6

The whole sequence of events is so strange that it feels symbolic. Hands don't normally come out first in childbirth, and then pulling it back in is curious. Why would a midwife be so anxious to label the first twin as to tie a thread around a child's hand even before it's fully delivered? Seeing anything other than a head should be cause for alarm.

The scarlet color is also viewed by some as significant (often denoting royalty). Also, chapter 38 is a detour from the Genesis story line (now mainly about Joseph). The birth of the twins seems to be the climax and the purpose of that detour. Something's up here.

I suspect all these dots connect, but I don't see how.

------ edits below ------

One thing we can conclude is that the midwife must have seen this firstborn as the household heir (i.e. Er's firstborn). If merely a child of Judah, it would be "behind" Shelah, and 1 Chronicles 4:21 notes many descendants of Shelah. If illegitimate, it wouldn't be anything. This genealogy matters later.

This means Judah confessed his sin fully to his household and also concluded that the firstborn counts as Er's as per Deuteronomy 25:5-6. Also, the midwife's curiously excessive attention to who is born first hints that she was under orders to track it.

Mike Slay
  • 71
  • 1
  • 4

3 Answers3

4

Identifying the first-born son has always been a hugely important part of the biblical account, not just for inheritance rights, but because of being set apart (dedicated) to the Lord God. This is where understanding the litany of familial disasters that befell Judah must be noted.

Judah had three sons by his wife, Shuah: Er was the first-born son. Then Shuah give him two more sons, Onan and Shelah. Er married Tamar but he was wicked and the Lord slew him (before he had any children to Tamar). According to Leverite marriage laws, Er's brother Shuah ought to have married the widow and raised up children by her, to keep his brother's name going, but then he would forfeit his rights to any such offspring. For that reason, he thought to indulge in the pleasures of sex with her but to deny her any chance of becoming pregnant. The Lord slew him for that. Judah had to then promise his daughter-in-law to his third son, but made the excuse of him being too young and sent Tamar to live with her father till he deemed Shelah to be old enough. The account tells us that Judah had no intention of giving Shelah to her in marriage in case he was stricken dead as well. Shelah was now his only heir. While Tamar was away, Judah's wife, Shuah, died.

Then comes the account of Tamar, desperate to have children, resorting to subterfuge to get them by her father-in-law, for she rightly perceived that Judah was not going to let Shelah marry her. (If he had, any children by his union with Tamar would have inherited the rights of the first-born as they would continue the line of Judah's first-born, Er.) Tamar's plot succeeded and she became pregnant by Judah. It probably wasn't till well on in her pregnancy that it was clear she was carrying twins.

Now comes the matter of a scarlet cord being tied around the extended hand of the first baby which appeared to be coming out. The haste with which the midwife did this might have been due to the very real risk that Tamar would die in labour (no caesarian operations on the go at that time). If she died before even one twin was fully born, the cord would still enable a first-born to be claimed. Ah, but that baby's hand was withdrawn and (perhaps after a protracted labour), the baby who was truly first-born was delivered - minus any scarlet cord. Then came his brother, with the scarlet cord still attached. But there was no denying that the first-born son had a two-fold birth-right and would inherit Judah's line, superseding his third son, Shelah.

The first-born was named Pharez and his twin brother was named Zarah. It was through those two that families of considerable note in the most illustrious tribe of Judah arose. And from the line of Pharez descended king David and then Jesus Christ. Both these sons are mentioned in the genealogy of Christ in Matthew 1:3. Shelah is not mentioned in that line, despite him fathering his own line.

It is noted by Matthew Henry in his 'Commentary' (page 62, 3rd column):

"that the four eldest sons of Jacob fell under very foul guilt. Reuben and Judah under the guilt of incest, Simeon and Levi under that of murder, yet they were patriarchs, and from Levi descended the priests, from Judah the kings and Messiah. Thus they became examples of repentance, and monuments of pardoning mercy."

I would suggest that the important points in this account are to do with the line of the Messiah. And, yes, the colour of the cord used to identify that first-born baby appropriately signified royalty. There is also the scarlet cord the prostitute Rahab used to save the spies and her own family, and the scarlet thread in the garments of priests. But this is not a detour in the main story, for the main theme of scripture is (starting from Genesis 3:15) to trace the spiritual matters pertaining to the promised "seed of the woman". Judah and Tamar were unwitting 'players' in that line of the Messiah, and it was God who determined who their first-born son would be, just as he did in determining the birth-right of twins Esau and Jacob, reversing the natural order.

Anne
  • 23,484
  • 1
  • 21
  • 84
  • 1
  • 1 I am glad to see Tamar (one of the heroines of the OT IMO) begin to receive the credit due her. I'd say she was not completely unwitting either... she risked her life to preserve the chosen lineage. I think she was at least partly aware of her providential role. Like Mary in a later drama she was incorrectly thought to have committed adultery by the central male figure in the story. I like to think that God guided her.
  • – Dan Fefferman Jan 12 '24 at 03:32