GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38 (Gen 38:1) And it came to pass at that time, that Judah went down from his brethren, and turned in to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. Anytime a person goes away from the people of God and turns in to the Canaanites he is going down. Lot had pitched his tent toward Sodom and Judah pitched his tent toward the Canaanites. Judah had taken to wife the daughter of a Canaanite, no doubt to the grief and regret of his father (Gen_26:35); he had done what hitherto every member of the chosen branches of Abraham's house had scrupulously avoided; for even the sanguinary deed of Simeon and Levi had been dictated by the desire of preserving the purity of their family. (M. M. Kalisch, Ph. D.) (Gen 38:2) And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was Shuah; and he took her, and went in unto her. Judah, who must have been no more than fifteen was at a ripe age to begin desiring someone of the opposite sex, without the experience of the consequences to giving in to sensual appetites. The Canaanites were known for their lack of godly morality, and influenced many young people into a life of wickedness. This man Shuah must have had such an influence on Judah and he took the man’s daughter, probably in fornication to begin with and then married her. (Gen 38:3) And she conceived, and bare a son; and he called his name Er. Er means “watchful,” and he did not live up to his name spiritually. Being part Canaanite he would not likely have had good spiritual sight anyway, and his father, though a Hebrew, was also spiritually impaired. It is interesting that Judah whose name means praise would appear to not live up to his name either, and live opposite to what God desired. (Gen 38:4) And she conceived again, and bare a son; and she called his name Onan.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 1
The first child was named by Judah, but his wife named this second child. The first was named “watchful,” and this second was named “strength.” Neither of them lived up to their name in any spiritual sense. None of Judah's family seemed to have much spiritual conception, which was opposite of their names.
Luther asks why such things were placed in Scripture, and answers, (1) That no one should be self-righteous, and(2) that no one should despair, and(3) to remind us that Gentiles by natural right are brothers, mother, sisters to our Lord; the word of salvation is a word for the whole world. (R. A. Redford) (Gen 38:5) And she yet again conceived, and bare a son; and called his name Shelah: and he was at Chezib, when she bare him. It is not told which one named this child, but the Targum says the woman named it “because her husband forgot her.” This appears the same as Akzib, which is associated with Keilah and Mareshah Jos_15:44, and therefore, lay in the south of the lowland of Judah. This note of place indicates a change of residence since her other children were born. (Barnes Notes) (Gen 38:6) And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar. Er would have been very young when he was married to Tamar. It was not a case as his father, in going out to find a wife, but his father took one for him, which leaves the possibility that he was not even yet old enough to have a child himself, and following the Canaanite customs of his day, he became corrupt at a very young age. (Gen 38:7) And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. The record does not tell us what the crime was, but the two areas of corruption by which almost all Canaanites were involved would be immorality and witchcraft.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 2
It is worthy of remark that the Hebrew word used to express Er’s wickedness is his own name, the letters reversed. [RA to ER] (Adam Clarke) (Gen 38:8) And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. The law was not yet given, so we do not know if this was already a custom, or if Judah simply felt it was the right thing to do, but we have here the first incident of the Levirate marriage. This order was for the preservation of the stock, since the child begotten by the second brother would have the name and inheritance of the first: a practice which is abolished in the New Testament. (Geneva Bible) (Gen 38:9) And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. We do not know whether Er was old enough to have children or not, but it is obvious that Onan was, and yet he did not want to raise up children for his brother, so he did not allow her to conceive. He wanted pleasure without the consequences. From as far back as Cain and Abel there has been a tendency to reject the proper care of a brother. (Gen 38:10) And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also. A multiplicity of such immoral acts were apparently common in Canaan from earliest days, and for that God not only slew men like Onan, He wiped out the entire population and gave the land to Israel. We find from this history that long be fore the Mosaic law it was an established custom, probably founded on a Divine precept, that if a man died childless his brother was to take his wife, and the children produced by this second marriage were considered as the children of the first husband, and in consequence inherited his possessions. (Adam Clarke)
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 3
(Gen 38:11) Then said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father's house, till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren did. And Tamar went and dwelt in her father's house. If Shelah was only a year younger than Onan, he could have been at marriageable age by the next year. We do not know how long Tamar waited but it was obvious to her that he was old enough when she planned to find a way to have a child. She must have felt this was her only hope since the first two sons had died leaving her childless. (Gen 38:12) And in process of time the daughter of Shuah Judah's wife died; and Judah was comforted, and went up unto his sheepshearers to Timnath, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. Judah had apparently left his family for good, with no intention to return, and very likely not on good terms for he was still among the Canaanite friends after all these years. Now he joined with them in sheep shearing. It is interesting that his wife's name is not mentioned, though her father's name is given.
There would appear to be something of a sinister nature in Judah's close connection with the pagan Hirah, the whole context favoring the thought that Judah and Hirah were "on the town" in an unfavorable sense. Sure, Judah "went up" to Timnah, but the altitude of his spirituality remained low. (Coffman) (Gen 38:13) And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold thy father in law goeth up to Timnath to shear his sheep. Tamar’s parents very likely lived in the neighborhood of Judah so that she would be able to keep up with the news of his whereabouts. She would also know where Shelah was and the fact she had not been given to him, although it was promised, she took things in her own hands. Women in those days felt it a disgrace not to have a child. (Gen 38:14) And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a vail, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 4
the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. She knew the sensual nature of Judah and had no doubt that he would turn in to a harlot should he find one along the way. She lived in a day when for a woman to die childless was one of the greatest reproaches a woman could bear. When you consider the extent she went to in order to have a child, and the daughters of Lot, you will recognize that a woman would do almost anything just to make sure she did not die childless. (Gen 38:15) When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. Apparently she had not been around him a whole lot or he would have recognized her voice, but he appeared to be unaware of who she was and her plan worked in getting him to have a child by her. She knew him well enough to have no doubt that he would proposition her when he thought she was a harlot.
Little could Judah have realized that he had just become the father of a great multitude through Tamar, including the Christ himself. (Coffman) (Gen 38:16) And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? The record does not tell us where Hirah the Adullamite was at this time. It is very likely Judah sent him on to make preparations for the shearing of the sheep, and gave some excuse to remain here where he could be entertained by this supposed harlot. Most of Jacob's family did not appear to have such sensual tendencies, but both Judah and Reuben had problems in this area. (Gen 38:17) And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? Apparently she had thought all this out well, knowing what Judah was most likely to say and knowing she would need evidence later GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 5
when the child was born that it was his. It has always been a tendency of men to feel free to have extra-marital affairs, but any women involved would be condemned, so she was preparing for her own security. (Gen 38:18) And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him. The only one of these that was not likely to be duplicated was the ring or signet because it would have his seal upon it. The other two were items that anyone might carry with them. She needed enough proof that if one was lost or was not enough to prove the father of this child another would. With these tokens there would be no doubt that the father was Judah. (Gen 38:19) And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. She was not actually a harlot, and only pretended to be one because it appeared to her, and very likely rightly so, that Judah’s promises were not serious and he had no plans to fulfill them, and she wanted to make sure he did. As was said earlier, she knew his nature before she ever made these plans, and her main concern was to be sure she did not die childless. (Gen 38:20) And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not. At least he was honest enough that he wanted to fulfill his pledge to the harlot whether he was honest enough to fulfill his promises about his son or not. Of course he had something to lose in the matter and though not vital, it was important to him to get his goods back. The fact he sent the kid by someone else shows the careless attitude toward such affairs. (Gen 38:21) Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 6
One good thing about the particular area in which she lived was that there were no harlots who openly practiced there. This would be rare for Canaan, but there were very likely pockets of communities that were relatively decent. Our translators often render different Hebrew words by the same term in English, and thus many important shades of meaning, which involve traits of character, are lost. In Gen_38:15, Tamar is called a harlot, zonah, which, as we have already seen, signifies a person who prostitutes herself for money. In this verse she is called a harlot in our version; but the original is not zonah, but kedeshah, a holy or consecrated person, from kadash, to make holy, or to consecrate to religious purposes. And the word here must necessarily signify a person consecrated by prostitution to the worship of some impure goddess. (Adam Clarke) (Gen 38:22) And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place. In small communities where everybody knows everybody, and are acquainted with the business of each person, they would have quickly recognized the fact that a harlot practiced there if indeed one did. Thus this would be a puzzle to Judah, since he knew that he met one there and she now had his tokens of infidelity.
We also see the continued "harvest" in the family because of deception. Jacob used a garment to deceive his father Isaac, and Judah and his brothers used a garment to deceive Jacob (Gen_37:32). Now Tamar used a garment to deceive Judah! (Gen_38:14) We reap what we sow. (Bible Knowledge Commentary) (Gen 38:23) And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her. Very likely he was not concerned about being ashamed of committing fornication, for it appears he was not very discreet about keeping it a secret, but he felt it would be shameful, or at least a matter to be laughed at, if someone found out how he had been tricked out of his signet, bracelets, and staff. So he wanted to keep his record clear. GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 7
(Gen 38:24) And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. As people usually are about others sins, Judah was very upset about his daughter daring to be so loose in her moral life, not even thinking of the fact that he was even more so. Yet that is a common tendency to blame others for the very things we do ourselves. That is why Nathan told his parable of the rich man who had many sheep and the poor man who had one. The rich took the one dear lamb of the poor man, and that made David furious. Then the prophet said, “Thou art the man.” Suddenly he saw himself as he was. CONDEMNING OTHERS FOR THINGS OF WHICH WE ARE GUILTY Gen_38:24 No one is quicker to condemn the guilty as the person guilty of the same crime. That is natural because their conscience bothers them about their problem and they have solved it for themselves in some way. They may have repented or they may have justified it in their own case; but however it has been handled it was done so as a response to their own problem. How often we hear the statement, “How could he have sat in judgment against that person when he had the same problem.” We heard that of Jimmy Swaggart who confessed to his own immoral acts. We learned later he had helped put ministers out of the church who were caught doing less than he had done. I personally know a minister who sat on the board that put another preacher out of the ministry because the man confessed to homosexual acts. Later this minister who helped put the other out confessed that years earlier he had had a homosexual affair with the same man.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 8
Jesus said, “He that is without sin cast the first stone.” Why did they drop the stones they held in their hands and walk away? The fact this is their method of catching Jesus says they found something they had problems with and condemned it in others while condoning it in themselves. Joh_8:7 David is quick to want to kill the man who stole another man’s ewe lamb when he had taken Uriah’s ewe lamb. 2Sa_12:5 Note, it is a common thing for men to be severe against those very sins in others in which yet they allow themselves; and so, in judging others, they condemn themselves, Rom_2:1; Rom_14:22. (Matthew Henry's) In condemning Tamar. “Bring her forth, and let her be burnt,” said the indignant patriarch. It is obvious the sentence was excessive in its severity. It was not imperative, else it could not have been remitted; and a recollection of his visit to Timnath three months previously should have inclined him to lean to mercy’s side. But the virtuous Angelos of society always procure indulgence for themselves by damning their fellow-sinners (Measure for Measure, Act II.). Scripture counsels differently (<400703>Mat_7:3; <450222>Rom_2:22; <480601>Gal_6:1). (Pulpit Commentary) J. Vernon McGee Here is the old double standard. The fact of the matter is, he is quick to see the sin in somebody else, but he can’t see it in himself. It reminds us of the time Nathan went in to David and told him the story about the fellow who had one little ewe lamb. When Nathan said the rich man came and took it away, David was quick to condemn the rich man. David reacted just like Judah does here. David said he wanted the rich man stoned to death. Then Nathan declared that David himself was the man. It is interesting that we can all see sin so clearly in other people, but we can’t see it within our own being.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 9
(Gen 38:25) When she was brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff. Though she was in the home of her parents, it appears that Judah still had jurisdiction over her and could pronounce sentence, even death against her. We hear nothing of involvement from her parents. She sends the evidence by a messenger and thus does not have to verbally accuse him, but the evidence will itself declare her case. (Gen 38:26) And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more. This scenario played itself out like a modern soap opera; where there is a continual web woven by parties that get themselves into problems that have no ready solutions. Judah could not have her now as wife, for she was the wife of his son. Yet he was the father of her child so he owed her the respect of giving the child a father. Neither he nor the son he promised could now be her husband. Shelah could not because it was his father’s wife. He could not because she was his son’s wife. It was one of those cases that any way you go it will be wrong. (Gen 38:27) And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb. Through her act committed to obtain this child, she bore twins and one of them would be in the lineage of Jesus Christ, which gives a reason for having this story in the Bible in the first place. Had it not been for this child in His lineage and it coming through Judah, this chapter no doubt would not have been here. Other members of His lineage are left out. (Gen 38:28) And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first. Now the plot thickens. Who is the firstborn now? This was a very abnormal event and would forever leave a question as to who legally receives the birthright, and meets other requirements of the firstborn.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 10
The binding of the scarlet thread about the wrist of the child whose arm appeared first in the birth, serves to show us how solicitously the privileges of the birthright were preserved. Had not this caution been taken by the midwife, Pharez would have had the right of primogeniture to the prejudice of his elder brother Zarah. And yet Pharez is usually reckoned in the genealogical tables before Zarah; and from him, not Zarah, does the line of our Lord proceed. See Mat_1:3. Probably the two brothers, as being twins, were conjoined in the privileges belonging to the birthright. (Adam Clarke) (Gen 38:29) And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez. She placed upon this newly born child the consequences of anything that was going to legally occur later due to this strange occurrence. She had never seen anything like it and whatever would result from it later, she said should be borne by this one who went back into the womb after coming forth. Here we have a firstborn in the lineage of Jesus whereas usually it is the second born. (Gen 38:30) And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah. David later would want to return to the wells of Bethlehem and get a drink of water he had enjoyed as a child. But those days never came. How many have wished to return to earlier days. This child had no idea of his action, but in going back to the womb, showed a tendency of mankind in general to desire a comfort zone; to return to the “Good old days,” which were not so good after all when you think of it.
GRIFFIN COMMENTS GEN 38—PAGE 11