In Genesis 44 Joseph tested his brothers to see if they were sincerely repentant by hiding his silver cup in his brother Benjamin’s sack of grain. He sent his house steward after them and instructed him to say, “Why have you repaid evil for good? Is not this the one from which my lord drinks and which he uses for divination?” (44:5). After the brothers returned to Egypt Joseph confronted them directly: “What is this deed you have done? Do you not know that such a man as I can indeed practice divination?” (44:15).
One would hardly expect Joseph to engage in pagan fortune-telling or reading omens.
This brings up an interesting question: Did Joseph use divination, an occult practice meant to tell the future? On one hand, it would seem strange for a man such as Joseph to engage in occult practices. Joseph is presented throughout the text of Genesis 37-50 as a godly man who trusted the Lord and refused the temptations of lust, bitterness, and vengeance, and is listed among the heroes of the faith in Hebrews 11. One would hardly expect Joseph to engage in pagan fortune-telling or reading omens.
On the other hand the Bible does not gloss over the foibles of its heroes. It is entirely possible that Joseph, while he was living in Egypt and elevated to a place of nobility, adopted the practice of divination. This may be attributed to the influence of his wife, Asenath, whose father was an Egyptian priest. I am sure that divination and fortune-telling were common practices in Egypt, as they are in nearly every culture. In fact, I discussed the subject of Joseph’s cup of divination with a friend who is very familiar with the history of ancient Persia. He told me about King Jamšid, a mythological Zoroastrian king who was believed to have a cup in which he could see the whole world reflected. Even today, my friend said, Muslim mullahs use a cup to divine a blessing for newlyweds at weddings in Central Asia.
And we cannot overlook the previous mention of divination by Laban, Joseph’s maternal grandfather, speaking to Jacob: “I have learned by divination that the LORD has blessed me because of you” (Gen. 30:27). This and the presence of the household gods Rachel stole from her father, at least until the family went up to Bethel in Genesis 35, means that it is not outside the realm of possibility that Joseph learned the art of divination from his own family. Since the prohibition on divination and all other occult practices was not given until after the children of Israel received the law at Sinai,1 applying them to Joseph seems anachronistic at best. So what are we to do with this detail?
Gerhard Aalders has argued that divination is not really the best translation. “Other scholars,” he says, “including this commentator, feel that in this case the term should be read to say, ‘be sure to notice.’”2 The idea being that, since this was the cup which Joseph regularly drank from, its absence would be sure to be noticed. That is why it would have been foolish for anyone to steal it. John Calvin, too, notes that some commentators resort to this explanation: “Others translate it, ‘by which he hath tried you, or searched you out;”3 but he also says, “there is, however, no need to resort to forced expositions for the sake of excusing the man; for he speaks according to the common understanding of the multitude, and thus foolishly countenances the received opinion.”4
All it takes is a quick survey of the English translations to render Aalders’ solution unlikely. Bible Gateway lists 58 English version, 42 of which use the word “divine” or “divination,” while 8 use “learn about the future/secret things” and the rest include “explaining dreams,” “interpreting omens,” and “fortune-telling”. Only two follow Aalders’ suggestion of “find things out” (NirV) or “observeth diligently” (Young’s Literal Translation). Clearly the vast majority of translators believe Joseph was talking about the practice of divination rather than keen observation.
We could take Calvin’s view that this was a ruse meant to manufacture a charge against the brothers, an act which he considered a grievous sin. He says Joseph abandoned his former testimony, that only God could interpret dreams, and boasted “that he is a magician rather than proclaiming himself a prophet of God.” By so doing, Calvin maintains, “he impiously profanes the gift of the Holy Spirit.”5 Joseph was caught up in the Egyptians’ misapprehension; they thought he had interpreted the earlier dreams by means of magical arts, even though he had credited the Lord, and this lie was added to the deception of pretending to be a stranger to his brothers.
From this Calvin draws the following moral conclusion: “Whence we gather, that when any one swerves from the right line, he is prone to fall into various sins. Wherefore, being warned by this example, let us learn to allow ourselves in nothing except what we know is approved by God.”6 In other words we must avoid all deception or lose the ability to oppose evil in every form, since we will have yielded to it in one area.
“In fact, we know too little about the whole matter to pass judgment upon it in one way or in another.”
H. C. Leupold
Lutheran commentator H. C. Leupold offers three possibilities. First, Joseph actually engaged in divination, which would have made him “guilty of heathenish and sinful practices.” Second, he merely pretended that he used divination, which would have made him guilty of “a form of deception both here [v.5] and in v.15.” Or the third possibility, that God used the silver cup “in order to convey higher revelation to Joseph.” But I think Leupold is probably correct when he concludes: “In fact, we know too little about the whole matter to pass judgment upon it in one way or in another.”7
All of this simply illustrates one of the main challenges we face in interpreting and applying biblical narratives. The Bible records accurately what happened and gives us whatever details the author thought necessary. Of course, the human authors were carried along by the Holy Spirit, so their editorial decisions were all perfectly guided by divine wisdom. Still, we are sometimes left with questions to which there are no answers and are rarely given any kind of guide for applying what is written.
Was Joseph involved in the practice of divination? We can’t say for certain one way or the other. Would it have been sinful if he was? Again, it is difficult to say. Was he engaged in a deception? By instructing his steward to put his brothers’ money back in their sacks (twice) and his cup in Benjamin’s, it seems that he was. But the text does not focus on the morality of Joseph’s actions besides his refusal to engage in adultery with his master’s wife. So we should probably be cautious about making any applications about deception and falsehood here. What is emphasized throughout the narrative is the same thing we find in the lives of all the patriarchs and indeed the whole book of Genesis: God’s sovereignty in ruling over the world he has made and governing the affairs of men in order to bring about his covenant purposes in the lives of his people. And we just have to be satisfied without knowing the real significance of Joseph’s silver cup of divination.
1The first time divination is condemned is Leviticus 19:26, where it is linked with conjuring spirits. According to Deut. 18:10 divination was one of the detestable practices of the Canaanites, which caused the Lord to drive them out before the children of Israel. These revelations were given centuries after Joseph, so applying them to him seems anachronistic.
2G. Ch. Aalders, Genesis, Volume 2 (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1981), 235
3John Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of Genesis, Volume 2 (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1963), 368
4Ibid., 371
5Ibid., 369
6Ibid.
7H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, Volume II (Grand Rapids, Baker, 1971), 1081-2