37:1–2 Genesis 37:1 is a transitional verse, connecting the preceding account of Esau and his descendants to the account that follows about Jacob and his sons. It contrasts Jacob with Esau: while Esau lives a settled life on Mount Seir, outside the land, Jacob follows the pattern of his father (and grandfather) as a sojourner within the Land of Promise (cf. 35:27). It also establishes that the events that follow are not a judgment upon Jacob for his failures; at this point he is faithfully fulfilling his calling.

The story proper begins with the toledot formula: “These are the generations [toledot] of Jacob” (37:2). As always the toledot story focuses on the next generation, in this case Joseph and his brothers.495 We have previously been introduced to Reuben, Simeon, and Levi as significant characters in the story, but from here onward all twelve of the brothers will take center stage. This is the tenth and final use of the formula, demonstrating conclusively that the formula begins an episode rather than closing one. The story from here to the end of Genesis is part of a single narrative arc that concludes the story begun in Genesis 1:1 while at the same time preparing for the events that follow in the book of Exodus.

The first brother to be introduced is Joseph (37:2). A character’s first appearance on the biblical stage can be quite revealing, and Joseph seems rather self-absorbed.496 As a seventeen-year-old assisting his brothers Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher—the sons of the maidservants, Bilhah and Zilpah—out in the fields, his role would normally be quite minor. In Hebrew the text says, “He was a boy with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah” (v. 2),497 which is as much a job description as it is a reference to his age.498 He is sent along with his brothers to do all the menial and unimportant jobs. Yet Joseph brings a bad report to his father (v. 2), which certainly would not endear his brothers to him.

In English a “bad report” may be true or false; in Hebrew, however, this particular phrase (dibbatam raʿah) has the connotations of a false or malicious report.499 During the wilderness wanderings the ten spies bring the same kind of “bad report” back to the people of Israel concerning the land of Canaan, telling them it is not worth fighting for (Num. 13:32). In Proverbs 10:18 the word dibbah is translated “slander.” This suggests that Joseph’s report to his father is a fabricated, or at least exaggerated, account of their misdeeds. Whether the bad report is justified or unjustified—whether Joseph is a righteous whistleblower or a self-righteous pharisee—it inevitably strains relations between them, with Joseph elevating himself into a position of authority over them (as merely the sons of maidservants?).

37:3–4 Joseph’s bad report to his father against his brothers is compounded by his father’s favoritism: Jacob loves him “more than any other of his sons” (Gen. 37:3). Joseph is not the only “son of his old age” (v. 3); Benjamin was actually born after him. However, Joseph is also the firstborn son of Jacob’s favored wife, Rachel. By calling Joseph “the son of his old age” (Hb. lizqunav) the narrator links Joseph with Isaac, the child that Sarah bore to Abraham in his old age; the same word is used of Isaac in Genesis 21:2. It was when Joseph was born that Jacob’s thoughts turned to the journey back to the Promised Land (30:25), and, when it seemed that Esau and his men might threaten the safety of the whole family, Jacob had carefully placed Rachel and Joseph at the rear of the caravan, where their prospects of escape would have been the greatest (33:2).

It is striking that the text says that “Israel loved Joseph more than any other of his sons” (37:3). The alternation between Jacob and Israel is not a random choice or the result of the use of different sources; rather it often reflects Jacob’s self-awareness. When he is at his best, he is Israel; when he is regressing, he is Jacob.500 Here it seems that the name Israel acts as a clue to Jacob’s thinking: his favoritism toward Joseph is not merely a personal preference for the child who is most amenable or most like him, as was Isaac’s preference for Esau (27:4). Rather, Jacob’s preference for Joseph is rooted in his assumption that Joseph must be the child of the promise, the one who will carry on the line of the Messiah, the promised seed of the woman of Genesis 3:15. Surely God will not choose a child from unloved Leah, still less from one of the maidservants, to bear this blessing? This is perhaps why it is as Israel that he loves Joseph the best. But of course Jacob is mistaken: the God who chose him, the younger brother, as bearer of the blessing is quite capable of choosing one of the children of unloved Leah for that privilege.

That favoritism for Joseph is embodied in the richly ornamented coat (37:3; ketonet) that his father bestows upon him. It is not necessarily a “robe of many colors,” a rendering based on the LXX; the exact meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain. However, in the only other place where this phrase occurs in the Bible it refers to a royal garment worn by a princess, David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18). There the English translations, once again following the LXX, render it as a “long robe with sleeves.” Since the Hebrew pas can mean the palms of the hand or the soles of the feet, it seems that the most plausible rendering is as a “robe that reaches to the extremities of the arms and legs.”501

Whatever precise kind of robe it is, it is certainly not the kind of clothing that a person would wear to engage in manual labor. It striking that this robe is mentioned after Joseph brings the bad report to his father about his brothers (Gen. 37:2). There seems to be a sequence of events here: Joseph goes to serve and work under his brothers while they are shepherding; he brings home a bad report about them; his father rewards him with a splendid coat. The next time the brothers go out shepherding, later in the chapter, Joseph is no longer with them. Instead he is relaxing at home in his fancy coat, while his brothers do the dirty work of shepherding. In light of this it is not surprising that Joseph’s clothing will have an important role to play throughout the narrative.502

Joseph’s brothers hate him because of his father’s preferential treatment toward him (v. 4). The Hebrew text says “They could not say shalom to him”—that is, they cannot even give him the most basic greeting (shalom leka; v. 4).503 If this reflects their attitude toward Joseph before he receives his dreams, it is not surprising that after they hear his dreams they hate him all the more (v. 8). In fact, the text notes their rising hatred for Joseph three times (vv. 4, 5, 8). This is ominous, particularly given the bloodthirsty history of Simeon and Levi.

37:5–11 Joseph’s place in the divine plan appears cemented when he receives two dreams that seem to affirm his status as God’s favorite as well as Jacob’s. Doubling is a feature of the Joseph narrative: alongside his two dreams, the two dreams of the Egyptian officials (40:5), and the two dreams of Pharaoh (41:1–8), Joseph experiences two confinements, in a pit and in an Egyptian prison (37:24; 39:20); the brothers make two journeys down to Egypt (42:3; 43:15); and so on.504 In the ancient world doubled dreams had the reputation of being certain to come true (41:32). The prominence of dreams also marks a shift from the earlier patriarchal narratives; in those accounts God’s presence was more immediate and direct, through appearances and explicit actions, while in the Joseph account God is still present and active but less overt in his actions.505

Joseph’s first dream involved an agricultural setting: “In the field.”506 There, while Joseph and his brothers are binding sheaves as part of the harvesting process, Joseph’s sheaf stands upright and the sheaves of his brothers gather round and bow down to his sheaf (37:7).507 Even though Jacob and his family are primarily pastoralists, they would be involved in planting and harvesting as well (cf. 26:12);508 the dream also foreshadows Pharaoh’s second dream and Joseph’s control over the granaries of Egypt (cf. 41:22–23). Some divinely inspired dreams have a complexity that requires expert interpretation, as in the dreams given to Pharaoh and his officials, but this dream is sufficiently transparent that the brothers instantly recognize its import: it is a claim of Joseph’s supremacy over all his brothers (37:8). The brothers resent this claim to reign and rule over them, as well as the way in which he presents it to them; it is not merely for the dreams that the brothers hate him but for “his words” as well (v. 8).509

If it is unwise for Joseph to report his first dream to his brothers in this manner, the second dream underscores the point. Joseph is not responsible for receiving the dream, to be sure, but he chooses to report it in a similar fashion, punctuated with two more “Beholds” (hinneh) for emphasis (v. 9). This dream is even more affirmative of Joseph—Alter describes it as “teetering on the brink of blasphemy.”510 Now it is not merely sheaves of wheat that are bowing down to Joseph but the sun, the moon, and eleven stars (v. 9). In context these heavenly bodies represent Jacob’s parents and his brothers,511 but in the ancient world, where the stars were regarded as semidivine, the dream would be loaded with extra freight. In the same way that in Hebrew parallelism the second phrase does not merely repeat the first but often carries a force of “and what is more,” so too here the second dream repeats and heightens the first one. Even Jacob rebukes Joseph for this dream, though, unlike Joseph’s brothers, who are merely jealous, Jacob “kept the saying in mind” (v. 11). It likely further seals Jacob’s conviction that Joseph is indeed the son of promise, chosen by God.

In giving Joseph these dreams God himself is bringing this family conflict to a head, in some ways contributing to the evil events that follow—which of course he intends for good (50:20). God is not to blame for the sinful reaction of Joseph’s brothers, but he sovereignly directs all Joseph’s steps through a difficult pathway to accomplish his designs in Joseph’s heart, as well as in the hearts of his brothers. In the days that lie ahead Joseph will have a mixed evaluation of these dreams. On the one hand they are the occasioning incident of so much of his suffering, but on the other hand his faith in the promises of God that they represent keeps his hope alive in the most difficult of circumstances.