Chapter 38

1 Judah begetteth Er, Onan, and Shelah. 6 Er marrieth Tamar. 8 The trespass of Onan. 11 Tamar stayeth for Shelah. 13 She deceiveth Judah. 27 She beareth twins, Pharez and Zarah.

1. It came to pass. This chapter gives the origin of the three leading families of Judah, the future princely tribe of Israel. It shows also that the sons of Jacob, forgetting the sacred vocation of their race, were in danger of perishing in the sins of Canaan. Had not God in mercy interposed to bring about the removal of the whole house of Jacob to Egypt, the chosen race might have succumbed to the corrupting influence of Canaanite customs. Thus, ch. 38 is an integral part of the early history of Israel.

The phrase “it came to pass” has been taken by many commentators to refer to the story of the sale of Joseph recorded in the preceding chapter. The term, however, is so general that it cannot be limited to a particular event; more likely, it refers to the whole period of Jacob’s history in Palestine. Chronological considerations make it almost necessary to place this narrative at the time Joseph was still in his father’s house.

Being the fourth son of Leah, Judah was certainly not more than 3 years or so older than Joseph, which would make him about 20 years old at the time Joseph was sold (see ch. 37:2 and on ch. 30:24). Between Joseph’s sale as a slave and Jacob’s migration to Egypt lay 22 years (cf. chs. 41:46; 45:6), so that Judah was about 42 years old when the family moved to Egypt. At that time he not only had the three sons, mentioned in ch. 38, but was apparently a grandfather as well, as ch. 46:12 seems to imply. If this be correct, his sons Er, Onan, and Shelah must have been born before Joseph was sold, since they themselves had already reached marriageable ages when the events involving Tamar occurred, and Tamar’s son Pharez had two sons of his own when the family moved to Egypt. These observations oblige us to conclude that some of Jacob’s sons must have married while very young. Judah could not have been more than 14 years old at the birth of his oldest son, Er, nor Er more than 13 at his marriage to Tamar. The birth of Judah’s twin sons by his daughter-in-law Tamar must have taken place within two years after Er’s death. Pharez cannot have been more than 14 years old when Hezron and Hamul were born, apparently also as twins, before the departure from Canaan. Such early marriages are by no means uncommon in certain parts of the Orient even today. In the case of Jacob’s family, they may represent Canaanite influence. The considerations make it virtually certain that Judah was a married man and a father at the time of Joseph’s sale, and that part of the narrative of ch. 38 had already taken place.

A certain Adullamite. Adullam lies about 13 mi. southwest of Bethlehem, at a site now called Tell eshРSheikh MadhkuЖr, and approximately the same distance northwest of Hebron, where Jacob lived at the time. For some unknown reason Judah visited Adullam while he was still a youth. Perhaps it was while feeding the flocks of his father in that vicinity that he accidentally made the acquaintance of the Adullamite and remained for a time with him. That Judah did not separate himself permanently from his parental home is clear from the fact that he was with his brothers when Joseph was sold (ch. 37:26), and also when the famine forced them to buy grain in Egypt (ch. 43:3).

5. He was at Chezib. This place is named in order that the descendants of Shelah might know where their forefather was born. Chezib, or Achzib (Joshua 15:44; Micah 1:14), is probably to be identified with the present site Tell elРBeid\aµ, which lies southwest of Adullam.

6. Tamar. Probably a Canaanite woman, though of unknown ancestry.

8. Judah said unto Onan. According to custom, Onan, as brother-in-law of Tamar, should have married the childless widow of his deceased brother and raised up a family for him. Onan, however, was loath to accept the responsibilities this involved, since the first-born son would not be his own but would perpetuate the family of the deceased and receive his inheritance. Onan’s conduct betrayed a lack of natural affection for his brother and a covetousness for his possessions and inheritance. Even worse, his conduct was an offense against the divine institution of marriage. This is a sad commentary on the low estate to which Jacob’s sons had fallen.

The custom of levirate marriage (from the Latin levir, “brother-in-law”), first mentioned here in the Bible, also existed, in varying forms, among other nations of antiquity, such as the Hittites. It was incorporated into the Mosaic legislation, with the provision that a brother-in-law might refuse to perform the duty. Such a refusal, however, was considered shameful, as the ceremony to be carried out in that case shows (Deut. 25:5–10). Ruth 4:5–8 records an example of such a refusal.

11. Remain a widow. The sudden death of his two older sons, so soon after their marriage to Tamar, made Judah hesitate to give her the third as a husband. In harmony with a superstition found in the Apocryphal book of Tobit (ch. 3:7–10), he may have thought that either she herself, or marriage to her, had in some way occasioned the deaths of Er and Onan. Therefore he sent her away to her father’s house, with the promise of his youngest son as soon as he had grown up. That Judah never intended to fulfill his promise is clear from his excuse that Shelah might “die also, as his brethren did.”

When Shelah had reached a marriageable age but was not given to her, Tamar determined to secure a child by Judah himself. This was completely in harmony with prevailing Hittite and Assyrian custom. The laws of the Hittites and Assyrians contained the provision that the duty of levirate marriage was to be performed by the father of the deceased if no brother was available.

12. Went up unto his sheepshearers. Judah had become a widower. Inasmuch as festivities were always connected with sheepshearing (see 1 Sam. 25:2–11; 2 Sam. 13:23), Judah could not attend till after the customary time of mourning had passed. Mention is made of his friend Hirah accompanying him, because of the part he was to play in what follows (v. 20).

Timnath. This place was situated in the mountains of Judah, as the expression “went up” shows, and was later allotted to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:57). The site, known today as Tibnah, lies about 4 mi. northeast of Adullam.

14. An open place. The KJV translators did not recognize the Hebrew expression thus rendered as the name of a town. It should read, “the entrance to Enaim,” as in the RSV. Enaim must have been on the road between Adullam and Timnath, but has not yet been identified. It is probably the Enam of Joshua 15:34, mentioned there as being close to Adullam.

18. Thy signet, and thy bracelets. Judah’s “signet” was probably a cylinder seal, carried about his neck by a cord, translated in the KJV as “bracelets.” Rather, the passage should read, “your signet and your cord” (RSV). As literature of the time makes clear, the seal was an object of considerable value, since no business could be transacted without it. The staff may have been ornamented, as became the son of a wealthy cattleman. Asiatic staffs with human heads carved in the handles are mentioned in the list of spoils taken by the Egyptian king Thutmose III in the 15th century b.c., and were also found in the tomb of Tutankhamen, of the 14th century b.c.

21. The harlot. The Hebrew word here translated “harlot” is different from that of v. 15, zanah, an unchaste woman. In verse 21 “harlot” is from qedeshah, “the consecrated one,” or “the devoted one.” Canaanite religious worship, like that of Greece, provided for both male and female prostitutes in great numbers. This profession was respectable among the Canaanites, and therefore in making inquiry for the “harlot” to whom he was to deliver the kid, Hirah used the more respectable term.

23. Let her take it. Feeling that he had done his part, Judah chose to leave his pledge with the unknown girl rather than expose himself to ridicule by making further inquiry, even though the pledge was doubtless of more value than a young goat.

24. Let her be burnt. Judah gave this order by virtue of his authority as head of the family. This probably seemed to him a fortunate opportunity, furthermore, to extricate himself from his obligation to provide her with a husband. Tamar was regarded as the bride of Shelah, and as such was to be punished for a breach of chastity. The Mosaic law provided for stoning under such circumstances (Deut. 22:20–24). Only in the case of a priest’s daughter, or of certain forms of incest, was burning enjoined (Lev. 21:9; 20:14). Judah’s sentence, therefore, was more harsh than later Israelite law required. Whether he acted according to the custom of his time, or on other grounds, cannot be determined. The Code of Hammurabi lists two crimes for which the punishment is burning. Section 110 of the code states that a “devoted one” (see on Gen. 38:21) who opens a wineshop or enters a wineshop for a drink shall be burned alive, and sec. 25 provides that a thief shall be cast into the burning house from which he had attempted to steal property.

25. She sent to her father in law. In passing sentence upon Tamar, Judah had unwittingly condemned himself. His sin, however, consisted not only in giving way to lust, but also in breaking his promise to Tamar (v. 11). This made him personally responsible for the deception she had practiced upon him. His first error had been his own marriage to a Canaanite, in open violation of principle (cf. chs. 24:3; 28:1; 34:14). Furthermore, he certainly knew of the wickedness of his sons; but instead of recognizing the hand of God in their sudden death, he blamed Tamar for it and determined to keep her a childless widow forever.

26. More righteous than I. There was little Judah could do but to admit his guilt. Again, as in the plot against Joseph, he revealed a spirit of fair play and sincerity beneath his sometimes scandalous conduct. His frank confession, his subsequent treatment of Tamar, his success in rearing the sons born to her, and the fact that one of them was honored by a place in the ancestral line of Christ—all clearly point to a thorough reform on his part. A character more excellent than that of his older brothers qualified him for the leadership of the family, and his posterity for leadership in Israel (see ch. 49:3, 4, 8–10).

29. Pharez. The names of Tamar’s children were based on the interesting episode which occurred at their birth. When the twins were born in the reverse order from that in which they first appeared, the midwife addressed the second one reprovingly, saying as it were, “What a breach you have made for yourself,” meaning perhaps, “You really knew how to push yourself to the front.” From this saying of the midwife the boy received the name Pharez, “break.” Although the midwife did not consider him the first-born, he is henceforth always placed before Zarah in the genealogical lists (Gen. 46:12; Num. 26:20; etc.). He became the ancestor of King David Ruth 4:18–22), and through him, of the Messiah (Matt. 1:3–16).

30. Zarah. The twin with the scarlet thread was named Zarah, “rising.”

Ellen G. White comments

1-30P 238