Jacob continues to sojourn in Canaan, Genesis 37:1. Joseph, being seventeen years of age, is employed in feeding the flocks of his father, Genesis 37:2. Is loved by his father more than the rest of his brethren, Genesis 37:3. His brethren envy him, Genesis 37:4. His dream of the sheaves, Genesis 37:5-7. His brethren interpret it, and hate him on the account, Genesis 37:8. His dream of the sun, moon, and eleven stars, Genesis 37:9-12. Jacob sends him to visit his brethren, who were with the flock in Shechem, Genesis 37:13, Genesis 37:14. He wanders in the field, and is directed to go to Dothan, whither his brethren had removed the flocks, Genesis 37:15-17. Seeing him coming they conspire to destroy him, Genesis 37:18-20. Reuben, secretly intending to deliver him, counsels his brethren not to kill, but to put him into a pit, Genesis 37:21, Genesis 37:22. They strip Joseph of his coat of many colors, and put him into a pit, Genesis 37:23, Genesis 37:24. They afterwards draw him out, and sell him to a company of Ishmaelite merchants for twenty pieces of silver, who carry him into Egypt, Genesis 37:25-28. Reuben returns to the pit, and not finding Joseph, is greatly affected, Genesis 37:29, Genesis 37:30. Joseph's brethren dip his coat in goat's blood to persuade his father that he had been devoured by a wild beast, Genesis 37:31-33. Jacob is greatly distressed, Genesis 37:34, Genesis 37:35. Joseph is sold in Egypt to Potiphar, captain of Pharaoh's guard, Genesis 37:36.

INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS 37
In this chapter begins the history of Joseph, with whom the remaining part of this book is chiefly concerned; and here are related the hatred of his brethren to him, because he brought an ill report of them to his father, and because his father loved him, and which was increased by the dream he dreamed, and told them of, Genesis 37:1; a visit of his to his brethren in the fields, whom he found after a long search of them, Genesis 37:12; their conspiracy on sight of him to slay him, but by the advice of Reuben it was agreed to cast him into a pit, which they did, Genesis 37:18; and after that, at the motion of Judah, sold him to the Ishmaelites, who were going to Egypt, Genesis 37:25; this being done, Reuben being absent, and not finding Joseph in the pit, was in great distress, Genesis 37:29; their contrivance to deceive their father, and make him believe that Joseph was destroyed by a wild beast, which on the sight of the coat he credited, and became inconsolable, Genesis 37:31; and the chapter concludes with the sale of Joseph in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh's, Genesis 37:36.

(Genesis 37:1-4) Joseph is loved of Jacob, but hated by his brethren.
(Genesis 37:5-11) Joseph's dreams.
(Genesis 37:12-22) Jacob sends Joseph to visit his brethren, They conspire his death.
(Genesis 37:23-30) Joseph's brethren sell him.
(Genesis 37:31-36) Jacob deceived, Joseph sold to Potiphar.

X. History of Jacob - Genesis 37-50Its Substance and Character
The history (tholedoth) of Isaac commenced with the founding of his house by the birth of his sons (p. 171); but Jacob was abroad when his sons were born, and had not yet entered into undisputed possession of his inheritance. Hence his tholedoth only commence with his return to his father's tent and his entrance upon the family possessions, and merely embrace the history of his life as patriarch of the house which he founded. In this period of his life, indeed, his sons, especially Joseph and Judah, stand in the foreground, so that "Joseph might be described as the moving principle of the following history." But for all that, Jacob remains the head of the house, and the centre around whom the whole revolves. This section is divided by the removal of Jacob to Egypt, into the period of his residence in Canaan (Genesis 37-45), and the close of his life in Goshen (Genesis 46-50). The first period is occupied with the events which prepared the way for, and eventually occasioned, his migration into Egypt. The way was prepared, directly by the sale of Joseph (Genesis 37), indirectly by the alliance of Judah with the Canaanites (Genesis 38), which endangered the divine call of Israel, inasmuch as this showed the necessity for a temporary removal of the sons of Israel from Canaan. The way was opened by the wonderful career of Joseph in Egypt, his elevation from slavery and imprisonment to be the ruler over the whole of Egypt (Genesis 39-41). And lastly, the migration was occasioned by the famine in Canaan, which rendered it necessary for Jacob's sons to travel into Egypt to buy corn, and, whilst it led to Jacob's recovery of the son he had mourned for as dead, furnished an opportunity for Joseph to welcome his family into Egypt (Genesis 42-45). The second period commences with the migration of Jacob into Egypt, and his settlement in the land of Goshen (Genesis 46-47:27). It embraces the patriarch's closing years, his last instructions respecting his burial in Canaan (Genesis 47:28-31), his adoption of Joseph's sons, and the blessing given to his twelve sons (Genesis 49), and extends to his burial and Joseph's death (Genesis 50).
Now if we compare this period of the patriarchal history with the previous ones, viz., those of Isaac and Abraham, it differs from them most in the absence of divine revelations-in the fact, that from the time of the patriarch's entrance upon the family inheritance to the day of his death, there was only one other occasion on which God appeared to him in a dream, viz., in Beersheba, on the border of the promised land, when he had prepared to go with his whole house into Egypt: the God of his father then promised him the increase of his seed in Egypt into a great nation, and their return to Canaan (Genesis 46:2-4). This fact may be easily explained on the ground, that the end of the divine manifestations had been already attained; that in Jacob's house with his twelve sons the foundation was laid for the development of the promised nation; and that the time had come, in which the chosen family was to grow into a nation-a process for which they needed, indeed, the blessing and protection of God, but no special revelations, so long at least as this growth into a nation took its natural course. That course was not interrupted, but rather facilitated by the removal into Egypt. But as Canaan had been assigned to the patriarchs as the land of their pilgrimage, and promised to their seed for a possession after it had become a nation; when Jacob was compelled to leave this land, his faith in the promise of God might have been shaken, if God had not appeared to him as he departed, to promise him His protection in the foreign land, and assure him of the fulfilment of His promises. More than this the house of Israel did not need to know, as to the way by which God would lead them, especially as Abraham had already received a revelation from the Lord (Genesis 15:13-16).
In perfect harmony with the character of the time thus commencing for Jacob-Israel, is the use of the names of God in this last section of Genesis: viz., the fact, that whilst in Genesis 37 (the sale of Joseph) the name of God is not met with at all, in Genesis 38 and 39 we find the name of Jehovah nine times and Elohim only once (Genesis 39:9), and that in circumstances in which Jehovah would have been inadmissible; and after Genesis 40:1, the name Jehovah almost entirely disappears, occurring only once in Genesis 40-50 (Genesis 49:18, where Jacob uses it), whereas Elohim is used eighteen times and Ha-Elohim seven, not to mention such expressions as "your God" (Genesis 43:23), or "the God of his, or your father" (Genesis 46:1, Genesis 46:3). So long as the attention is confined to this numerical proportion of Jehovah, and Elohim or Ha-Elohim, it must remain "a difficult enigma." But when we look at the way in which these names are employed, we find the actual fact to be, that in Genesis 38 and 39 the writer mentions God nine times, and calls Him Jehovah, and that in Genesis 40-50 he only mentions God twice, and then calls Him Elohim (Genesis 46:1-2), although the God of salvation, i.e., Jehovah, is intended. In every other instance in which God is referred to in Genesis 40-50, it is always by the persons concerned: either Pharaoh (Genesis 41:38-39), or Joseph and his brethren (Genesis 40:8; Genesis 41:16, Genesis 41:51-52, etc., Elohim; and Genesis 41:25, Genesis 41:28, Genesis 41:32, etc., Ha-Elohim), or by Jacob (Genesis 48:11, Genesis 48:20-21, Elohim). Now the circumstance that the historian speaks of God nine times in Genesis 38-39 and only twice in Genesis 40-50 is explained by the substance of the history, which furnished no particular occasion for this in the last eleven chapters. But the reason why he does not name Jehovah in Genesis 40-50 as in Genesis 38-39, but speaks of the "God of his (Jacob's) father Isaac," in Genesis 41:1, and directly afterwards of Elohim (Genesis 41:2), could hardly be that the periphrasis "the God of his father" seemed more appropriate than the simple name Jehovah, since Jacob offered sacrifice at Beersheba to the God who appeared to his father, and to whom Isaac built an altar there, and this God (Elohim) then appeared to him in a dream and renewed the promise of his fathers. As the historian uses a periphrasis of the name Jehovah, to point out the internal connection between what Jacob did and experienced at Beersheba and what his father experienced there; so Jacob also, both in the blessing with which he sends his sons the second time to Egypt (Genesis 43:14) and at the adoption of Joseph's sons (Genesis 48:3), uses the name El Shaddai, and in his blessings on Joseph's sons (Genesis 43:15) and on Joseph himself (Genesis 49:24-25) employs rhetorical periphrases for the name Jehovah, because Jehovah had manifested Himself not only to him (Genesis 35:11-12), but also to his fathers Abraham and Isaac (Genesis 17:1 and Genesis 28:3) as El Shaddai, and had proved Himself to be the Almighty, "the God who fed him," "the Mighty One of Jacob," "the Shepherd and Rock of Israel." In these set discourses the titles of God here mentioned were unquestionably more significant and impressive than the simple name Jehovah. and when Jacob speaks of Elohim only, not of Jehovah, in Genesis 48:11, Genesis 48:20-21, the Elohim in Genesis 48:11 and Genesis 48:21 may be easily explained from the antithesis of Jacob to both man and God, and in Genesis 48:20 from the words themselves, which contain a common and, so to speak, a stereotyped saying. Wherever the thought required the name Jehovah as the only appropriate one, there Jacob used this name, as Genesis 49:18 will prove. But that name would have been quit unsuitable in the mouth of Pharaoh in Genesis 41:38-39, in the address of Joseph to the prisoners (Genesis 40:8) and to Pharaoh (Genesis 41:16, Genesis 41:25, Genesis 41:28, Genesis 41:32), and in his conversation with his brethren before he made himself known (Genesis 42:18; Genesis 43:29), and also in the appeal of Judah to Joseph as an unknown Egyptian officer of state (Genesis 44:16). In the meantime the brethren of Joseph also speak to one another of Elohim (Genesis 43:28); and Joseph not only sees in the birth of his sons merely a gift of Elohim (Genesis 41:51-52; Genesis 48:9), but in the solemn moment in which he makes himself known to his brethren (Genesis 45:5-9) he speaks of Elohim alone: "Elohim did send me before you to preserve life" (Genesis 41:5); and even upon his death-bed he says, "I die, and Elohim will surely visit you and bring you out of this land" (Genesis 50:24-25). But the reason of this is not difficult to discover, and is no other than the following: Joseph, like his brethren, did not clearly discern the ways of the Lord in the wonderful changes of his life; and his brethren, though they felt that the trouble into which they were brought before the unknown ruler of Egypt was a just punishment from God for their crime against Joseph, did not perceive that by the sale of their brother they had sinned not only against Elohim (God the Creator and Judge of men), but against Jehovah the covenant God of their father. They had not only sold their brother, but in their brother they had cast out a member of the seed promised and given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from the fellowship of the chosen family, and sinned against the God of salvation and His promises. But this aspect of their crime was still hidden from them, so that they could not speak of Jehovah. In the same way, Joseph regarded the wonderful course of his life as a divine arrangement for the preservation or rescue of his family, and he was so far acquainted with the promises of God, that he regarded it as a certainty, that Israel would be led out of Egypt, especially after the last wish expressed by Jacob. But this did not involve so full and clear an insight into the ways of Jehovah, as to lead Joseph to recognise in his own career a special appointment of the covenant God, and to describe it as a gracious work of Jehovah.
(Note: The very fact that the author of Genesis, who wrote in the light of the further development and fuller revelation of the ways of the Lord with Joseph and the whole house of Jacob, represents the career of Joseph as a gracious interposition of Jehovah (Genesis 39), and yet makes Joseph himself speak of Elohim as arranging the whole, is by no means an unimportant testimony to the historical fidelity and truth of the narrative; of which further proofs are to be found in the faithful and exact representation of the circumstances, manners, and customs of Egypt, as Hengstenberg has proved in his Egypt and the Books of Moses, from a comparison of these accounts of Joseph's life with ancient document and monuments connected with this land.)
The disappearance of the name Jehovah, therefore, is to be explained, partly from the fact that previous revelations and acts of grace had given rise to other phrases expressive of the idea of Jehovah, which not only served as substitutes for this name of the covenant God, but in certain circumstances were much more appropriate; and partly from the fact that the sons of Jacob, including Joseph, did not so distinctly recognise in their course the saving guidance of the covenant God, as to be able to describe it as the work of Jehovah. This imperfect insight, however, is intimately connected with the fact that the direct revelations of God had ceased; and that Joseph, although chosen by God to be the preserver of the house of Israel and the instrument in accomplishing His plans of salvation, was separated at a very early period from the fellowship of his father's house, and formally naturalized in Egypt, and though endowed with the supernatural power to interpret dreams, was not favoured, as Daniel afterwards was in the Chaldaean court, with visions or revelations of God. Consequently we cannot place Joseph on a level with the three patriarchs, nor assent to the statement, that "as the noblest blossom of the patriarchal life is seen in Joseph, as in him the whole meaning of the patriarchal life is summed up and fulfilled, so in Christ we see the perfect blossom and sole fulfilment of the whole of the Old Testament dispensation" (Kurtz, Old Covenant ii. 95), as being either correct or scriptural, so far as the first portion is concerned. For Joseph was not a medium of salvation in the same way as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He was indeed a benefactor, not only to his brethren and the whole house of Israel, but also to the Egyptians; but salvation, i.e., spiritual help and culture, he neither brought to the Gentiles nor to the house of Israel. In Jacob's blessing he is endowed with the richest inheritance of the first-born in earthly things; but salvation is to reach the nations through Judah. We may therefore without hesitation look upon the history of Joseph as a "type of the pathway of the Church, not of Jehovah only, but also of Christ, from lowliness to exaltation, from slavery to liberty, from suffering to glory" (Delitzsch); we may also, so far as the history of Israel is a type of the history of Christ and His Church, regard the life of Joseph, as believing commentators of all centuries have done, as a type of the life of Christ, and use these typical traits as aids to progress in the knowledge of salvation; but that we may not be seduced into typological trifling, we must not overlook the fact, that neither Joseph nor his career is represented, either by the prophets or by Christ and His apostles, as typical of Christ, - in anything like the same way, for example, as the guidance of Israel into and out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1 cf. Matthew 2:15), and other events and persons in the history of Israel.