39:1–6a Genesis 39:1 resumes where chapter 37 left off, recounting from the opposite perspective the transaction whereby Joseph ends up with Potiphar. In Genesis 37:36 Joseph was sold by the Midianites to Potiphar; here he is bought by Potiphar from the Ishmaelites.549 This shift naturally focuses our attention on Potiphar, who, along with his wife, is the main character in this chapter. He is once again described as “an officer [saris] of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard” (39:1); we noted earlier the ambiguity of the first descriptor, which routinely (though not always) in the OT refers to eunuchs (cf. comment on 37:29–36). The Egyptian identity of Joseph’s master is mentioned three times for emphasis (39:1, 2, 3): Joseph’s God-given prosperity while in Egyptian captivity forms a paradigm for the later prosperity of the Israelites in their own Egyptian captivity (anticipated in the Lord’s words to Abraham in 15:13).550 It is also stressed (twice) that Joseph has been “brought down” (causative form of yarad) to Egypt, heightening the comparison and contrast with Judah, who “went down” (simple form of yarad) to live among the Canaanites of his own volition (38:1).

The divine name, Yahweh, is not used elsewhere in the Joseph narrative; however, it occurs no fewer than six times in this chapter, three at the beginning and three at the end (Gen. 39:2, 3, 5, 21, 23 [2x]).551 Joseph’s blessing comes not from some generic deity (ʾelohim) but from the personal presence of Israel’s deity, which results in blessing for him and all those who trust in him. “The Lord was with Joseph,” and so he prospers; these themes are underscored repeatedly in this chapter as cause and effect. Despite the difficulty of Joseph’s situation, he advances rapidly in positions of responsibility and trust because the Lord gives him favor in the eyes of his owner (v. 4).

The first mark of this prosperity is Joseph’s working in Potiphar’s house with the higher class of slaves rather than out in the fields (v. 2). Of course, this location in the house will later put him in the pathway of Potiphar’s wife, with significant consequences. In any case his master notices the success of everything placed under his care and promotes him first to be his personal assistant (ESV: “attended him”) and then to be overseer over the whole house and estate (v. 4). The narrator chooses an unusual idiom in verse 6 to describe the transfer of power from Potiphar to Joseph; instead of the normal “he gave [natan] into the hand of Joseph” the narrative uses the verb ʿazab (“he left” [or “abandoned”]). This prepares for the next scene, in which Joseph in turn “abandons” his garment in the hand of Potiphar’s wife (cf. vv. 12, 13, 15).552 Potiphar’s only concern is “the food he ate” (v. 6)—whether literally or as an idiom for needing to think only of his personal interests.

39:6b–10 Thus far the narrative might sound like a moralistic wisdom tale: those who serve God will prosper, along with everyone around them. However, this trajectory is rudely interrupted by Potiphar’s wife. Joseph is “handsome in form and appearance” (v. 6), like his mother, Rachel, the only other person in Scripture to be given this double accolade. Potiphar’s wife “cast her eyes on Joseph,” an idiom of desire familiar from other ancient Near Eastern literature.553 There is no seduction or romance in her approach to him. Rather, she issues him a simple command as his superior, as she might command him to move a piece of furniture: “Lie with me” (v. 7).

It would have been easy for Joseph to justify submitting to her demands. Promiscuity was a given in most slave societies, and Joseph has seen so much taken from him. Why should he not take a little pleasure when it is offered? Ingratiating himself with his master’s wife might lead to all sorts of little privileges, while turning her down might have unforeseen consequences. However, Joseph categorically refuses her. As the narrator has highlighted by repeatedly calling her “his master’s wife,” she does not belong to him—indeed, she is the only one of his master’s belongings that he keeps for himself (v. 9). To sleep with her would be a sin against his master and, more importantly, a sin against God (v. 9). Indeed, it would be “great wickedness” (Hb. haraʿah haggedolah) to do such a thing; the word “wickedness” relates this temptation to the sins of Er and Onan in the previous chapter, which led to their deaths (38:7, 10), while also relating to the sins of the prefall generation in Genesis 6:5.

Potiphar’s wife is far from deterred by Joseph’s refusal, however. On the contrary, she continues to harass him on a daily basis “as she was speaking [kedabberah] with him” (39:10), which suggests a constant flow of speech. Meanwhile, his only recourse is to refuse to listen to her or to put himself in any kind of potentially compromising position (v. 10). To “lie beside her” or “to be with her” might not necessarily require Joseph to engage in sexual activity, but under the circumstances any close contact would be dangerous, and the latter phrase could be used as a euphemism for sex (cf. 2 Sam. 13:20). Joseph’s steadfast refusal under constant temptation contrasts sharply with Judah’s sexual sin with Tamar after simply seeing her sitting veiled beside the road on one occasion (Gen. 38:15–16).554

39:11–18 If this story were a morality tale, Joseph’s steadfast faithfulness to God under temptation would be result in his being freed, or perhaps being given some high office. Instead, his faithfulness is precisely what brings him down. One day, when Joseph happens to be working in the house and none of the other servants are around, she confronts him again, taking hold of his outer garment (Hb. beged; 39:12).555 He has no alternative but to leave his cloak in her hand and flee the house (v. 12).556

Not for the first time in his life Joseph finds his own clothing used against him. His brothers used his distinctive coat to convince his father he had been killed by a wild animal (37:31–33). Now his cloak is used by Potiphar’s wife as the evidence that he has assaulted her (39:13–15). She marshals her case well, immediately summoning her other servants and claiming an atrocity has occurred, as evidenced by the cloak. She calls Joseph a “Hebrew,” identifying him as a dangerous foreigner,557 and blames her husband for his presence in their midst (“He has brought among us a Hebrew”; v. 14). Meanwhile, she suggests that Joseph’s presence is an intentional insult to all of them by her husband; she and the servants are together (“us”) in being mocked by this alien.558 Potiphar’s wife claims that, when Joseph threatened her, she cried out with a loud voice (v. 15), an important demonstration of resistance to an attempted rape (Deut. 22:24, 27), though in fact in the earlier verses she called out only after Joseph had fled (Gen. 39:13–14).

When Potiphar returns home, she retells her story, with key differences. Potiphar is still assigned blame for bringing the Hebrew into their midst, but now Joseph’s servant status is emphasized (v. 17). Joseph’s intent was to mock (or sexually assault) her alone, rather than mocking both her and the other servants (v. 17). In both recountings she claims that Joseph left his cloak beside her, avoiding any mention of the more incriminating fact that it was actually left in her hand (v. 18; cf. v. 12).559

39:19–23 Potiphar is left with the unenviable choice of siding with a slave and exposing his wife as a liar or getting rid of Joseph. He chooses the latter course, though the fact that he merely has Joseph thrown in prison rather than executed suggests he does not entirely believe his wife’s story. It seems that in many contexts in Egypt at this time the husband could decide whether or not to press for the death penalty in cases of adultery, but the normal punishment for such an offense would have been immediate execution.560 There seems little reason for Potiphar to grant clemency if he really believes her story; however, if he has his doubts about her veracity, the decision makes perfect sense. While the text notes that Potiphar is furious, it refrains from identifying the target of his anger, supporting the possibility that at least part of that anger is directed toward his wife.561

Joseph thus finds himself at the bottom of the heap once again. After Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers, the Lord’s presence with him had permitted his meteoric rise to become the steward over all of Potiphar’s possessions (vv. 3–6). Yet his downfall, through no fault of his own, does not mean that the Lord has now abandoned him. Joseph is now in the royal prison rather than in Potiphar’s house (v. 20), but the Lord is still with him, with similar results. The Lord gives him favor in the eyes of the keeper of the prison (v. 21; cf. v. 4); everything Joseph does prospers (v. 23; cf. v. 3), so that he ends up in charge of the household, while his master lives a life entirely free from concern (vv. 22–23; cf. v. 6).

These close parallels between the beginning and the end of the chapter make the one unique statement in these verses stand out: “The Lord . . . showed [Joseph] steadfast love” (Hb. khesed; 39:21). The casual observer would never conclude from Joseph’s circumstances that he is the recipient of the khesed of his God, but appearances can be deceptive. In fact, it is the Lord’s steadfast faithfulness to his promises to make the children of Israel into a community of nations and through them to bless the world that is being worked out through all this seemingly adverse providence. God has placed Joseph exactly where he needs to be for the next part of his storyline to unfold, and the Lord’s blessing remains upon Joseph, even in the most difficult of circumstances.