Then Judah said to Onan, Go in to thy brother's wife, and fulfil to her the brother-in-law's duty, and raise up seed to thy brother.
Judah tells his second son to marry his dead brother's widow and father a child in the dead brother's name. Two questions follow: what duty was Judah calling on, and why did refusing it displease God so deeply?
Judah was not inventing a family arrangement. He was calling on a known custom.
One marked exception was needed to keep up tribal inheritance in Israel. It existed elsewhere, but it applied to no other people as it did to them, and still less to a Christian: a Levirate, or brother-in-law, marriage. It came into force when a man died childless. Then his brother or next of kin was called to raise up offspring for the dead man. The aim was to hold the family line and the inheritance together. If the nearer kinsman refused, the widow had the right to take off his shoe in public and spit in his face.
More than property was at stake.
The law made a merciful provision (Deut. 25:5-10): no man's family should die out while a brother lived to carry on the line. In Israel, to be childless was a disgrace. If a man's name was blotted out — his family dying out — people saw it as a special mark of God's displeasure... In His provision there seems, too, to be a recognition of that hope in the heart of every Hebrew woman: that through her the promise of "the woman's seed" might somehow be fulfilled. This came true literally in the family line kept alive through Ruth.
Judah is giving orders about a marriage. His own marriage had already broken with what his family stood for.
Judah had no regard for the ancient landmark set up by Abraham, who said, "you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites" (Gen. 24:3)... The way he chose his wife is suggested by the phrase "And Judah saw," much the same as Samson in later years... There was no thought of making a choice according to the mind of God.
Onan obeyed the letter of his father's command and refused its whole purpose.
Onan married Tamar but then refused to grant her the privilege of being the mother of Judah's heir. He was prepared to marry her and enjoy conjugal relations, but he wanted to hold back his strength. The sin that is so displeasing to God in Onan's case was not simply spilling his seed on the ground, but selfishness. He wanted her to remain a childless and despised widow, and his whole attitude was governed by this. It was not a single sin but a repeated one, for the word "when" in verse 9 should read "whenever."
Judah's line survives this chapter. Some writers find that outcome written into the meaning of his three sons' names.
His seed still continues on the earth, even though God's wrath rests on the first two sons. Their names speak: Er of "enmity," and Onan of "iniquity." The third son, Shelah ("sprout"?), speaks of divine power in resurrection, bringing life out of death. So a remnant is preserved.
The line Onan refused to continue went on anyway. The New Testament does not hide where it led.
"It is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah" (Heb. 7:14). But how? "Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar" (Matt. 1:3). This is especially striking. God, in His great grace, rises above the sin and folly of man to bring about His own purposes of love and mercy... How plain it is that when we reach the close of the first chapter of Matthew, it is "God manifest in the flesh" we find. Man could never have devised such a genealogy.
- Duty. The command was a levirate marriage. When a man died childless, his brother fathered a child to keep the dead man's name and inheritance alive in Israel.
- Dread. Israel saw a blotted-out name as a mark of God's displeasure. Every Hebrew woman's hope of childbearing touched the promise of "the woman's seed."
- Descent. Judah had already chosen his own wife by sight, with no thought of choosing according to the mind of God.
- Denial. Onan took the marriage and refused the child. God judged his selfishness — a sin he repeated, not a single lapse.
- Deliverance. The line two sons could not continue ran on to Christ — a genealogy naming Tamar that no man would have designed.
But when Onan knew that the seed should not be his own, it came to pass when he went in to his brother's wife, that he spilled [it] on the ground, in order to give no seed to his brother.
Genesis 38 pauses the story of Joseph and turns to Judah's family. Verse 9 shows a man taking his brother's widow while making sure she would never bear his brother's heir. The act looks technical. Commentators look behind it to the motive, and to why the Lord answered it with death.
Behind the verse stands a custom that later became law in Israel. Its aim was not private happiness but the survival of a family line and its land.
One marked exception was needed to keep up tribal inheritance in Israel: a levirate, or brother-in-law, marriage. It existed elsewhere too, but it applied to no other people as it did to Israel, and still less to a Christian. It was used when a man died childless. His brother or next of kin then had to raise up a child for the dead man. The aim was to bind up the family line and the inheritance. This mattered so much that if the nearer kinsman refused, the widow had the right to take off his shoe in public and spit in his face.
What was at stake for the widow and the dead man was more than property.
The law made a merciful provision: no man's family should die out while a brother was still alive to carry on the line. In Israel, to be childless was a disgrace. For a man's name to be blotted out — his family dying out — counted as a special mark of God's displeasure.
The verse itself gives the motive: Onan knew the child would not count as his. One writer names the sin behind that, and reads verse 9 as "whenever," not "when" — a habit, not one lapse.
Onan married Tamar but then refused to grant her the privilege of being the mother of Judah's heir. He was prepared to marry her and enjoy the relationship, but he wanted to hold back from giving of his strength. In Onan's case, the sin that is so displeasing to God was not simply spilling his seed on the ground. It was selfishness. He wanted her to stay a childless and despised widow, and that desire ruled his whole attitude. It was not a single sin but a repeated one, for the word "when" in verse 9 should read "whenever."
Another writer calls it a broken agreement.
Onan, the second son, agreed to take Er's widow as his wife so as to have a child who would count as his brother's. But he did not honour his side of the agreement, and the Lord considered this serious enough to kill him too. The reason was his complete selfishness: the child would not count as his own, though in fact it would be.
Genesis names God in two ways, and the difference matters. One writer marks where the name "Jehovah" appears in the book.
In the rest of the book, "Jehovah" appears in only three places. The first is Judah's case, chapter 38:7-10, where one sees His special ways and His government. The second is Joseph sold and in trial, chapter 39. The third is Jacob's waiting for His salvation. We often get "God" — His dealings as ruling all things, in contrast with men.
This is the family through whom the Messiah would come, and the chapter opens a crisis over who will carry that line forward.
This passage gives us the first crisis of succession in Judah. We know that our Lord came from Judah, so we can see Satan breaking into the situation. His aim was always to hinder the coming and work of the Messiah.
One writer asks why this chapter breaks into the story of Joseph at all.
It seems the sorry story of Judah is told to bring out all the more how Joseph stood firm under a temptation of the same kind. Judah appears to have been among the better behaved of Jacob's sons. Yet the practices that marked him and his family were evil, and clearly accepted as nothing unusual.
Onan refused to raise up his brother's line. It came anyway, and Scripture kept the record of the failure.
Tamar's sin was the very thing that brought her into the Lord's genealogy. And it is simply as sinners that we have the right to rejoice in a work done for sinners. In a day that is near, Judah will find his right standing not in legal righteousness, and not in mere descent from Abraham, but in the truth that God has stressed for us here.
- Duty. The custom protected two things: a dead man's name and inheritance, and his widow's hope of a child.
- Withholding. Onan took the marriage and refused the duty. Commentators put the offence in his selfishness, and in a habit he kept repeating.
- Government. The chapter uses God's covenant name, Jehovah. These deaths were His own direct dealing with Judah's line.
- Design. The Messiah would come through this line. Onan refused the very heir it needed, and Satan's hand was behind the crisis.
- Grace. The line survived. Tamar's name stands in the Lord's genealogy, sin and all, so that sinners may rejoice in a work done for sinners.
And the thing which he did was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and he slew him also.
This is the second death in Judah's family, and Genesis marks it with the name "the LORD." Two questions follow. What was so evil in what Onan did? And why does this dark story sit inside the family line that leads to the Messiah?
The act described in verse 9 was not the whole offence. Onan took the marriage and refused the duty that came with it.
Onan married Tamar, but then refused to grant her the privilege of being the mother of Judah's heir. He was prepared to marry her and enjoy relations with her, but he wanted to hold back his strength. In Onan's case, the sin that so displeases God was not simply spilling his seed on the ground. It was selfishness. He wanted her to stay a childless and despised widow, and that desire drove everything he did. It was not a single sin but a repeated one, for the word "when" in verse 9 should read "whenever."
Another writer frames it as an agreement made and then broken:
He did not keep his side of the agreement, and the Lord considered this serious enough to kill him too. The reason was his complete selfishness: the child would not count as his own, even though it really would be.
Which name for God the text uses matters here. Genesis does not simply say "God." It uses "the LORD" — Jehovah.
In the rest of the book, the name "Jehovah" is used in only a few places. One is Judah's case, chapter 38:7-10, where you can see that these are His own special ways and His government. Another is Joseph sold and in trial, chapter 39. Another is after Dan, where Jacob waits for His salvation, chapter 49:18 — the longing of an Israelite for the coming kingdom.
So this death is not bad luck. It is God dealing with Judah's house in His own government.
Onan's death is the second in a row. Judah watched his own household fall apart under God's hand.
Judah could have cried out, "My house is not so with God!" Er, his firstborn, "was wicked in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD put him to death." Then Onan, his second son, rebelled against his father's command, and the Lord killed him too.
Judah had married into Canaan, and the results showed in his sons.
Judah was to be the leading royal tribe and the ancestor of the King of kings. Yet he shamelessly takes a daughter of Canaan for himself. No wonder that wickedness killed his firstborn, and disgrace killed his brother.
Some writers find meaning in the names of Judah's three sons. They read the loss of the first two as a picture of God's dealings with the nation.
Judah's line still continues on the earth, even though God's wrath is on the first two sons. Their names speak of "enmity" (Er) and "iniquity" (Onan). But the third son, Shelah ("sprout"?), speaks of divine power in resurrection, bringing life out of death. In this way God preserves a remnant.
The text itself does not give these meanings. Commentators offer them as a suggestion.
This chapter is one of the ugliest in Genesis, yet God does not abandon Judah. The same story that records two deaths also carries the line that leads to Christ.
Yet from this guilty Judah, and from Tamar, came the One who cleanses from all sin by His blood. He will reign over the universe to God's glory. That reign goes far beyond all that Joseph pictured, just as He went far lower in humiliation and suffering.
God's answer to this chapter is not to cover it up.
Tamar's name appears in the Lord's genealogy in the gospel of Matthew. Her sin alone brought her there, and God has taken pains to record this striking fact — and to record it twice. In the same way, simply as sinners, we have the right to rejoice in a work done for the need of sinners.
- Selfishness — the sin was not one physical act. It was a settled refusal to give his brother an heir, repeated every time. Verse 9 means "whenever," not "once."
- Seen — the name "the LORD" marks this death. It shows God's own ways and His government at work in Judah's house.
- Sown — Judah married into Canaan, and he reaped the harvest in his sons. What the father allowed, the next generation acted out.
- Spared — two sons are gone, but a third remains. Some read Shelah's name as "sprout": a remnant brought out of death.
- Saved — the line God judged is the line God kept. Tamar's name stands in Christ's genealogy, and it was her sin that brought her there.
And Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, Remain a widow in thy father's house, until Shelah my son is grown; for he said, Lest he die also, as his brethren. And Tamar went and remained in her father's house.
Judah has just buried two sons, and now he speaks to the widow they left behind. His words sound like a promise: a home, a wait, then marriage when his youngest son is grown. But the verse also tells us what he was thinking, and the two do not match.
Judah's arrangement looks like care. In fact it keeps from Tamar what was hers by right, and one writer also finds a flaw in the plan itself:
Tamar had the right to be the mother of Judah's heir. He kept that right from her, and in doing so he blamed her for the death of his sons. He did not blame his own sons for any wrong. Judah's favouritism towards his own family blinded him to the truth… Many people today let family ties sway their judgment in important matters. Judah's values are twisted. On a practical note, the idea that Shelah could be a husband before he was full grown also goes against the mind of God… Every area of life calls for maturity: physical, mental and emotional. Shelah was much younger than Tamar, and that was not a good recipe for a marriage.
Notice where Judah puts the blame. He fears for Shelah, so he sends Tamar away, and his own sons go unblamed.
Judah's promise had a date on it: "till Shelah my son grows up."
Judah promised Tamar that she could marry Shelah when he was grown, since he was still young. In the meantime he asked her to remain a widow in her father's house. But we shall see that Judah failed to keep his promise, just as the tribe of Judah has done again and again.
Tamar obeyed. She went back to her father's house and stayed there. Her willingness shows what she wanted:
Tamar had the natural desire for children. She was clearly content to wait until Judah's third son was old enough to be her husband. That seemed to show she valued her place in the family of Jacob.
Her patience did not last. Later she took matters into her own hands, and one writer weighs both sides:
Her desire for children was a right one. We can admire how she valued a place in the family where God's Name was known, and the righteous, trusting qualities she showed in her patient waiting as a widow. But we cannot excuse what she did to get what she wanted. It showed a lack of confidence in God, and the sin itself was unnatural… How ready we are by nature to try to get God's blessing in our own way.
Judah's neglect of Tamar is the first of three failures here. All three show up again in a later king:
Judah's failure has features that strongly remind us of David's failure. First, Judah neglected his duty towards Tamar. Second, he indulged the flesh and so badly dishonoured the Name of the Lord. Third, he was quick to pass the death sentence on evil he was guilty of himself. Do we not see these very same features in the failure of King David?
Everything in this chapter runs downhill. Yet the line to the King of kings runs straight through it, and it is not Judah who rescues it:
Judah was to be the royal tribe above all others, and the ancestor of the King of kings. Yet he takes a daughter of Canaan for himself with no regard for God. No wonder wickedness killed his firstborn, and disgraceful conduct his brother. No wonder the widow got no regard from the third son… Such is man, and such Judah; but such too is God. Where terrible sin increased, grace increased far more.
- Right withheld — Tamar had the right to be the mother of Judah's heir. Judah told her to go home and wait, which looked like care but kept that right from her.
- Blame misplaced — Judah feared for Shelah, so he treated Tamar as the danger. His own sons he did not blame at all.
- Promise broken — Judah never kept the promise he made about Shelah. Writers see in that broken word a pattern the tribe of Judah repeated.
- Waiting misused — We can admire Tamar's waiting and how she valued a place in Jacob's family. Her later scheme has no excuse, since it showed a lack of confidence in God.
- Grace exceeding — The chapter runs downhill from here. Still the line to the King runs through it, because where sin increased, grace increased far more.