When the nine brothers prepared to leave Egypt, Joseph graciously provided food for their journey. It wasn’t easy for them to leave Simeon behind, but they were sure they’d return for more grain and be able to bring Benjamin with them. It seemed that the clouds were starting to lift, but they didn’t realize the tensions that were yet to come in their family in the days ahead.
Fear and perplexity (vv. 25–35). At Joseph’s command, his steward replaced the brothers’ money in their sacks, but later the steward said he had received their silver and he gave credit to the Lord (43:23). Either the steward was lying, which is doubtful, or Joseph paid for the grain himself so that he could care for his father and the relatives he hadn’t seen in over twenty years. The money in the sacks was also part of his plan to test his brothers and prepare them for their next trip to Egypt.
But there are some problems relating to the discovery of the money. When one brother found the silver in his sack (42:27–28), all the men must have searched through their sacks and found the rest of the silver. At least that’s the story they told Joseph’s steward when they arrived in Egypt on their second visit (43:21). But if that’s what happened, why did the brothers act surprised and frightened when they opened their sacks on arriving home? (42:35)
To say that their account to the steward was merely a “condensed report” of what had happened is to accuse them of having very poor memories. They specifically stated that it was at “the lodging place” (“the inn,” kjv), and not at home, that they discovered the money in the sacks. We assume that this statement is correct because they had no reason to lie to Joseph’s steward, the one man whose help they desperately needed. And why lie when they were returning all the money?
What are the possible solutions? Perhaps the steward put some of the money in the provision sacks and some in the grain sacks. The money in the provision sacks was found when they camped for the night, but the rest of the money wasn’t discovered until they emptied the other sacks at home. But the writer clearly stated that each man found all his money at the first stopping place (43:21; “the exact weight,” niv), which means that the nine brothers had done a quick search immediately and found all the silver.
If that’s true, then perhaps the brothers replaced the money in the sacks with the intention of deceiving their father by acting surprised when the money was discovered at home. But 42: is written as though their surprise and fear were genuine responses to finding the money. And why deceive their father about the money? They hadn’t stolen it, and they could take it back on their next trip. Anyway, Jacob didn’t seemed worried about it; his only comment was “Perhaps it was a mistake” (43:12).
Whatever the explanation, the experience put fear and perplexity into the hearts of the brothers. “What is this that God has done to us?” they asked (42: nkjv). They knew that they were innocent concerning the money, but could they convince the Egyptians? Their lives could be in danger (43:18).
Their report to their father only made the old man feel worse, especially when he heard the news about Simeon’s confinement and the future involvement of Benjamin. The whole episode should have led Jacob and his sons to some heart-searching and confessing of sin, but apparently it didn’t. It would have been a good time for them to seek the Lord and pray for His help and direction. However, in spite of their failures, God was still at work and His purposes would be fulfilled.
Despair (vv. 36–38). It was all too much for Jacob. “It is always me that you bereave,” he cried (v. 36), thus hinting that he suspected his sons were behind Joseph’s mysterious disappearance. “All these things are against me!” was a valid statement from a human point of view, but from God’s perspective, everything that was happening was working for Jacob’s good and not for his harm (Rom. 8:28).
It’s sad to see Jacob again expressing his special love for Joseph and Benjamin, something that must have hurt the other sons. Hadn’t the ten boys made the difficult trip to Egypt to help preserve the family? Was it their fault that the Egyptian officer asked too many personal questions, called them spies, and took Simeon as hostage? Were they responsible for the return of the money? Jacob could have been more understanding, but he was still grieving the loss of Joseph (Gen. 37:35); and the loss of Simeon and the possible loss of Benjamin were more than he could bear.
Considering that Reuben was out of favor with his father (35:22), Reuben should have kept quiet, but perhaps he felt obligated to act like a leader since he was Jacob’s firstborn son. His suggestion was ridiculous. What right did he have to offer his sons’ lives as compensation for the loss of Benjamin? Did he discuss this idea with his wife and sons? Furthermore, how would the death of two innocent boys offset the loss of one of Jacob’s two favorite sons? Was Reuben offering to sacrifice one son for Joseph and one for Benjamin? How would this make matters better in the home?
Jacob would have nothing to do with Reuben’s suggestion or with any suggestion that threatened Benjamin’s safety. The statement “he is left alone” (42:38) means “Benjamin alone is left of Rachel’s two sons.” It was another selfish statement from Jacob that made the other sons feel they were second-class members of the family. Benjamin must be protected even if the whole family starves! A crisis doesn’t make a man; it shows what a man is made of. Jacob was revealing his true affections, just as he had done when he had met Esau (33:2).
Delay (43:1–10). Week by week, the family watched their food supply diminish, but knowing their father’s feelings, none of the sons dared to bring up the subject of a second trip to Egypt. The tension in the home must have been unbearable, especially for Benjamin. While Jacob was protecting his preferred son, who was voicing concern for Simeon in Egypt and his family in Canaan? Unwilling to face reality, Jacob was living in a private dream world and making others suffer.
When the supplies were gone, Jacob told his sons to go “buy a little food”; and that was the opportunity for Judah to step forward and take command of a delicate situation. Jacob’s blindness to his unhealthy relationship with Benjamin and his selfish nurturing of grief over Joseph (37:35), plus his hidden suspicions about his sons, all combined to make him a man difficult to deal with.
Judah reminded his father that they couldn’t return to Egypt without taking Benjamin along. Jacob tried to put the blame on the boys for even mentioning their youngest brother, again trying to make them feel guilty because of his sorrows. “Why did you bring this trouble on me?” (43:6)
Judah wisely sidestepped debating with his father concerning issues that had come up before about matters that couldn’t be changed. Judah offered to become surety for Benjamin to guarantee his safe return home. This generous offer indicates that Judah had experienced a change of heart since the sale of Joseph (37:26–27). Perhaps his experience with Tamar had taught him some lessons (chap. 38). Judah made it clear that this was a matter of life and death (43:8, 10) and even reminded Jacob of his own words (42:2).
Unbelief (vv. 11–15). There’s a difference between surrendering to God’s loving providence and bowing to blind fate, and Jacob’s statements show where he stood. “If it must be so. … If I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved” (vv. 11, 14). This kind of response certainly doesn’t sound like the Jacob of Bethel who claimed the promises of God and had angels caring for him! Nor is it the Jacob who led his family back to Bethel for a new beginning with the Lord. His feelings of grief and despair had almost extinguished his faith.
Always the controller, Jacob told his sons exactly what to do. Of course, there had to be a present for the Egyptian ruler who could release Simeon (see 32:13ff.); and they had to take twice the amount of money so they could return the money they found in their sacks as well as purchase more food. It’s interesting that Jacob said, “Take your brother also” (43:13) and not “Take also my son.” Was he emphasizing their personal responsibility to take care of their own flesh and blood?
He sent them off with his blessing (v. 14), asking that El Shaddai (God Almighty, the All-Sufficient One) change the heart of “the man” so he would show mercy by releasing Simeon and not hurting Benjamin. But his final statement didn’t give evidence of much faith or hope: “If I be bereaved of my children [Joseph, Benjamin, and Simeon], I am bereaved.” Perhaps he wanted those pathetic words to echo in his sons’ minds as they journeyed to Egypt.