is why when Moses would come to the mount of God and to the burning bush, he would be told to take off his shoes in order to show his nakedness before God, his spiritual need before God. That is why John the Baptist said of the Lord Jesus Christ, “Whose shoe's latchet, I am not worthy to unloose” (John 1:27). This is because when Christ’s shoe is unloosed, He becomes sin for us. Therefore, John the Baptist is saying that he is not worthy that Christ take his sins upon Him and die the death for him. That is what it means to have your shoe loosed. For your shoe to come off of your foot, spiritually, means that you are a sinner under the wrath of God, under the curse of God.
This was to be emphasized even further by having the woman spit in the face, as the woman would spit into the man’s face who would not raise up seed unto the brother. This would indicate that he was accursed, and that is why man cannot raise up seed. Man has to deal with his own sins. He has to pay the penalty for his own sins.
It takes Christ Himself to be the kinsman redeemer. It takes Him who is the Brother of mankind, through His birth into this world through the Virgin Mary, to go in and to accomplish that which man cannot fulfill.
We will end here and continue learning about Joseph in our next study.