Exodus, Pharaoh who did not know Joseph – FAQ

Please follow and like us:

Exodus 1:8 says that a Pharaoh came to power in Egypt who did not know Joseph. How is this possible when the final part of Genesis says that Joseph was made second only to Pharaoh? How did the Israelites find themselves enslaved by Egypt?

Genesis 41:40-43 neatly summarizes the position which the Pharaoh of Egypt gave to Joseph:

“‘You shall be over my house, and according to your command all my people shall do homage; only in the throne I will be greater than you.’ Pharaoh said to Joseph, ‘See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.’ Then Pharaoh took off his signet ring from his hand and put it on Joseph’s hand, and clothed him in garments of fine linen and put the gold necklace around his neck. He had him ride in his second chariot; and they proclaimed before him, ‘Bow the knee!’ And he set him over all the land of Egypt” (NASU).

With Joseph being made viceroy of Egypt and saving Egypt from the terrible famine, one would expect that some kind of record would have been made about him. We would assume that successive Pharaohs would have at least known about Joseph, but this does not seem to be the case in the opening verses of Exodus, where a new Pharaoh comes to power and the Israelites in Egypt are enslaved:

“Now a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. He said to his people, ‘Behold, the people of the sons of Israel are more and mightier than we. Come, let us deal wisely with them, or else they will multiply and in the event of war, they will also join themselves to those who hate us, and fight against us and depart from the land’” (Exodus 1:8-10, NASU).

There are a variety of views as to why a Pharaoh came to power “who did not know about Joseph” (NIV). A proper view of this can elude many Bible readers who are not equipped with an historical understanding of the Scriptures, which can generally be nursed by employing good commentaries. The ArtScroll Chumash, commonly used in today’s Messianic community, mentions the possibilities of it literally being a new king, or references a Talmudic opinion that the new Egyptian king deliberately ignored the work of Joseph (b.Sotah 11a).[1] This is greatly appreciable, as examiners of Exodus 1:8-10 do usually decide between one of these two options. Among Jewish examiners, Nahum M. Sarna opts for the emergence of a new Egyptian dynasty, which factually did not know of Joseph. In his commentary of the Book of Exodus, he mentions the policies of the pharaohs of the Ninteenth Dynasty (1306-1200 B.C.E.), specifically Ramses II (1290-1224 B.C.E.). He also makes light of how the north of Egypt had been invaded by a Semitic people in the Eighteenth Century B.C.E., the Hyksos.[2] When the the Hyksos had been repelled by the Sixteenth Century B.C.E., the Hebrews in Goshen, also Semites, found themselves enslaved.

When we consider some of these factors in our reading of Exodus 1, what is most likely to have happened is that the Ancient Israelites found themselves embroiled in a political conflict beyond their control. This would have been the general time when Jacob and his family migrated into Egypt to avoid the famine, if we accept the prophecy that Israel would be in Egypt four hundred years (Genesis 15:13). This would have occurred at about the same time of the Hyksos invasion of Egypt, who later took over Northern Egypt where the Israelites lived. The Egyptians, not making any distinctions between the Hyksos and the Hebrews, both being Semitic peoples—coupled with the possibility of a new dynasty coming to power—would have easily enslaved them as they took back control of their land.

A new Pharaoh of Egypt from a new dynasty could have easily not known of Joseph because the Israelites settled in Goshen, in the Nile Delta region of Lower Egypt or Northern Egypt, and as Pharaoh he would have been from Upper Egypt or Southern Egypt, moving back into previously conquered territories. Wanting to rebuild an empire which had been lost, the Israelites having multiplied would make a convenient workforce. Politically it would have been easy to enslave them, because as Semites they would remind many Egyptians of the Hyksos invasion.