He washed his face, and came out. He controlled himself, and said, “Serve the meal.”
They served him by himself, and them by themselves, and the Egyptians who ate with him by themselves, because the Egyptians don’t eat with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination to the Egyptians. They sat before him, the firstborn according to his birthright, and the youngest according to his youth, and the men marveled with one another. He sent portions to them from before him, but Benjamin’s portion was five times as much as any of theirs. They drank, and were merry with him.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv32–33 32. Because the Egyptians might not eat, etc Moses…
32. Because the Egyptians might not eat, etc Moses says they might not eat with the Hebrews, because they abhorred it, as being unlawful. For seeing that their religion forbade it, they were so bound, that they could not do what they did not dare to do. This passage teaches us how great was the pride of that nation; for, whence did it arise that they so utterly detested the Hebrews, unless because they thought themselves alone to be pure and holy in the world, and acceptable to God? God, indeed, commands his worshipers to abstain from all the pollutions of the Gentiles. But it behoves any one who separates himself from others, to be himself pure and upright. Therefore superstitious persons vainly attempt to claim this privilege for themselves, seeing they carry their impurity within, and are destitute of sincerity. Superstition, also, is affected with another disease; namely, that it is full of pride, so that it despises all men, under the pretext that they are vicious. It is asked, however, whether the Egyptians were separated from Joseph, because they regarded him as polluted: for this the words of Moses seem to intimate. If this interpretation is received, then they esteemed their false religion so highly, that they did not scruple to load their governor with reproaches. I rather conjecture, that Joseph sat apart from them, for the sake of honor; since it would be absurd that they, who disdained to sit at the same table with him, should be invited as his guests. Therefore it is probable that this distinct order was made by Joseph himself, that he might maintain his own dignity; and yet that the sons of Jacob were not mixed with the Egyptians, because the former were an abomination to the latter. For though the origin of Joseph was known, yet he had so passed over to the Egyptians, that he had become as one of their body. For which reason, also, the king had given him a name, when he adorned him with the insignia of his office as chief governor. Now, when we see that the church of God was, at that time, so proudly despised by profane men, we need not wonder that we also, at the present day, are subjected to similar reproach. Meanwhile, we must endeavor to keep ourselves pure from the filth of the world, for the Lord’s sake; and yet this desire must be so at tempered, that we may be alienated from the vices, rather than from the persons of men. For on this account does God sanctify his children, that they may beware of the vices of the unbelievers among whom they are conversant; and nevertheless may allure, as many as are curable, to a participation of their piety. Two things are here to be attended to; first, that we may be fully persuaded of the genuineness of our faith; secondly, that our excessive and fruitless fastidiousness may not entirely alienate many from the Lord, who otherwise might have been won. For we are not expressly commanded so to abhor the wicked, as not eat with them; but to avoid such association as may subject us to the same yoke. Besides, this passage confirms what I have before said, that the Hebrews had derived their name, not from their passing over the river; (as some falsely imagine,) but from their ancestor Heber. Nor was the fame of a single small and distantly situated family, sufficiently celebrated in Egypt, to become the cause of public dissension.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv31, 32, 34 Hebrew, bread.
Hebrew, bread.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv31–34 Gen 43:31 And he washed his face, and went…
Gen 43:31 And he washed his face, and went out, and refrained himself, and said, Set on bread.
Ver. 31. Set on bread.] Which the Latins call panis of παν, either because all covet it, or because whatever else the cheer be, men always set on bread. {a}
Read full note →
{a} Isidor., lib. xx.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv32–34 They set on for him by himself; partly because…
They set on for him by himself; partly because the dignity of his place, and the custom of princes, required this state; and partly for the reason here following.
That is an abomination unto the Egyptians; not so much from their pride and disdain of other people, as from their superstition and idolatry; partly because they worshipped the creatures which the Hebrews and others did commonly eat; and partly because of some peculiar rites and customs which they had in the dressing and ordering of their diet. Whence Herodotus affirms, that the Egyptians would not use the pots nor knives of the Grecians about their food. Compare Gen 46:34. See there, Exo 8:26.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv31–33 And they set on for him by himself,.... A…
And they set on for him by himself,.... A table was placed and provisions set upon it in one part of the room for Joseph by himself; which was done either because he was an Hebrew, and the Egyptians might not eat with him, nor he with them; or rather for the sake of grandeur, he being the next man in the kingdom to Pharaoh:
and for them by themselves; another table was placed and spread for Joseph's brethren by themselves, the reason of which is after given:
Read full note →
and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves; a third table was laid for such Egyptian noblemen and others, who were at this time Joseph's guests, or used to dine with him:
because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians; the reason of which, as given by the Targums of Onkelos and, Jonathan, is, because the creatures the Egyptians worshipped the Hebrews eat; but it is a question whether such creatures as oxen, sheep, goats, &c. which were eaten by the Hebrews, were so early worshipped by the Egyptians; though they were in later times, and particularly the Apis or ox, which is supposed by many to be worshipped on the account of Joseph, and so after his time; rather the abhorrence the Egyptians had the Hebrews in was on account of their being shepherds, on a political account, they having before this time suffered much by the insurrections and rebellions of such sort of persons among themselves, who set up a kingdom and kings of their own, called the "Hycsi", or pastor kings: or else this difference made between the Egyptians and Hebrews at eating, was not on account of what they did eat, as of the certain rites and customs the Egyptians had peculiar to themselves in dressing their food, and eating it; and therefore would not eat with any of another nation; so that this was not any particular distaste they had to the Hebrews, but was their usage towards men of all nations; for so Herodotus says (c), that"no Egyptian, man or woman, might kiss the month of a Greek, or use a knife, or spit, or pot;''that is, a knife a Greek had cut anything with, or a spit he had roasted meat on, or a pot he had boiled it in; and adds,"nor might taste of the flesh of an ox, cut with the knife of a Greek.''And indeed they would not eat nor converse with any of another religion (d), be they who they would.
(c) Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 41. (d) Chaeremon apud Porphyr. de abstinentia, l. 4. sect. 6.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv33–34 He placed his brethren according to their seniority, as…
He placed his brethren according to their seniority, as if he could certainly divine. Some think they placed themselves so according to their custom; but if so, I see not why such particular notice is taken of it, especially as a thing they marvelled at.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv32–34 Verse 32. They set on for him by himself,…
Verse 32. They set on for him by himself, c.] From the text it appears evident that there were three tables, one for Joseph, one for the Egyptians, and one for the eleven brethren.
The Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews] There might have been some political reason for this, with which we are unacquainted but independently of this, two may be assigned.
Read full note →
1. The Hebrews were shepherds; and Egypt had been almost ruined by hordes of lawless wandering banditti, under the name of Hycsos, or King-shepherds, who had but a short time before this been expelled from the land by Amasis, after they had held it in subjection for 259 years, according to Manetho, committing the most wanton cruelties.
2. The Hebrews sacrificed those animals which the Egyptians held sacred, and fed on their flesh.
The Egyptians were in general very superstitious, and would have no social intercourse with people of any other nation; hence we are informed that they would not even use the knife of a Greek, because they might have reason to suspect it had cut the flesh of some of those animals which they held sacred. Among the Hindoos different castes will not eat food cooked in the same vessel. If a person of another caste touch a cooking vessel, it is thrown away. Some are of opinion that the Egyptian idolatry, especially their worship of Apis under the figure of an ox, was posterior to the time of Joseph; ancient monuments are rather against this opinion, but it is impossible to decide either way. The clause in the Alexandrian Septuagint stands thus, Βδελυγμα γαρ εστιν τοις Αιγυπτιοις [πας ποιμην προβατων], "For [every shepherd] is an abomination to the Egyptians;" but this clause is probably borrowed from Ge 46:34, where it stands in the Hebrew as well as in the Greek. See Clarke on Ge 46:34.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv32–33 Gen 43:32. That is an abomination to the Egyptians…
Gen 43:32. That is an abomination to the Egyptians — The most generally received opinion has been, according to the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan, that the reason of this was the Hebrews eating the animals which the Egyptians held sacred. To this must be added, however, that the Egyptians were addicted to such superstitious ceremonies in dressing and eating their victuals, that they could not endure to sit at table with persons of other nations. According to Herodotus, it was not only to the Hebrews that they had such an aversion, for he assures us they would not use the pots or knives of the Grecians about their food, lest these utensils should have been defiled with cutting or containing the flesh of those animals which they accounted sacred. There is some reason, notwithstanding, to think that these superstitions had not begun to prevail in Joseph’s days, and that the cause of this abhorrence must be sought for in the difference of the civil rather than the religious manners of the two nations.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv32–34 Hebrews. "They had the same aversion for all who…
Hebrews. "They had the same aversion for all who did not adopt their superstition." (Porphyrius, Abstin. iv.) Herod. ii. 41, says, that would not use a knife which had been in the hands of a Greek, nor kiss him. This aversion arose, from their custom of abstaining from various meats which other nations eat. (Chaldean; &c.) They disliked the Hebrews, because they were also shepherds, chap. xlvi. 34 (Calmet); and because they knew they were accustomed to eat goats, oxen, and sheep, the objects of adoration in Egypt, (Exodus viii. 26): though they were not, probably, served upon Joseph’s table. (Tirinus) --- They who dwelt in the towns could not bear even the Egyptian shepherds, because they were of a more stirring and warlike temper. (Calmet) (Cunæus)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv31, 32, 34 THE DINNER. (Gen 43:31-34)
THE DINNER. (Gen 43:31-34)
Joseph said, Set on bread--equivalent to having dinner served, "bread" being a term inclusive of all victuals. The table was a small stool, most probably the usual round form, "since persons might even then be seated according to their rank or seniority, and the modern Egyptian table is not without its post of honor and a fixed gradation of place" [WILKINSON]. Two or at most three persons were seated at one table. But the host being the highest in rank of the company had a table to himself; while it was so arranged that an Egyptian was not placed nor obliged to eat from the same dish as a Hebrew.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv32–34 32. For him by himself — He thus maintained…
32. For him by himself — He thus maintained his distinction of rank and caste, and conformed to Egyptian ideas and customs.
Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews — Herodotus (ii, 41) says: “No Egyptian, man or woman, will kiss a Grecian on the mouth, or use the knife, spit, or caldron of a Greek, or taste the flesh of a pure ox that has been divided by a Grecian knife.” This same fear of contamination was doubtless held with regard to other nations as well as the Greeks. The Egyptians held in abomination those who slaughtered cows and oxen, animals which they held in highest reverence. Hence it was that they despised shepherds. Gen_46:34.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv31–34 31. he refrained himself] Joseph’s effort of self-constraint broke…
31. he refrained himself] Joseph’s effort of self-constraint broke down in Gen_45:1.
Set on bread] As we should say, “serve up dinner.”
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv31–34 (31) He washed his face.—This was done to remove…
(31) He washed his face.—This was done to remove all traces of his tears.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv31–34 And he washed his face (an indication of the…
And he washed his face (an indication of the violence of his weeping), and went out (from his chamber), and refrained himself (keeping his tears in check), and said, Set on bread an expression used at the present day in Egypt for bringing dinner (Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," vol. 2. p. 41, ed. 1878).
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v34 But Benjamin’s mess
But Benjamin’s mess
Cf. (See Scofield "Gen 35:18"). It is important to observe that Benjamin now becomes prominent. Joseph is peculiarly the type of Christ in His first advent, rejection, death, resurrection, and present exaltation among the Gentiles, but unrecognized of Israel. As the greater Benjamin, "Son of sorrow," but also "Son of my right hand," He is to be revealed in power in the Kingdom Gen 1:26-28. See Scofield "Zec 12:8". It is then, and not till then, that Israel is to be restored and converted. See Scofield "Deu 30:3". Typically Gen 45:1; Gen 45:2 anticipates the revelation prophetically described,; Eze 20:33-36; Hos 2:14-23 at which time the Benjamin type of Christ will be fulfilled.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v32 The servants served Joseph by himself and the brothers…
The servants served Joseph by himself and the brothers by themselves. The Egyptians there ate with him by themselves
This means that Joseph, the brothers, and the other Egyptians are eating in three different places within the same room. AT: "The servants served Joseph by himself and the brothers by themselves and the Egyptians, who were eating with him, by themselves"
Read full note →
The Egyptians there ate with him by themselves
These are probably other Egyptian officials who ate with Joseph, but they still sat separately from him and the Hebrew brothers.
because the Egyptians could not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that is detestable to the Egyptians
This can be translated as a new sentence: "They did this because the Egyptians thought it was shameful to eat with the Hebrews"
could not eat bread
Here "bread" stands for food in general. (See: Synecdoche)
The brothers sat before him
It is implied that Joseph had arranged where each brother would sit. You can make clear the implied information. AT: "The brothers sat across from the man, according to how he arranged their places" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
the firstborn according to his birthright, and the youngest according to his youth
The "firstborn" and the "youngest" are used together to mean all the brothers were sitting in order according to their age. (See: Merism)
The men were astonished together
"The men were very surprised when they realized this"
But Benjamin's portion was five times as much as any of his brothers
The phrase "five times" can be stated more generally. AT: "But Benjamin received a portion that was much bigger than what his brothers received"
translationWords
servant
Joseph (OT)
Egypt
bread
Hebrew
detest
firstborn
birthright
amazed
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv33–34 43:33 to their amazement: This ruler knew more about…
43:33 to their amazement: This ruler knew more about the brothers than seemed possible (cp. 44:15).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.