John Calvin Commentary Genesis 41:40

"thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou." — Genesis 41:40 (ASV)

Thou shalt be over my house. Not only is Joseph made governor of Egypt, but he is also adorned with the insignia of royalty, so that all may reverence him and obey his command. The royal signet is put on his finger to confirm decrees. He is clothed in robes of fine linen, which were a luxury at that time and were not available at any common price.

He is placed in the most honorable chariot. However, it may be asked whether it was lawful for the holy man to appear with such great pomp. I answer, although such splendor can scarcely ever be free from blame, and therefore frugality in external ornaments is best, yet all splendor in kings and other princes of the world is not to be condemned, provided they do not desire it too earnestly, nor make an ostentatious display of it.

Moderation is, indeed, always to be cultivated. But since it was not in Joseph’s power to prescribe the mode of investiture, and the royal authority would not have been granted to him without the accustomed pomp of state, he was free to accept more than seemed desirable in itself.

If the option is given to the servants of God, nothing is safer for them than to cut off whatever they can of outward splendor. And where it is necessary for them to accommodate themselves to public custom, they must beware of all ostentation and vanity.

Regarding the explanation of the words, while we render them, “At thy mouth all the people shall kiss,” others prefer to read, “shall be armed”; others, “shall be fed at thy will or commandment.” But as the proper meaning of the verb נשק (nashak) is to kiss, I do not see why interpreters should twist it to another sense. Yet I do not think that any special token of reverence is intended here; instead, the phrase rather seems to be metaphorical, meaning that the people should cordially receive and obediently embrace whatever might proceed from the mouth of Joseph, as if Pharaoh had said, “Whatever he may command, it is my will that the people shall receive with one consent, as if all should kiss him.”

The phrase “second chariot” is read by the Hebrews, in grammatical construction, as meaning the chariot of the viceroy, who holds the second place from the king. However, the meaning is clear: Joseph has precedence over all the nobles of Egypt.

There are various opinions about the meaning of the word אברך (abraik). Those who explain it as “tender father,” because Joseph, though still young, was endowed with the prudence and gravity of old age, seem to me to offer a far-fetched explanation to fit their own imagination. Those who render it as “the father of the king,” as if the word were compounded of the Hebrew noun אב (ab) and the Arabic רך (rak), have little more basis for their interpretation.

If, indeed, the word is Hebrew, the meaning preferred by others, “Bow the knee,” seems more probable to me.

But because I am more inclined to suppose that Moses is referring to Egyptian terms, both in this place and shortly afterwards, I advise readers not to distort them needlessly.

Indeed, those interpreters who suppose that an Egyptian king gave him a Hebrew name—which they render as either “Redeemer of the world” or “Expounder of mysteries”—are being ridiculously subtle. I prefer to follow the Greek interpreters, who, by leaving both words untouched, sufficiently prove that they thought them to be of a foreign language.

I cannot refute the common belief that Joseph’s father-in-law was a priest, though I can hardly be persuaded to believe it. Therefore, since כוהן (cohen) means a prince as well as a priest, it seems probable to me that he was one of the nobles of the court, who might also have been the satrap or prefect of the city of On.