John Calvin Commentary Genesis 47

Then Joseph came. Joseph indirectly intimates to the king, his desire to obtain a place to live for his brothers in the land of Goshen. Yet this modesty was (as we have said) free from cunning. For Pharaoh both immediately recognizes his wish and liberally grants it to him, declaring beforehand that the land of Goshen was most excellent.

From this we gather that what he gave was based on his own judgment, not out of ignorance, and that he was aware of Joseph's wish, even though Joseph did not dare to ask for what was best. Joseph can be easily excused for having instructed his father, along with most of his brothers, to remain in that region.

For it was not possible for them either to bring their cattle with them or to leave their cattle behind to come and greet the king, until some settled place to live was assigned to them, where, after pitching their tents, they could arrange their affairs. For it would have shown a lack of respect to take possession of a place as if it had been granted to them, when they had not yet received the king's permission. Therefore, they remained in that district, in suspense, until, having determined the king's will, they could more certainly establish their home there.

The statement that Joseph brought five from the extreme limits of his brethren, is commonly explained this way: that those who were of the smallest stature were brought into the king's presence, because it was feared he might take the stronger ones into his army. But since the Hebrew word קצה (qatsah) signifies the two extremities (the beginning and the end), I think they were chosen from the first and the last, so that the king, by looking at them, might form his judgment concerning the age of the entire group.

Your servants are shepherds. This confession was humiliating to the sons of Jacob, and especially to Joseph himself, whose high, and almost regal dignity, was thus marked with a spot of disgrace: for among the Egyptians (as we have said) this kind of life was disgraceful and infamous. Why, then, did not Joseph adopt the course, which he might easily have done, of describing his brothers as persons engaged in agriculture, or any other honest and creditable method of living?

They were not so devoted to tending livestock as to be altogether ignorant of agriculture, or incapable of accustoming themselves to other ways of earning a livelihood; and although they would not immediately have found it productive, we see how ready the king's generosity was to help them.

Indeed, it would not have been difficult for them to be appointed to offices at court. How then does it happen that Joseph, knowingly and purposely, exposes his brothers to an ignominy, which must bring dishonor also on himself, unless it was because he was not very anxious to escape from worldly contempt?

To live in splendor among the Egyptians would have had, at first, a plausible appearance, but his family would have been placed in a dangerous position. Now, however, their humble and contemptible way of life proves a wall of separation between them and the Egyptians. Indeed, Joseph seems purposely to work to cast off, in a moment, the nobility he had acquired, so that his own descendants might not be swallowed up in the population of Egypt, but might rather merge into his ancestral family.

If, however, this consideration did not enter their minds, there is no doubt that the Lord directed their tongues, so as to prevent harmful mixing, and to keep the body of the Church pure and distinct. This passage also teaches us how much better it is to possess a remote corner in the courts of the Lord than to dwell in the midst of palaces, beyond the precincts of the Church.

Therefore, let us not consider it a hardship to secure a sacred union with the sons of God by enduring the contempt and reproaches of the world, just as Joseph preferred this union to all the luxuries of Egypt. But if anyone thinks that they cannot otherwise serve God in purity than by making themselves repulsive to the world, away with such folly!

God's design was this: to keep the sons of Jacob in a lowly position until He should restore them to the land of Canaan. Thus, to preserve themselves in unity until the promised deliverance should take place, they did not conceal the fact that they were shepherds.

We must beware, therefore, lest the desire for empty honor should puff us up, since the Lord reveals no other way of salvation than that of bringing us under discipline. Therefore, let us willingly be without honor for a time, so that, in the future, angels may receive us to share in their eternal glory.

By this example also, those who are brought up in humble occupations are taught that they have no need to be ashamed of their lot. It ought to be enough, and more than enough, for them that the way of life they pursue is lawful and acceptable to God.

The remaining confession of the brothers (Genesis 47:4) was not without a sense of shame, in which they say that they had come to live there temporarily, compelled by hunger; but from this arose an advantage not to be despised. For as they came down few in number, and perishing with hunger, and so branded with infamy that scarcely anyone would deign to speak with them, the glory of God afterward shone all the more illustriously out of this darkness when, three centuries later, He wonderfully led them out, a mighty nation.

And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph. It is to be attributed to the favor of God that Pharaoh was not offended when they desired that a separate dwelling place might be granted to them, for we know that kings bear nothing more indignantly than the rejection of their favors. Pharaoh offers them a permanent home, but they prefer to leave him. If anyone were to attribute this to modesty, on the grounds that it would have been proud to ask for citizenship so that they might enjoy the same privileges as natives, the suggestion is indeed plausible. However, it is fallacious, for in asking to be admitted as guests and strangers, they took timely precautions so that Pharaoh would not hold them bound in the chains of servitude. The passage from Sophocles is well known:

Ὅστις δὲ πρὸς τύραννον ἐμπορεύεται,
Κείνου ἐστὶ δοῦλος, κἂν ἐλεύθερος μόλῃ.

Who refuge seeks within a tyrant’s door,
When once he enters there, is free no more.
Langhorne’s Plutarch

It was therefore important for the sons of Jacob to declare, in limine, on what condition they wished to live in Egypt. This made the cruelty exercised towards them all the more inexcusable when, in violation of this compact, they were most severely oppressed and were denied the opportunity to depart, for which they had stipulated.

Isaiah indeed says that the king of Egypt had some pretext for his conduct, because the sons of Jacob had voluntarily placed themselves under his authority (Isaiah 52:4); but he is speaking comparatively, so that he might more grievously accuse the Assyrians, who had invaded the descendants of Jacob when they were quiet in their own country, and expelled them from there by unjust violence.

Therefore, the law of hospitality was wickedly violated when the Israelites were oppressed as slaves and when the return to their own country, for which they had silently covenanted, was denied them, even though they had professed that they had come there as guests. For fidelity and humanity ought to have been shown to them by the king once they were received under his protection.

It appears, therefore, that the children of Israel took such precautions, as if in the presence of God, that they had just grounds for complaint against the Egyptians.

But seeing that the pledge given to them by the king proved of no advantage to them in worldly terms, let the faithful learn from their example to cultivate patience.

For it commonly happens that whoever enters the court of a tyrant must lay down his liberty at the door.

The land of Egypt. This is recorded not only to show that Jacob was courteously received, but also that nothing was given to him by Joseph except at the king’s command. For the greater his power, the more strictly he was bound to take care, so that by being liberal with the king’s property, he would not defraud both the king and his people.

And I wish that this moderation prevailed so much among the nobles of the world that they would conduct themselves in their private affairs no differently than if they were plebeians. But now, it seems to them they have no power unless they can prove it by their license to sin.

And although Joseph, by the king’s permission, places his family among the best pastures, he still does not avail himself of the other portion of the royal generosity—that of making his brothers keepers of the king’s cattle. He refrains from this not only because this privilege would have aroused the envy of many against them, but also because he was unwilling to be entangled in such a snare.

And Joseph brought in Jacob his father. Although Moses relates, in a continuous narrative, that Jacob was brought to the king, yet I do not doubt that some time had intervened; at least, until he had obtained a place in which he might dwell, where he might leave his family more safely and with a more tranquil mind, and also, where he might refresh himself for a little while after the fatigue of his journey.

And since he is said to have blessed Pharaoh, by this Moses does not mean a common and profane salutation, but the pious and holy prayer of a servant of God. For the children of this world greet kings and princes for the sake of honor, but by no means raise their thoughts to God.

Jacob acts otherwise; for he adds to civil reverence that pious affection which causes him to commend the safety of the king to God. And Jeremiah prescribes this rule to the Jews, that they should pray for the peace of Babylon as long as they were to live in exile, because in the peace of that land and empire their own peace would be involved (Jeremiah 29:7). If this duty was enjoined on miserable captives, forcibly deprived of their liberty and torn from their own country, how much more did Jacob owe it to a king so humane and beneficent? But whatever character those who rule over us may have, we are commanded to offer up public prayers for them (1 Timothy 2:1). Therefore, the same subjection to authority is required from each of us individually.