Genesis 37:25–28, 36; 38:1; 39:1 — Was Joseph Sold to Ishmaelites or Midianites?

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Free for All

$5.00

Introduction: The Apparent Problem

Critics of the Bible often draw attention to what they claim are discrepancies in the narrative of Joseph’s betrayal and sale into slavery, particularly concerning the identity of those responsible for transporting him to Egypt and selling him to Potiphar. Genesis 37:25–28 and 37:36 mention both “Ishmaelites” and “Midianites,” while Genesis 39:1 refers to the Ishmaelites again. The question is this: was Joseph sold by the Midianites or the Ishmaelites? And who delivered him to Potiphar in Egypt?

This textual complexity has led many liberal scholars, particularly those advocating the Documentary Hypothesis, to argue that this passage is a conflation of multiple, originally independent sources (commonly labeled “J” and “E”) later edited together by a redactor. Such speculative theories undermine the unity, coherence, and divine inspiration of the text and often lack any supporting manuscript evidence. However, upon close grammatical, historical, and theological analysis using the historical-grammatical method, the supposed contradiction dissolves.

The Textual Data: A Summary of the Passages

Genesis 37:25–28 (UASV)

25 Then they sat down to eat bread. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing labdanum gum, balsam, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt.
26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother and conceal his blood?
27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him.
28 Then Midianite traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt.

Genesis 37:36 (UASV)

Meanwhile the Midianites had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.

Genesis 39:1 (UASV)

Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the hand of the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.

Evaluating the Alleged Discrepancy

The textual complexity arises from the interchange of “Ishmaelites” and “Midianites” in these verses. Critics allege that the narrative lacks consistency, suggesting multiple conflicting accounts. However, this tension is superficial and resolves when considering the following historical and textual realities:

1. Historical and Ethnographic Considerations

Both the Midianites and the Ishmaelites trace their lineage to Abraham, though through different mothers. Ishmael was the son of Hagar (Genesis 16:15), and Midian was the son of Keturah, whom Abraham married after Sarah’s death (Genesis 25:1–2). This shared ancestry would likely result in close geographic proximity, trade alliances, intermarriage, and overlapping cultural identifiers, especially as nomadic tribes.

In the ancient Near East, tribal designations were often fluid and contextual. It was not unusual for related groups to be referred to interchangeably, particularly in the case of coalition caravans or mixed trading guilds. For example, in Judges 8:24, Gideon refers to his enemies as “Ishmaelites,” though they are elsewhere described as Midianites (Judges 7:25; 8:22, 26). This supports the idea that the terms could refer to overlapping or closely associated groups.

Thus, what appears to be a contradiction is more accurately a multi-faceted description of a complex social reality in which Midianite merchants could operate within or alongside an Ishmaelite caravan.

2. Grammatical and Narrative Flow of Genesis 37:25–28

Verse 25 introduces an Ishmaelite caravan. Judah suggests in verses 26–27 that they sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites, whose presence is already noted.

Then verse 28 states:

“Then Midianite traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites…”

Some translations and interpretations mistakenly see the subject of “they drew Joseph up” as the brothers. However, in Hebrew, the grammatical subject seems to shift to the Midianite traders, suggesting that they were the ones who physically extracted Joseph and handled the transaction.

This interpretation presents the Midianites as intermediary agents who drew Joseph from the pit, possibly acting independently of or in coordination with his brothers, and sold him to the Ishmaelites, who then carried him to Egypt. This is a realistic trading operation: multiple parties may be involved, each with a distinct role in the slave trade process.

Thus, Joseph could have been:

Found and extracted by Midianites
Sold to the Ishmaelites for transport
Brought to Egypt by the Ishmaelites
Resold by either group to Potiphar

This eliminates any contradiction and aligns naturally with the text.

3. Who Sold Joseph to Potiphar?

Genesis 37:36 states the Midianites sold Joseph to Potiphar.
Genesis 39:1 says Potiphar bought him from the Ishmaelites.

Again, these verses are not mutually exclusive. Either:

The Midianites directly sold Joseph to Potiphar (representing the seller’s role), or
The Ishmaelites, who were the transporters and handlers of the caravan, made the sale.

Alternatively, both groups could have played roles in a shared commercial venture, a common occurrence in nomadic trading networks. The Midianites may have acquired Joseph from the brothers, handed him off to their Ishmaelite partners, and either party finalized the transaction in Egypt.

The account does not require exact duplication of every detail in each verse. The Hebrew narrative often describes events in complementary snapshots, and different verses can reflect different perspectives of the same event. Thus, the Midianites and Ishmaelites were both involved — neither account excludes the other.

4. The Documentary Hypothesis: An Overreach

E. A. Speiser, advocating for the Documentary Hypothesis, asserts that conflicting “J” and “E” sources account for the differences — Judah and the Ishmaelites in one source, Reuben and the Midianites in another. According to this theory, a redactor later stitched these together, resulting in a contradiction.

However, there is no manuscript evidence for this hypothetical redactor or the supposed multiple source texts. The Documentary Hypothesis is highly speculative, methodologically flawed, and often imposes a false dichotomy where narrative complexity is mistaken for editorial inconsistency.

What proponents of source criticism ignore is the ancient Hebrew literary style, which commonly employs repetition, parallelism, and alternating terminology to give a full picture of events. The so-called contradictions dissolve when we accept that ancient authors, under inspiration, were fully capable of describing multi-layered interactions involving multiple groups.

5. Realistic Trade Practice Reflected in the Text

Joseph’s sale reflects the complexity of ancient Near Eastern trade networks. It was not uncommon for slave transactions to involve:

Acquisition by one party (Midianites)
Transfer to another for transport (Ishmaelites)
Final sale by either party (Midianites or Ishmaelites)

Genesis reflects these layers, not as contradictions, but as accurate descriptions of each stage in the process. It would be simplistic and historically inaccurate to expect that only one group would be involved from beginning to end.

Thus, the involvement of both the Midianites and the Ishmaelites is realistically complementary, not contradictory.

Conclusion: A Coherent Narrative Without Contradiction

The question “Was Joseph sold to Ishmaelites or Midianites?” is best answered with: both. The Midianites appear to have played the role of extractors and initial sellers, while the Ishmaelites were the caravan traders who transported Joseph to Egypt. At Egypt, either party may have executed the sale to Potiphar, but both were evidently involved in the transaction chain.

There is no need to postulate editorial splicing from divergent sources or invoke redactional reconstruction. The biblical narrative is cohesive and consistent when understood through the lens of the historical-grammatical method, an awareness of cultural context, and the linguistic conventions of Hebrew narrative.

What the text presents is not confusion or contradiction, but a complex, multi-actor event — entirely believable and internally coherent — showing once again that Scripture can stand up to the most rigorous scrutiny.

Please Support the Bible Translation Work for the Updated American Standard Version (UASV) http://www.uasvbible.org

$5.00

You May Also Benefit From

How Can We Explain Bible Difficulties?

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).