Good evening, and welcome to EBible Fellowship’s Bible study in the book of Genesis.  Tonight is study #29 in Genesis 35, and we are continuing to read Genesis 35:22-26:

And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine: and Israel heard it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve: The sons of Leah; Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulun: The sons of Rachel; Joseph, and Benjamin: And the sons of Bilhah, Rachel's handmaid; Dan, and Naphtali: And the sons of Zilpah, Leah's handmaid; Gad, and Asher: these are the sons of Jacob, which were born to him in Padanaram.

I will stop reading there.  We have been discussing the statement in verse 22 about Reuben laying with his father’s concubine, and Israel heard it.  We realize this was a grievous sin.  A son is not to lay with his father’s wife, but Reuben transgressed that Law.  As a result, he lost the blessing and birthright of the firstborn.  I think that is why God points out in verse 23 that Jacob’s son Reuben was the firstborn.  God could have just listed their names without mentioning that, but the fact that Reuben lay with his father’s concubine Bilhah impacted his status as the firstborn son.  He lost that birthright, and it was given to the sons of Joseph, who were Ephraim and Manasseh.  They would receive the blessing of the firstborn, as we will read later in Genesis. 

Regarding Joseph being born, we read this interesting statement in Genesis 30:22-23:

And God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her, and opened her womb. And she conceived, and bare a son; and said, God hath taken away my reproach: And she called his name Joseph; and said, JEHOVAH shall add to me another son.

And the name Joseph means “add.”  That is fairly interesting.  When we went through this chapter, I thought it was referring to Benjamin, the fact that there would still be another son.  Rachel was certain of that, and maybe that is what she was thinking, but it is a fact that in the birth of Joseph it was really as though two sons were born because we see that as Jacob was nearing his death, he said in Genesis 48:5:

And now thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, which were born unto thee in the land of Egypt before I came unto thee into Egypt, are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine.

So Jacob was indicating that these two (sons) are his, as if they were born to him.  There is a lot involved in Joseph’s name, which means “add,” because he is a great type of Christ, but I think one of the things the Lord is pointing to here is that in Joseph there are actually two sons, or two tribes.  I just wanted to mention it because I was wondering if that is a possible solution to the statement in Genesis 35:26 that states that he had 12 sons born to him in Padanaram.  Lord willing, in our next study we will try to see if we can understand that statement.

Bur right now, let us get back to the situation of Reuben laying with Bilhah.  And remember that her name means “trouble,” and he certainly found it.  All sin brings trouble.  Every transgression of the Law of God will bring trouble into the life of the one who is sinning against God in any way.  And this resulted in Reuben losing the right of the firstborn.

We have looked at several Old Testament passages, and now we are going to go to the New Testament in 1Corinthians 5.  We have discussed this before, but now I think we will see how it fits perfectly with the spiritual meaning of this passage.  It says in 1Corinthians 5:1:

It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

This is a telling remark indicating just how sinful this is.  For an individual in the church to have been involved in that sin in the day of the Roman Empire, an empire that was supposedly full of wickedness debauchery, and yet this sin of one having his father’s wife was not even so much as named among the Gentiles at that time.  They would not have even thought of such a thing, but here we find it within Israel in the family of Jacob, historically, and it was his own firstborn son Reuben.  Then it goes on to say in 1Corinthians 5:2-5:

And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Here, Paul is acting in the place of God.  That is, he is a type and figure of Christ, and his judgment is in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.  And his judgment was to take this man who had committed this fornication and deliver him unto Satan.  For what?  “…for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”  This is a passage that those in the churches use to show they have the authority to excommunicate certain wicked members who engage in various sins.  And I think it did have this application during the church age, but the church age is now long over.  It ended in 1988, and no one has that authority any longer.  There is no authority given by God to pastors, elders, or deacons.  It has all been removed.  But it was legitimate for church authorities to determine whether people in their congregation were worthy to partake of the Lord’s Supper because they were its administers.  They were the ones to exercise spiritual authority over the congregation.  If there were someone engaged in such a grievous sin, they could deny that they partake of the Lord’s Table, or to take away their church membership (if the person were a member), and it would be as if that man were cast out. 

That was how it worked out historically, but there was a spiritual meaning.  This man was a type and a figure of the New Testament corporate church, and at the time of the end of the church age, God came to visit the churches, as it were, and He saw that they had been involved in grievous spiritual fornication.

Let us go to Revelation 2, and let us read what God says concerning the church in Thyatira, and the address to that church applies to all the churches.  It says in Revelation 2:20-22:

Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

Here, the sins of the churches are put upon one the woman Jezebel who was suffered to continue to seduce God’s servants.  God gave her space to repent, and when she did not, He cast her into a “bed,” and them that committed adultery with her into “great tribulation.”  You see, it is the same idea, whether it was a “woman” Jezebel, typifying the unfaithful, corrupt, apostate church or whether it was this man in the church at Corinth.  And notice that they also “suffered” this man to continue, as it says, “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.”  They did not judge the man.  They did not cast him out.  They put up with it, and allowed him to continue.  This was a far shorter term, historically.  Maybe it was months or a year, or two, that they put up with that situation.  But what it represents is the sin of the churches throughout their existence for 1,955 years.

Then came the judgment.  You saw the judgment in Revelation 2 where it was Jezebel that was involved in fornication.  God gave space, but there was no repentance.  Then came the judgment: “I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation.”  And tribulation is synonymous with judgment.  God brought judgment on the house of God because of their failure to repent from their idols, spiritual high places, and spiritual fornication.  And here, the man was also judged, and he also represents the churches. 

The judgment of Paul (in the name of Christ) was to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh.  What was God’s judgment upon the churches and congregations?  God would loose Satan, and He delivered the churches unto Satan, and Satan would sit as the “man of sin” in the temple, and would rule over the congregations of the world.  Why?  It was for the purpose of destroying the flesh.

Notice in verse 5, we read of the destruction of the flesh, and the saving of the spirit.  So there is “flesh,” and “spirit,” and the one is destroyed, and the other saved.  What would be another way to speak of that?  It would be the “wheat” and the “tares.”  The tares are the children of the wicked one, as we read in the parable in Matthew 13.   They are the children of the flesh, the natural-minded within the churches that never became born again, so they “walk in the flesh,” not in the Spirit.  But also within the corporate church was the “wheat,” the fruit that God as the Husbandman waited for, as He sent the rain to produce the wheat. 

So at the time of the judgment on the church when the man would be turned over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that would also be the time when the spirit would be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus: “Come out of her, my people.  Depart from the midst, and flee to the mountains.”  And who would come out?  Those in the spirit who have the Spirit of God within, and the new born again soul.  They hearken.  They have ears to hear, and eyes to see, and the obey.  The command to leave the churches served as a threshing tool to separate the wheat from the tares, the spirit from the flesh, or the spiritual from the natural.

That is the picture that God is painting, and we can see how Reuben ties into this.  Reuben defiled his father’s bed, and that is what the churches have done, spiritually.  So we can take that understanding to mean that when a man goes in unto his father’s wife, he uncovers his father’s nakedness.  And that was the real problem of the churches because they uncovered the nakedness of their Father (God).  How can someone uncover God’s nakedness?  Remember, there is the historical parable in the life of Noah after the flood when he began to be a husbandmen.  And who does the Bible tell us is a husbandman?  God is the husbandman.  Christ said in John 15:1, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.”  So Noah was a husbandman, and he planted a vineyard, and we read in Genesis 9:20-26:

And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be JEHOVAH God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Noah was naked, and his son Ham, the father of Canaan, saw, and he went out and told his two brothers, Shem and Japheth, who took a garment, and very respectfully covered their father, and they did not see his nakedness.  Then Noah woke up, and he found out what had happened, and he cursed Canaan – not Ham – and Canaan was the father of the Egyptians, which would point to the people of the world.  But Canaan is the one who would identify with the churches.  Obviously, it was Ham who was involved, but God cursed Canaan rather than Ham because it is not the duty and responsibility of the world to cover man’s nakedness.  When we look at “nakedness” spiritually, it means to be in sin, and the covering of nakedness points to the covering of the righteousness of Christ.  So exposing someone’s nakedness indicates that you are doing something that leaves someone in his sins, and it leads to certain death without a covering for sin.  It leads to destruction.  But the two sons respectfully covered him, so they represent the ones that bring the Gospel, the true elect people of God.  They cover their father’s nakedness, while Canaan and Ham represent those that are wicked.  They had the obligation to bring the true Gospel because they were professed people of God, but they never brought that true Gospel, so they left God “naked.” 

How can we say that this has to do with the nakedness of God?  After all, it is the sinner who comes under the hearing of the Gospel, and it is the sinner who either has his sins covered by the righteousness or Christ, or the sinner who sits under a false gospel that has no covering for sin.  It is not God – that is true – but that is not how God looks at it.  Remember that Jesus is eternal God, and in the context of His coming to judge the world, we read in  Matthew 25:34-40:

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Then the Lord turned to them on His left hand, and He told them, “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire…”  Then He went through the whole list, and He said, “For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not…”    You can see how it matches up perfectly with the blessing and cursing by Noah, a type of God, the Husbandman, that he issued forth when he was covered by some, but not covered by his other son, which points to the sins of the churches.

One having his father’s wife reveals his father’s nakedness.  Spiritually, it is bringing a gospel that cannot cover sin, so it leaves the hearers naked with their sins exposed before an angry God with whom they have to do.  Therefore God likens it to a man who goes in unto his father’s wife, exposing the nakedness of his father.

I think we have talked about this long enough.  Lord willing, when we get together in our next study, we will pick up the idea of the 12 tribes, with Benjamin included among them that were born in Padanaram.  We will try to understand that.  It is a difficult Scripture, but it is not surprising because that is how God has written the Bible.  He often makes these kinds of statements, and we have to do our best, by God’s grace and the leading of His Spirit, to understand how it can be that Benjamin was counted among those that were born in Padanaram.