GENESIS 35:22 — Why Did Reuben Sleep with His Father’s Concubine Bilhah? Why Is It Briefly Mentioned?

Christian Publishing House

3 months ago

Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

The Difficulty

Genesis 35:22 records a disturbing moment in Israel’s early history: “While Israel was dwelling in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it.” Immediately thereafter, the narrative moves to listing Jacob’s twelve sons, with no further commentary or visible reaction. Critics and skeptics have long claimed that such brevity implies divine indifference, that the inspired author neglected to express moral disapproval, or even that the text reflects a humanly edited document attempting to conceal patriarchal wrongdoing. Yet such assertions fail to appreciate the nature of biblical narrative and the theological framework in which it was written.

The passage is terse because Scripture, under divine inspiration, often presents human sin without commentary, trusting the reader to interpret through the broader canon. The brevity is not a mark of approval but a deliberate restraint consistent with the historical and literary method of the Hebrew text. The account records the fact, not to excuse Reuben, but to prepare the reader for the moral and covenantal repercussions that would unfold later.

The Historical Context of the Event

This episode occurs shortly after Rachel’s death (Genesis 35:19). Bilhah, Rachel’s maidservant, had been given to Jacob as a concubine earlier (Genesis 30:3–7), bearing him two sons—Dan and Naphtali—on Rachel’s behalf. After Rachel’s passing, Bilhah would have remained in Jacob’s household, still counted among his wives or concubines.

Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn by Leah, now acts in a moment of defiance, taking Bilhah and “lying with her.” This was not simply a lustful act. It was a deliberate assertion of status, a violation of family order, and an insult both to his father and to the memory of Rachel, Jacob’s beloved wife. In the ancient Near Eastern context, sexual relations with a father’s concubine represented a symbolic seizure of authority.

This pattern reappears elsewhere in Scripture:

Absalom defied King David by lying with his father’s concubines on the palace roof (2 Samuel 16:21–22), signaling rebellion and a claim to the throne.
Adonijah, Solomon’s older brother, attempted to legitimize a claim to royal succession by asking for Abishag the Shunammite, a woman associated with King David’s household (1 Kings 2:13–25).

Both examples demonstrate that such acts were statements of dominance and usurpation, not mere immorality. Reuben’s transgression thus violated both moral law and the divinely ordered authority structure within the patriarchal family.

The Nature of Reuben’s Sin

Reuben’s act was deeply sinful on multiple levels.

Moral and Sexual Sin — Reuben’s relationship with Bilhah constituted incest according to Leviticus 18:8: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness.” Even though the Levitical Law was not yet codified, God’s moral law was known and binding (cf. Genesis 20:3–9). Reuben’s action therefore desecrated the sanctity of the family relationship.
Defiance of Paternal Authority — The act symbolized rebellion against Jacob’s headship. Reuben, as firstborn, was expected to uphold family honor, yet he dishonored his father in an act of prideful self-assertion.
Spiritual Corruption — As the eldest son of Israel, Reuben’s behavior displayed disregard for the covenant family through whom Jehovah’s promises would continue. His moral instability demonstrated that he was unfit to inherit the responsibilities that came with primogeniture.
Violation of Covenant Order — Jacob’s family was no ordinary household; it represented the covenant line of promise. Any attack upon its sanctity or order was an attack upon Jehovah’s redemptive purpose.

The Silence of Genesis 35:22

The inspired narrative records the event briefly and then transitions to the listing of Jacob’s twelve sons. The abrupt shift is not accidental or careless. The biblical historian deliberately avoids sensationalizing sin. Instead, Scripture frequently uses concise narrative statements to preserve moral seriousness without resorting to editorial commentary.

For example:

Genesis 9:20–25 records Noah’s drunkenness and Ham’s disrespect with minimal elaboration, yet the moral judgment is revealed through Noah’s subsequent curse.
2 Samuel 11–12 recounts David’s adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah. The initial account reports the events plainly; divine evaluation and judgment come later through Nathan’s prophetic rebuke.

Likewise, Genesis 35:22 establishes the fact of Reuben’s transgression so that its consequences can later be interpreted in the light of God’s revelation. The Holy Spirit’s economy of language intensifies, rather than diminishes, the moral gravity. Scripture’s brevity is not divine indifference—it is divine precision.

The Later Consequences and Divine Judgment

Jacob did not publicly react to Reuben’s sin at the time, perhaps due to the instability within his household following Rachel’s death and the ongoing consolidation of his family at Bethel. Yet his silence did not mean ignorance or approval. The verse notes pointedly, “and Israel heard of it.” This phrase assures the reader that the patriarch was aware, and that the offense was not forgotten.

Years later, when Jacob gathered his sons before his death, he addressed Reuben first:

“Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength,
preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power.
Unstable as water, you shall not have preeminence,
because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it.” (Genesis 49:3–4)

This pronouncement formally stripped Reuben of his birthright privileges. His moral instability disqualified him from the leadership role that should have been his by birth. His line would never produce kings, priests, or prophets of national prominence.

The chronicler later confirms this transfer of privilege:

“The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel—for he was the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, so that he is not enrolled in the genealogy according to the birthright; though Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came the leader, yet the birthright belonged to Joseph.” (1 Chronicles 5:1–2)

Thus, Reuben’s act reshaped Israel’s covenantal order. His forfeited birthright was divided:

The priestly line went to Levi.
The royal line went to Judah.
The double inheritance went to Joseph through his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh.

Reuben’s moral failure permanently altered the trajectory of his tribe. The consequences of sin, even when not immediately visible, remain certain and severe in divine justice.

The Theological Significance

Reuben’s sin and its understated record reveal crucial theological truths about the integrity of Scripture and the holiness of God.

Scriptural Honesty — The Bible never sanitizes the failures of its leading figures. It presents the patriarchs as real men with real weaknesses. This transparency strengthens the credibility of Scripture as an inspired historical record. Human sin does not invalidate divine revelation; rather, it magnifies God’s grace and faithfulness despite human failure.
Divine Faithfulness vs. Human Failure — Jehovah’s covenant with Jacob was unconditional in its ultimate fulfillment. Reuben’s defilement did not derail God’s plan. His faithfulness to His promises transcends human imperfection. The line of Messiah continued, not through Reuben, but through Judah, demonstrating divine sovereignty in directing redemptive history.
Moral Accountability — Even among God’s chosen people, sin bears consequence. Reuben’s position as firstborn did not protect him from divine justice. The narrative thus teaches that divine privilege does not negate personal responsibility.
Narrative Restraint as Moral Instruction — The silence of Genesis 35:22 is itself a moral device. By avoiding emotional editorializing, the text invites readers to judge the act in light of God’s revealed standards elsewhere. This pattern reinforces that Scripture interprets itself—later revelation illuminates earlier events without needing human commentary to impose judgment.

Covenant Integrity and Family Order

Jacob’s household was the seedbed of the covenant nation. Any disruption of its sanctity threatened to pollute the line through which Jehovah’s redemptive purposes would unfold. Reuben’s sin was therefore not a private moral lapse but a covenantal violation.

In patriarchal culture, the eldest son was expected to demonstrate loyalty, restraint, and leadership. His behavior was to model faithfulness within the household. By violating Bilhah, Reuben effectively profaned the very foundation of the covenant family.

This event prefigures the reality that leadership within God’s people is determined not by birth or position but by righteousness and obedience. The narrative underscores that privilege can be forfeited by sin and that God’s blessings flow through those who walk uprightly. Reuben’s moral instability serves as a warning that spiritual strength, not lineage, defines worthiness before God.

The Literary Integrity of the Passage

Genesis 35:22–26 serves as a hinge point in the patriarchal narratives. The verse marks both the end of Jacob’s family-building phase and the transition toward the emergence of the twelve tribes. The author, under inspiration, presents the sin of Reuben not as an isolated episode but as part of the broader covenantal history. The listing of Jacob’s sons immediately after the mention of Reuben’s sin emphasizes divine providence—the family line through which the promises will proceed remains intact, though individual members may fail.

This structural juxtaposition underscores a central biblical theme: God’s covenant advances despite human rebellion. Sin does not nullify divine sovereignty; it exposes human frailty and magnifies the need for divine grace.

The Broader Moral and Spiritual Lessons

Leadership Requires Moral Stability — Reuben’s instability (“unstable as water”) reveals the character defect that rendered him unfit for leadership. God’s servants must exhibit steadiness of purpose and moral consistency.
Privilege Increases Responsibility — The firstborn’s position carried honor and duty. Reuben’s failure demonstrates that privilege without faithfulness leads to greater accountability.
Jehovah’s Holiness Is Uncompromising — Sin within the covenant household received divine reproof. God’s standards are absolute, and His justice is impartial.
God’s Grace Overcomes Human Sin — Though Reuben failed, Jehovah continued to fulfill His promises to Jacob’s descendants. Divine grace triumphs, but not at the expense of divine holiness.

The Integrity of Scripture Affirmed

Far from indicating divine indifference or moral confusion, Genesis 35:22 reveals the inspired author’s commitment to truth. The text records both the sin and the consequence without exaggeration or concealment. This transparency is precisely what one would expect from the inspired, inerrant Word of God.

If Scripture were of human origin, it would likely omit or soften such embarrassing accounts of its patriarchs. Instead, the Bible exposes their failures, affirming that redemption depends solely on Jehovah’s mercy, not on human merit. This record, therefore, testifies to the divine authorship and moral authority of Scripture.

You May Also Enjoy

Did Jacob Deceive Laban? If So, Why Would God Bless Him? (Genesis 31:20)

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).

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS