Font Size
Clearly, as the Joseph saga is taken up once more, the central character is perceived as one on whom the blessing of God rests (39:2-3, 5, 21, 23). Such an observation is important in light of the events that now occur in Joseph’s life. In a context of seductive temptation, deception, slander, and injustice, Joseph emerges unscathed. His faith, prudence, and integrity remain intact. The dream/blessings will not be placed in jeopardy because of a fling of passion. The significance of the statement The Lord was with Joseph (vv.2-3, 21, 23) is evidenced in the hidden but proactive manner of God’s protective care of his servant. Joseph’s success (v.2) is due to God as are the blessings Joseph imparts to those with whom he has dealings though they may be outside the covenant—Potiphar (v.5), the cupbearer (40:6-8), Pharaoh (41-16), and ultimately Egypt itself (v.57). More subtly one may recognize God’s hidden providence in Joseph’s imprisonment (39-20). He could have reasonably expected death for his alleged rape of Potiphar’s wife. Whether the captain of the guard mitigated his sentence because of past service or possible misgivings concerning the accuracy of the charges or because God influenced Potiphar’s thinking, one can be sure that God was providentially preserving Joseph and safeguarding the dream.
Joseph’s imprisonment does not distract from the ultimate realization of the dream. God prospers his servant even in such dire straits (39:21-23). Indeed, the fate of the cupbearer and the baker during the prison episode are secondary to the fate of Joseph himself. Their dreams are simply tools that connect the reader with the larger dream of Joseph. It is that dream that most concerns the narrator, for in Joseph’s dream lies the future of God’s promise to Israel. Interestingly, in this context dreams and their interpretations represent the activity of God, not of Joseph per se (40:8; 41:25). Joseph was given special ability to interpret the dreams of both the prisoners (40:20-22) and Pharaoh (41-54). Others are unsuccessful in explaining the mystery of the dreams (v.8). These revelations of God lie outside the epistemology of Egypt, indeed of any except God’s chosen servant. Yet, even in his chosenness, Joseph acknowledges his own utilitarian role in the dreams (40:8, 41:16) and pleads with the cupbearer to remember him when the cupbearer is restored to his position (v.14). However, the cupbearer forgets Joseph (v.23). It is certain that God does not.