Prophetic Reverse

In the day of my distress I sought YHWH; my hand was stretched out in the night and it did not cease, my being refused to be comforted. Psalm 77:2 (ISR)

Refused To Be Comforted – It’s all connected. Of course, it’s not so easy to see the connections in translation, so let’s look for them in Hebrew. That’s where you will find the amazing intricacy of the text. Consider this phase, “refused to be comforted” (meana hinachem). It is found only three places in the Tanakh; here, Jeremiah 31:15 and Genesis 37:35. Applying the rabbinic principle keyotza bo bamakom acher (“as comes from it in another place”), we discover the prophetic connection between Jacob and Jesus (Ya’akob and Yeshua). In Genesis 37, Jacob (Ya’akob) refuses to be comforted over the loss of his son, Joseph. Aaron Eby explains the reason why. Jacob laments that he will descend to his son as if mourning toward Sheol. But we should not think of this as simply descending into hell. The idea of descending is often associated with “going down” to Egypt. In fact, Jacob’s refusal to be comforted is a prophetic statement that he and his sons will descend to Egypt where Joseph, the son who is no more, actually resides. In other words, Jacob will not be comforted with the lie of Joseph’s death because, prophetically, he announces that he will descend to his son again. Jacob may not realize the prophetic sense of his statement, but the author of the text certainly does.

When we see the same phrase in Jeremiah 31, we discover it is a prophetic announcement about Rachel’s children. Rachel weeps and refuses to be comforted for her children “because they are no more.” At least that’s what it look like in translation. But the Hebrew text doesn’t say “they are no more.” It says “he is no more.” In other words, the text deliberately shifts from the plural (children) to the singular (he). The rabbinic principle shows us that Rachel’s lament is connected to Joseph, the one who is described several times in Genesis by the phrase “who is no more.”

David, Israel’s brilliant theological poet, sees the connection between Jacob, comfort and Joseph. Of course, David also sees that the coming Messiah is Messiah ben Joseph, the one who will give himself up for the sake of the family of God. In the first century, most Jews expected to see the Messiah ben David, the conquering hero. Instead, Yeshua arrived as Messiah ben Joseph, the suffering servant. Matthew recognizes this difference and used precisely the same phrase in his rabbinic commentary on Jeremiah. He takes the Jeremiah passage and applies it to the disaster at Bethlehem, a disaster that occurs after Yeshua has descended into Egypt, exactly as Joseph descended into Egypt in divine preparation for the coming deliverance of God’s people.

What have we learned? First, we have discovered once again the intricate complexity of Scripture, woven together with a divine hand. Secondly, we have learned that Matthew (and the other apostolic writers) employed Hebraic imagery with rabbinic orientation. And so should we if we wish to understand them. Finally, we are once more confronted with a God who engineers human history for His own purposes. He is the God of all creation, including the event-creations of men. As we see His secret hand working behind the loss of a child, the exile and the coming of the Messiah, we must be humbled. All the plans of Man are but straw before the King of the universe.

Topical Index: sixth principle, comfort, meana hinachem, Psalm 77:2, Genesis 37:35, Jeremiah 31:15, Messiah