And when Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister, and said to Jacob, Give me children, or else I die.
Rachel had Jacob's love but no children, and her sister's family kept growing. Her demand to Jacob opens a chapter of family rivalry and raises a hard question: what does a believer do when God holds back the one thing the heart wants most?
The verse names Rachel's envy before it reports her words. One writer traces what that envy did to her.
It is easy to see, and sad to see, why Rachel looked at her own childlessness and her sister's many children with bitterness. Self was at work. It blinded her to one thing: her sister did not have Jacob's heart, and she alone held it. It was envy — that low feeling which cannot bear another person, even a sister, having what it lacks. And it broke out in unreasonable and irreverent complaining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault.
Her words are passionate, but God is nowhere in them. One writer weighs that silence against how her story ended.
Her passionate cry for children shows no recognition at all of the will of God (Gen. 30:1). It does not compare well with Hannah's submissive spirit and humble prayer to the Lord. And it prepares us for the despair that overwhelmed her later. The thing she dreamed would be a spring of happiness turned out to be a bitter and deadly drink of sorrow.
One writer fills in the picture of Hannah.
How different Hannah was! She was sorrowful under Peninnah's taunts, and under the high priest's wrong judgment of her too. She did not break out into unfitting complaints against her husband. She wept and prayed and made a vow to Jehovah, and the God of Israel heard her.
Readers may wonder why a squabble between two sisters is in the Bible at all. One writer answers that Scripture shows people as they really are.
Revelation about God, and from God, is the essential difference between Scripture and all other writings. Yet there is much more in it of the greatest value. We have man as he is, as nowhere else. Scripture tells us the truth so that we may know ourselves as well as God. So it matters, and it is deeply interesting, that God gives inspired light on what the proud selfishness of man's mind tends to despise as mere domestic squabbles.
Another writer sees the whole chapter as a fall from the fathers before Jacob, and watches how Rachel speaks of God.
How terribly everything has fallen, in moral terms, from Abraham's time, and even Isaac's. This is not barrenness of the flesh with God stepping in, in promise and power. Instead — oh, what a scene of selfishness, jealousy, and scheming! Only one patch of green is in it — Rachel, the barren one, is heard. Even in her special circumstances Rachel has no thought of Jehovah's ways here. It is "God has judged me," and so it goes on all through, until grace softens her heart. Then she says, in faith, "Jehovah will add."
One writer turns Rachel's demand into a warning for every Christian who sees no results.
We may see a serious lesson in Rachel's words, "Give me children, or I shall die!" If we do not see clear fruit, we have a tendency to give up. The exercise of soul that desires true godliness may in effect die. Many Christians have their proper growth stunted by this very thing.
The same writer looks at Jacob's angry reply in the next verse.
On the other hand, Jacob's anger does not help the situation. If Christ is not the Object of our lives, our efforts to make ourselves more spiritual will always bring in the principles of jealousy, anger and discouragement. These work against the very result we seek.
The story does not end with the demand. One writer follows Rachel to the point where God answered her.
Rachel at last becomes a refreshment to the heart, through the thoughtful tenderness of God's ways. She was humbled for a long time because of her unworthy self-seeking. Then God was pleased to pity her and give her the son she had wanted so much. Then she said, God has taken away my reproach. Despite her proud bearing, she knew she had been under God's discipline. The name she gave her firstborn is striking, for Joseph means He will add.
- Envy blinds. Rachel could not see that she alone held Jacob's heart, because her eyes stayed on what her sister had.
- Envy misfires. Her complaint landed on her husband, as though her barrenness were his doing.
- Envy substitutes. She demanded from Jacob what Hannah asked from God, and Jacob's anger only added to the damage.
- Envy stunts. When no fruit shows, the desire for godliness can die, and many Christians stay stunted because of it.
- Grace outlasts envy. God pitied the woman who had demanded, took away her reproach, and gave her Joseph — a name meaning "He will add."
And Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, Am I in God's stead, who has withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?
Rachel has her husband's love, but her sister has the children. Her demand to Jacob turns a private grief into a charge against him. His sharp reply puts the question back where it belongs: God closed her womb, not her husband.
Commentators trace Rachel's outburst to the sight of what Leah had.
One understands too well, too sadly, why Rachel should look at her own childlessness and her sister's many children with bitterness. Self worked in her and blinded her to what her sister lacked: Jacob's heart, which she alone had. It was envy, that low feeling which cannot bear another person — even a sister — having what she does not have. It broke out in unreasonable and irreverent complaining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault. No wonder his anger resented her unworthy state in his reply: "Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?"
Jacob's reply was true, but his anger helped nothing.
On the other hand, Jacob's anger does not help the situation. If Christ is not the Object of our lives, our efforts to make ourselves more spiritual will always involve jealousy, anger and discouragement. These work against the very result we want.
Jacob names God as the One who closed her womb. From this verse on, the story uses a different name for God. One writer says the change is deliberate, not a sign of different authors patched together.
The name is Jehovah in Genesis 29 and Elohim in Genesis 30:2-23. Yet in the very next verse (24) Rachel says not Elohim but Jehovah, and it is the same in verses 27 and 30. The idea of different writers is pure imagination. It explains nothing, and it blocks any proper enquiry into God's own reason for the change of name. God, or Elohim, is the name that stands in contrast with man; Jehovah is His name of relationship.
That change of name matches Rachel's own heart. She speaks of God as a distant judge, until grace works in her.
Rachel here, even in her special circumstances, has no thought of Jehovah's ways. It is "Elohim has judged me," and so it goes on, until grace softens her heart. Then she says, in faith, "Jehovah will add."
Rachel's words carry more than a wife's grief. They picture a collapse familiar to any believer who sees no results.
The fruitfulness of Leah moved Rachel to jealousy, then her demand to Jacob for children moves him to anger (vv. 1-2). We may see a serious lesson in Rachel's words, "Give me children or else I die." If we do not see clear fruit, we tend to give up. The work in the soul that longs for true godliness may all but die. This very thing stunts the proper growth of many Christians.
What follows in the chapter shows the next step down. Instead of waiting, Rachel borrows a plan from Sarah, Abraham's wife — a plan that had not worked before.
Then we too often turn to a substitute of our own making, as Rachel did in verse 3. Sarah had done the same when she gave Abraham her servant to have a child by her. Rachel ought to have known that this did not work out as Sarah planned. But she thought, like Sarah, that the children of Bilhah, her servant, would be hers.
Later in the chapter Rachel stops scheming and prays. One writer marks the turn.
When we reach verse 22, we find God begins to act, and we leave behind the scheming of the two wives, though it is still Rachel who gives the name Joseph. Yet here is a son born as the fruit of God acting in answer to Rachel's prayers. The story rises to a higher level.
Kelly sets Rachel beside Hannah, another wife who had no children.
How different she was from Hannah! Peninnah's taunts made her sorrowful, and even the high priest misjudged her. Yet Hannah made no unworthy complaints against her husband. She wept and prayed and made vows to Jehovah, and the God of Israel heard her.
- Envy. Rachel had her husband's whole heart. Still she could not bear that Leah had children. Envy cannot stand to see another hold what it lacks.
- Blame. She aimed her complaint at Jacob, but her barrenness was never his doing. His angry reply only added a second wrong to the first.
- God's hand. Jacob's question puts the closed womb in God's hands. From this verse on, the change in the divine name follows Rachel's own distance from Him.
- Collapse. "Or else I die" is the voice of a soul that sees no fruit. It gives up, or grabs a substitute — as Rachel did with Bilhah, though Sarah's plan had not worked.
- Prayer. God acts in verse 22. Joseph comes as the fruit of Rachel's prayers. Hannah shows the same path: tears and vows to God instead of complaints against a husband.
And she said, Behold, there is my maid, Bilhah go in to her, in order that she may bear on my knees, and I may also be built up by her.
Rachel cannot have children. She hands her servant Bilhah to Jacob and asks for the child as her own. Two sons come of it — but commentators ask whether a woman may reach for God's blessing by a plan of her own, and what such a plan costs a home.
Writers set Rachel's request inside a custom of the time. Families prized children above almost everything else.
David proclaimed, "Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward." Psalm 127:3. Women in the East had a great desire for children. You can see it in Sarah, Rachel, and Leah giving their handmaids to their husbands so that they might have children by them. This always marked the women of Israel afterwards.
Rachel's plan was not new. Abraham's household had tried it, and the family knew how it ended. Kelly traces the chain: envy of her sister, unreasonable complaining to her husband, Jacob's sharp reply, then this plan.
It was envy — that base feeling which cannot bear to see another, even a sister, have what she had not. It broke out in unreasonable and irreverent complaining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault. No wonder his anger resented her unworthy state. He replied, "Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?" But he gave in to her proposal, and takes Bilhah so that she might have children by her maid. Had not honoured Sarah done the same? Yes, but through Ishmael did its fruit not end in the expulsion of both Hagar and her son? Was this encouraging?
Rachel's answer was a substitute of her own making. One writer sees the same pattern in believers today.
Then we too often resort to a humanly conceived substitution, as Rachel did in verse 3. Sarah had done the same in giving Abraham her handmaid by whom to have a child. Rachel ought to have known that this did not work out as Sarah planned. But she thought, as Sarah did, that the children of Bilhah, her handmaid, would be hers... All of this struggle is a picture of the struggle in Romans 7. We try to subdue the evil passions of our hearts, but the effort only stirs them up.
A second woman in the house did not settle the rivalry. Bellett sets Jacob's home beside Abraham's, and traces where the trouble came from and what removes it.
The house of Abraham was such a scene. There Hagar and Sarah lived together for a time, but in sad discord and strife. Again, the family of Jacob showed the same. Leah and Rachel, the two wives, lived together, but between them there was the same disturbance, reproach and envy... Unbelief brought the trouble in, and only strengthening the freewoman could remove it. So it was Sarah's unbelief that brought Hagar into the family. She could have waited in the patience of faith for the Lord's time. Then she would never have given her maid to Abraham, and Hagar and Ishmael would not have cost her fourteen years of sorrow.
Commentators say plainly that this was never God's design for marriage. Yet He did not disown the children it produced.
All this shows what God's institution of marriage was: one man and one woman, the two and only two, becoming one. What is more than this is not of God... Jacob's two wives gave their handmaids to their husband, and so he had four wives. God counted the twelve sons of these four women all alike as sons of Jacob, and they became the heads of the twelve tribes. One might have thought that God would not bless the children of these unions, but He did.
The names Rachel gave Bilhah's sons say what was in her heart. Yet the story does not end there.
The names Rachel gave the sons of Bilhah expressed the state of her soul, and her attitude toward her sister. Dan and Naphtali do not tell us of grace, but of satisfaction in winning points of strife on her own part... Every wrong has its effect among men and its judgment before Him. But God alone has the right to cause all things to work together for good to those who love Him, the called according to purpose.
- Envy starts it. Rachel could not bear that her sister had what she lacked, and blamed her husband for what God had withheld.
- The substitute follows. She borrows Sarah's plan and puts her servant in her place, forgetting how it ended for Sarah.
- Sorrow answers it. Unbelief brought a second woman into Abraham's house and into Jacob's. Both filled with discord and reproach.
- The order was known. Marriage from the start was one man and one woman; more than that is not from God.
- Grace outlasts it. God still counted all twelve sons as Jacob's and made them heads of the tribes. He works all things together for good to those who love Him.
And she gave him Bilhah her maidservant as wife, and Jacob went in to her.
Rachel, unable to have children, hands her servant Bilhah to Jacob, and Jacob agrees. It reads like a private family decision. Yet two of Israel's tribes came from it, and it raises a question: why does Scripture record such things?
These chapters read like family quarrels. One writer explains their value.
What sets Scripture apart from all other writings is that it reveals God and comes from God. But there is much more of the greatest value in it. We have man as he is, as nowhere else: the truth is told us so that we may know ourselves as well as God. That is why inspired light on these things is so interesting and important. Man's proud selfishness tends to dismiss them as mere family quarrels. To the believer they are full of healthy instruction, and they point to God's own concern and compassion... No one will boast before God. It is good and wise to learn that now, so that, as Scripture says, the one who boasts should boast in the Lord.
Jacob does not refuse. He gives in to a suggestion born of Rachel's envy — and one with an unhappy precedent already in his own family history.
It was envy — that low feeling that cannot bear another, even a sister, having what she has not. It broke out in unreasonable and irreverent complaining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault. No wonder his anger resented her unworthy state. He replied: "Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?" But he gave in to her plan, and took Bilhah so that Rachel might get children through her maid. Had not honoured Sarah done the same? Yes — but its fruit through Ishmael ended with Hagar and her son driven out. Was that encouraging?
Another childless woman in Scripture faced the same grief and a rival's taunts. She handled it differently.
How different from Hannah! She grieved under Peninnah's taunts, and even under the high priest's misjudgment. She made no improper complaints against her husband. She wept and prayed and made a vow to Jehovah, and the God of Israel heard her.
One writer sees Rachel's move as a pattern we all repeat.
Then we too often resort to a humanly devised substitution, as Rachel did in verse 3. Sarah had done the same in giving Abraham her handmaid to have a child by her. Rachel ought to have known that this did not work out as Sarah planned. But she thought, like Sarah, that the children of Bilhah, her handmaid, would be hers... All of this struggle is a picture of the struggle of Romans 7. That struggle only stirs up the evil passions of our hearts instead of subduing them, as we try to do.
The verse calls Bilhah a wife, and this left Jacob with four wives. That was never God's design — yet God did not disown the children.
All this shows that God's institution of marriage was the union of one man and one woman, the two and only two, becoming one. Anything more than this is not of God, but of human lust... Long after this, Scripture records wives who wanted children so much that they gave their maidservants to their husbands. We would now judge that as most unnatural in a wife... Jacob's two wives gave their handmaids to their husband, and so he had four wives. God counted the twelve sons of these four women equally as Jacob's own, and they became the heads of the twelve tribes. It might have been thought that God would not bless the offspring of these unions, but He did.
God's patience here had an end in view.
But in old times God permitted what was far from His mind, as we see here, until He makes all things new. Jacob was not Jesus, and neither was any other man, though a man of faith.
Rachel named Bilhah's two sons, and the names carry the rivalry behind them.
The names Rachel gave the sons of Bilhah expressed the state of her soul, and her attitude toward her sister. Dan and Naphtali do not speak of grace, but of satisfaction at scoring points of strife on her own part... Every wrong has its effect among men and its judgment before Himself. But it is God's prerogative to cause all things to work together for good to those who love Him, the called according to purpose. He at least is good and does good, whatever man has to mourn over.
- Envy starts it. Rachel could not bear her sister having what she lacked, and blamed her husband for what God had withheld.
- Substitution continues it. Handing over Bilhah was a human device to produce what only God gives. Sarah had tried it already, with painful results.
- Prayer was the road not taken. Hannah, in the same sorrow, wept, prayed and made a vow to God — and God heard her.
- God permitted what He never designed. Marriage was one man and one woman; God bore with departures from it until He makes all things new.
- Grace outlasts the mess. Dan and Naphtali record strife, not grace. Yet God counted these sons as Jacob's own, made them tribal heads, and works all things together for good.
And Bilhah conceived, and bore Jacob a son.
Rachel had no children, and she envied her sister, so she gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob to bear a child for her. This verse records the result, and the names that follow reveal both Rachel's heart and God's grace.
Rachel's plan came from a feeling she could not control. It also copied something that had already failed once.
It is all too sad to see why Rachel resented her own childlessness while her sister had many children. Self was at work in her. It blinded her to what her sister lacked: Jacob's heart, which Rachel alone had. It was envy, that low feeling which cannot bear another — even a sister — having what she had not... But he gave in to her proposal, and takes Bilhah so that she might have children through her maid. Had not Sarah, honoured as she was, done the same? Yes — but through Ishmael, did it not end with both Hagar and her son being driven out?
Handing a servant to her husband broke God's original design for marriage. Yet God did not write off the children.
All this shows what God set up marriage to be: the union of one man and one woman. The two, and only two, become one. What is more than this is not of God, but is of human lust... Jacob's two wives gave their handmaids to their husband, and so he had four wives. God counted the twelve sons of these four women as Jacob's sons, all alike, and they became the heads of the twelve tribes. It might have been thought that God would not have blessed the issue of these unions, but He did.
The next verse gives this boy his name. One writer links Rachel's method to a habit we still fall into.
Then we too often resort to a humanly devised substitute, as Rachel did in verse 3... When a boy was born (vv. 5-6), Rachel said that God had given her a son, and she named him Dan, meaning "judge."... All of this struggle is a picture of the struggle in Romans 7. We try to subdue the evil passions of our hearts, but this only stirs them up.
Here two things stand side by side: what Rachel's choices reveal, and what God does with them anyway.
The names Rachel gave the sons of Bilhah expressed the state of her soul, and toward her sister. Dan and Naphtali do not tell us of grace, but of satisfaction in gaining points of strife on her own part... But God keeps His own right. Every wrong has its effect among men, and it comes under His judgment. Even so, He causes all things to work together for good to those who love Him, the ones called according to His purpose.
Rachel gives God the credit for this birth. Which name she uses for Him matters.
How dreadfully everything has sunk morally since Abraham's time, and even Isaac's. This is not barrenness of the flesh, with God stepping in with promise and power. Instead, oh, what a scene of selfishness, jealousies, and scheming... So Rachel here, even in her special circumstances, has no thought of Jehovah's ways. She says, "God has judged me." It stays that way all the way through, until grace softens her heart. Then she says, in faith, "Jehovah will add."
This son becomes a whole tribe. Its future holds a dark chapter, and then blessing.
Dan was the first son of Rachel's maid Bilhah... Looking ahead, this brings us to the time when Israel governs itself again... It seems likely the antichrist will come from the tribe of Dan, since Revelation 7 leaves Dan out of the 144,000... Yet even so, Dan will have his place in the blessing of the millennium.
- Envy starts it. Rachel could not bear that her sister had what she lacked. Envy, not faith, drove the plan behind this birth.
- Copying fails. Rachel copied Sarah's substitute plan. Sarah's ended with Hagar and Ishmael driven out.
- Naming exposes. "Dan" means "judge"; the names Rachel chose speak of points won in a quarrel, not of grace.
- God still reckons. Jacob's family broke God's order for marriage. Even so, God counted all twelve sons as Jacob's and made them heads of the tribes.
- Grace outlasts strife. Rachel says "God" while her heart is hard. Grace softens her, and then she says "Jehovah." All the while God works everything together for good to those who love Him.
And Rachel said, God has done me justice, and has also heard my voice, and given me a son; therefore she called his name Dan.
Rachel is childless while her sister gives Jacob son after son, so she hands her servant Bilhah to him. When the boy is born, she names him Dan and calls it a verdict in her favour — but was God taking her side?
The child was not Rachel's own, and the plan behind him was not new.
Then we too often turn to a substitute of our own devising, as Rachel did. Sarah had done the same when she gave Abraham her servant to have a child by her. Rachel ought to have known that this did not work out as Sarah planned. But she thought, as Sarah did, that the children of Bilhah, her servant, would be hers. When a boy was born, Rachel said that God had given her a son, and she named him Dan, meaning "judge."
One writer names the feeling behind Rachel's demand, and sets her beside Hannah, another childless woman who took a different road.
It was envy. That low feeling cannot bear another person — even a sister — having what she did not have. It broke out in unreasonable and irreverent complaining to her husband, as if her barrenness were his fault... But he gave in to her proposal, and took Bilhah so that she might have children through her maid. Had not Sarah, who was honoured, done the same? Yes, but through Ishmael did it not end with both Hagar and her son being sent away?... How different from Hannah, sorrowful under Peninnah's taunts... She broke out into no improper complaints against her husband. She wept and prayed and made a vow to Jehovah, and the God of Israel heard her.
The names in this chapter tell us what was in the mother's heart. God still works good out of it.
The names Rachel gave the sons of Bilhah showed the state of her soul, and her feeling toward her sister. Dan and Naphtali do not speak of grace. They speak of her satisfaction at scoring points in the quarrel... But it is God's own right to cause all things to work together for good to those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose. Every wrong still has its effect among men and its judgment before Him. He at least is good and does good, whatever man has to mourn.
Rachel says "God" — Elohim — and not "Jehovah," the name the ESV prints as "the LORD." One writer weighs what her choice shows.
How far everything has sunk, morally, from Abraham's time, and even Isaac's. This is not the barrenness of the flesh, with God stepping in with promise and power. Oh, what a scene of selfishness, jealousy and cunning! There is only one green spot in it — Rachel, the barren one, is heard... So Rachel here, even in her special circumstances, has no thought of Jehovah's ways. She says, "Elohim has judged me," and it is like that all the way through, until grace softens her heart. Then she says, in faith, "Jehovah will add."
The mothers name these sons; Jacob has no say. One writer traces that silence to Jacob's own state at the time.
It is worth noting that in each case the mother gave the name, and it grew out of her own circumstances and feelings. Jacob does not appear to have had any say in the matter. In this up-and-down stretch of his life there is no record of his having an altar for sacrifice and fellowship with God. Being out of touch, he had no guidance about the names of his children.
The name given in a rivalry became a whole tribe's calling — and its warning.
Dan's place among the tribes stands for judgment, and that is an honourable place. Yet his later history contradicted the truth of that position. Dan was the first tribe to bring in idolatry openly. What a solemn lesson for us! When we are given the place of judging for God, we may take that authority for ourselves until it amounts to idolatry.
Yet the failure of the tribe did not cancel what its name promised.
Still, such is the grace of God that in Ezekiel's prophecy of the restoration of the tribes, Dan is the first named and provided for — the worst sinner of all. There the question is not one of service but of mercy... Then at last Jacob's promise comes true, the promise even their wickedness could not cancel: "Dan shall judge his people as one of the tribes of Israel."
- Judge. Dan means "judge," and Rachel gave the name because she read the birth as a ruling in her favour against her sister.
- Copied. Rachel took the plan from Sarah and Hagar, and it had already ended badly once.
- Elohim. She says "God has judged me," not "Jehovah" — that name comes only later, when grace has softened her.
- Silent. Jacob has no altar and no fellowship with God at this stage, so he has no voice in naming these sons.
- Overruled. A name born in strife became a tribe that fell into idolatry — yet mercy still keeps Dan's place among the tribes.