WAS CONCUBINAGE GOD’S DESIGN FOR MARRIAGE, OR WAS IT AN ANCIENT SOCIAL INSTITUTION THAT SCRIPTURE RECORDED WITHOUT NECESSARILY ENDORSING?
Abraham had Sarah, yet Hagar entered his household as a reproductive partner.
Jacob married Leah and Rachel, yet Bilhah and Zilpah also bore his children.
Gideon had many sons, including one born to a concubine.
David maintained a royal household that included wives and concubines.
Solomon’s household included hundreds of wives and concubines.
These accounts are preserved within the sacred Scriptures. But their presence raises a question that cannot be answered merely by quoting the names of biblical patriarchs and kings.
Does the fact that something happened in the Bible mean that God intended Christians to practise it?
To answer responsibly, we must examine the Hebrew terminology, the social institutions of ancient Israel, the experiences of the women involved, the moral tensions within the biblical narratives and the teaching of Jesus Christ.
We must also resist the temptation to read modern assumptions into ancient texts. Concubinage, polygyny, slavery, adultery and contemporary cohabitation are related subjects, but they are not identical institutions. A serious theological investigation must distinguish them.
1. What exactly was concubinage?
The English word concubine generally describes a woman who maintained a recognised sexual or domestic relationship with a man without possessing the same social standing as a primary wife. However, the institution varied across cultures and historical periods.
In the Hebrew Bible, the principal term translated as concubine is פִּילֶגֶשׁ (pîlegeš). The word’s precise etymology remains uncertain. Its meaning must therefore be established primarily through its usage in biblical contexts rather than through speculative linguistic derivations.
A pîlegeš could occupy a recognised position within a man’s household while lacking the status or security associated with a principal wife. Nevertheless, scholars caution against assuming that every concubine possessed exactly the same legal status. Some were associated with slavery or servitude. Others appear to have maintained relationships resembling marriage in significant respects. The biblical evidence does not provide a single, comprehensive legal definition covering every case.
A concubine was not necessarily a prostitute, nor was concubinage simply identical to modern cohabitation.
The institution involved particular social expectations, household relationships and hierarchies of status. Understanding those distinctions is essential before attempting moral evaluation.
2. The Hebrew terminology: Why words matter
Several Hebrew terms are important to this investigation:
- פִּילֶגֶשׁ (pîlegeš): commonly translated as concubine.
- אִשָּׁה (ʾiššâ): woman or wife, depending upon the context.
- שִׁפְחָה (šipḥâ): female servant or enslaved woman.
- אָמָה (ʾāmâ): female servant, maidservant or enslaved woman.
These terms sometimes overlap within biblical narratives, but they should not automatically be treated as interchangeable.
Consider Hagar. Genesis 16:1 identifies Hagar as Sarah’s Egyptian servant, using terminology associated with servitude. Yet Genesis 16:3 states that Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham as a wife; the Hebrew expression employs ʾiššâ.
Did Hagar acquire the full social status of Sarah? The subsequent narrative strongly suggests that she did not. She remained vulnerable to Sarah’s authority and experienced serious mistreatment.
Similarly, Bilhah is described as Rachel’s servant before becoming Jacob’s reproductive partner. Genesis 35:22 subsequently identifies Bilhah as Jacob’s concubine. The terminology demonstrates that household status could be complex.
The same woman could be associated with servitude, a marital relationship and concubinal status within different narrative contexts.
This should caution contemporary readers against imposing simplistic classifications upon ancient households.
3. Concubinage within the social world of ancient Israel
Ancient Israel existed within the wider cultural environment of the ancient Near East. Households were not merely private domestic spaces. They were also economic, social and reproductive institutions.
Marriage could involve family alliances, inheritance arrangements, agricultural labour, household continuity and the production of heirs. Within such societies, a woman’s reproductive capacity could significantly affect her social position. Childlessness sometimes carried profound emotional and social consequences.
Concubinage could therefore emerge within systems concerned with lineage, fertility, household expansion and political influence. But historical explanation must not become moral justification. Understanding why a practice developed does not establish that the practice was ethically ideal.
Moreover, ancient Israelite society was not uniform across every century or social class. The households of kings and wealthy patriarchs cannot simply be assumed to represent the ordinary experiences of all Israelites. Scholarly reconstruction requires attention to literary genre, historical setting and the limitations of surviving evidence.
4. Abraham, Sarah and Hagar: The theology of power and vulnerability
Genesis 16 introduces one of Scripture’s most important narratives concerning reproductive arrangements within a patriarchal household. Sarah had not borne Abraham a child. She therefore gave Hagar, her Egyptian servant, to Abraham.
The arrangement must be understood against the background of ancient household structures and expectations surrounding inheritance. Yet the narrative exposes profound human suffering. After Hagar conceived, conflict developed between the women. Sarah treated Hagar harshly, and Hagar fled into the wilderness.
The theological importance of this account extends beyond the question of reproductive legitimacy. It raises questions concerning authority, social vulnerability and the dignity of a woman whose choices were constrained by her position.
Hagar’s voice is particularly significant. She is not merely an instrument through which Abraham obtains a child. She is a person encountered by God. Genesis 16:13 records her response to the divine encounter. In the Hebrew narrative, she identifies the Lord in language associated with divine seeing.
The God of Abraham did not ignore Hagar simply because her social position was inferior.
The narrative does not merely preserve the reproductive history of a patriarch. It also reveals God’s concern for a vulnerable woman. A Christian interpretation that celebrates Abraham’s household arrangement while ignoring Hagar’s suffering has failed to attend to the full narrative.
5. Jacob, Leah, Rachel, Bilhah and Zilpah: When women become instruments of rivalry
Genesis 29–30 presents a household marked by affection, rivalry, fertility struggles and unequal relationships. Jacob married Leah and Rachel. Bilhah and Zilpah, their servants, subsequently bore children to Jacob.
The arrangement is frequently discussed in connection with polygyny and concubinage. However, the narrative also reveals how reproductive expectations could shape relationships among women. Rachel’s distress over childlessness and Leah’s desire for affection contributed to a household environment in which childbearing became intertwined with competition.
Bilhah and Zilpah occupy important positions within the genealogy of Israel. Yet their personal perspectives are scarcely developed. This silence deserves theological attention. The sons they bore became part of Israel’s foundational tribal history. Nevertheless, the narrative gives comparatively little access to the women’s own experiences.
A responsible reader must distinguish between what the text explicitly states and what modern interpreters might reasonably infer. We cannot reconstruct every private emotion of Bilhah or Zilpah. But we can observe that the narrative is largely organised around the decisions and concerns of more powerful household members.
Their children were central to Israel’s history, even when their own voices were marginal within the narrative.
Genesis 35:22 further records Reuben’s sexual involvement with Bilhah. The incident later acquires consequences within Jacob’s family history. This episode demonstrates that concubinal relationships could become entangled with questions of household authority, succession and sexual misconduct.
6. Gideon’s concubine and the politics of inheritance
Judges 8:30–31 records that Gideon had seventy sons and that his concubine in Shechem bore Abimelech. This detail becomes significant in Judges 9. Abimelech’s political ambitions lead to violence and the killing of his brothers.
The narrative illustrates the connection between household relationships, lineage and political legitimacy. It would be an oversimplification to argue that concubinage alone caused Abimelech’s actions. Nevertheless, his maternal connection to Shechem becomes politically important.
The account demonstrates that secondary household relationships could have consequences extending far beyond private domestic life. They could influence inheritance, political allegiance and the struggle for authority.
7. The Levite’s concubine: One of Scripture’s most disturbing narratives
Judges 19 presents a profoundly troubling account involving a Levite and his concubine. The woman experiences extreme sexual violence and dies following the events described. The narrative subsequently becomes part of a wider account of social collapse and intertribal conflict.
This passage must never be used casually. It is not a romantic illustration of ancient marriage customs. Nor should its violence be sensationalised. The text exposes the breakdown of moral responsibility within a society repeatedly described in Judges as lacking stable, righteous leadership.
One of its most disturbing features is the treatment of the woman as vulnerable to the decisions and failures of men. The narrative raises questions concerning hospitality, gender, social power, violence and the failure to protect the vulnerable.
Phyllis Trible famously examined this passage among the Bible’s “texts of terror”, drawing attention to the suffering of women whose experiences challenge comfortable readings of Scripture. The theological responsibility of the contemporary Church is not to excuse the violence because it appears in a biblical narrative. It is to recognise the moral horror presented and reflect upon what the narrative reveals about human corruption.
Scripture’s record of violence is not Scripture’s endorsement of violence.
For Christian leaders, this passage should reinforce the importance of safeguarding, accountability and the protection of those vulnerable to exploitation.
8. Rizpah: A concubine whose dignity confronts royal power
Rizpah appears in 2 Samuel 3 and 21. She is identified as a concubine of Saul.
In 2 Samuel 3, an accusation involving Rizpah becomes part of a political confrontation between Ish-bosheth and Abner. The episode illustrates how access to a former king’s concubine could carry political implications. Women associated with royal households were sometimes treated as symbols of authority and succession.
Yet Rizpah’s most memorable appearance occurs in 2 Samuel 21. After the deaths of her sons and other descendants of Saul, she maintains a prolonged vigil over their bodies. Her actions express grief, determination and maternal devotion. The narrative eventually records David’s intervention concerning the burial of the dead.
Rizpah’s story is remarkable because a woman occupying a socially subordinate position becomes a powerful moral presence. Her protest is not delivered through political office or military strength. It is expressed through persistent, embodied grief.
Rizpah reminds us that a woman’s social status does not determine her moral significance before God.
Her story challenges readers to examine how political systems can treat vulnerable people as expendable. It also demonstrates why concubines should not be studied merely as secondary figures in the biographies of powerful men.
9. David, Solomon and royal concubinage
The royal households of David and Solomon provide further evidence of plural marital arrangements. Second Samuel 5:13 records David taking additional wives and concubines. Second Samuel 15–16 describes events involving David’s concubines during Absalom’s rebellion.
These passages reveal the political significance of royal household relationships. Absalom’s public appropriation of his father’s concubines was not merely an expression of sexual desire. Within the narrative, it functioned as an assertion of royal power and an act of political humiliation.
Second Samuel 20:3 records the subsequent treatment of the women. Their lives were profoundly affected by decisions made during a struggle for the throne.
Solomon’s household presents another important case. First Kings 11:3 records seven hundred wives of royal standing and three hundred concubines. The passage explicitly connects Solomon’s relationships with his movement towards religious unfaithfulness.
The theological emphasis is not simply numerical. It concerns the spiritual consequences of alliances and attachments that turned his heart away from covenantal loyalty. Deuteronomy 17:17 had already warned Israel’s kings against multiplying wives.
Royal prestige and the possession of many women were not necessarily signs of spiritual faithfulness.
Indeed, the biblical narrative often presents royal excess as a source of moral and political danger.
10. Did the Law of Moses approve concubinage?
The legal material requires careful interpretation. Exodus 21:7–11 addresses the position of a female servant within a particular household and marital arrangement. Verse 10 refers to a man taking another wife and establishes obligations that must not be diminished. Deuteronomy 21:15–17 regulates inheritance in a household with two wives.
These passages demonstrate that ancient Israelite law addressed complex domestic arrangements. However, the Hebrew legal texts do not provide a single systematic definition of pîlegeš. We must therefore avoid assuming that every law concerning secondary wives or female servants applies identically to every biblical concubine.
This is an important distinction between lexical analysis and legal interpretation. More fundamentally, the presence of regulation does not necessarily establish universal moral approval. Legal provisions may limit injustice within existing institutions. They do not always present those institutions as the highest ethical ideal.
The question for Christian theology is therefore not merely whether a practice was regulated under the Mosaic covenant. It is how that practice should be evaluated within the broader witness of Scripture.
11. Description, accommodation and moral prescription
The Bible describes many institutions that existed within ancient societies. Some were regulated. Others were criticised. Still others appear in narratives without an explicit statement of approval or condemnation.
A responsible interpreter must consider literary context, historical development and the relationship between biblical passages. We must not assume that the presence of a practice in Genesis makes it permanently normative. Nor should we ignore the historical reality of a practice simply because it challenges contemporary Christian assumptions.
The task of theology is neither to sanitise biblical history nor to reproduce every ancient institution. It is to understand the text faithfully and determine its significance within the whole canon.
Biblical description tells us what happened. Biblical theology asks what those events reveal about God, humanity and moral responsibility.
12. What did Jesus teach about marriage?
The Gospels do not record Jesus delivering a systematic lecture on concubinage. It would therefore be inaccurate to claim that he explicitly addressed every form of ancient concubinal relationship.
Nevertheless, his teaching on marriage provides a crucial theological foundation. In Matthew 19:3–9, Jesus responds to questions concerning divorce by returning to Genesis. He cites the creation account and the one-flesh union of husband and wife.
“What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:6, KJV)
The immediate issue is divorce. However, Jesus’ appeal to creation directs Christian understanding of marriage towards its foundational covenantal pattern. He does not construct his argument around the royal households of David or Solomon. He returns to the beginning.
This does not remove every interpretative difficulty. But it establishes an important theological orientation.
Christian marriage must be examined through the teaching of Jesus Christ, not merely through the social practices of ancient patriarchs and kings.
13. Paul, covenantal fidelity and the Christian household
First Corinthians 7:2–5 describes reciprocal responsibilities between husband and wife. Paul emphasises mutual obligations rather than presenting marital intimacy as an unrestricted privilege of the husband.
Ephesians 5:22–33 develops the theological significance of marriage through the relationship between Christ and the Church. Husbands are commanded to love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it. This is a demanding ethic of sacrificial responsibility.
The Pastoral Epistles also establish qualifications for church leadership. First Timothy 3:2 describes a bishop as the husband of one wife. The Greek expression mias gynaikos andra is often understood as referring to a one-woman man. Its precise implications have been debated, including questions of fidelity, polygamy and remarriage.
Nevertheless, the broader context requires moral integrity, self-control and exemplary household leadership. Taken together, these New Testament passages provide substantial grounds for understanding monogamous covenantal fidelity as the normative Christian pattern.
The theological argument is cumulative. It should not depend upon an isolated verse interpreted without regard to context. This conclusion is developed further in Can a Christian Pastor Have Two Wives and Still Be Biblically Right?.
14. Concubinage, polygyny, adultery and cohabitation: Are they the same?
No. These categories must be distinguished.
Concubinage refers to historical arrangements in which a woman maintained a recognised sexual or domestic relationship with a man, often without the full status of a principal wife.
Polygyny refers to a man having more than one wife simultaneously.
Adultery generally concerns sexual relations that violate an existing marriage covenant.
Cohabitation refers to people living together, often in an intimate relationship, without necessarily entering a legally recognised marriage.
These categories may overlap in particular circumstances, but they are not interchangeable. Not every biblical concubine was described as an adulterous partner. Likewise, not every contemporary cohabiting couple occupies a relationship equivalent to ancient concubinage.
Historical institutions must be interpreted on their own terms before contemporary moral comparisons are made. Otherwise, theological discussion becomes confused.
15. The contemporary Church and the question of polygamy
The subject acquired renewed public relevance following reports in October 2026 concerning Pastor Israel Ford of LifeWorks Church in Ohio. According to published accounts, his first wife, Lydia Ford, publicly introduced Minister Shakayla Talley Ford as his second wife during a church gathering. The pastor subsequently defended his position by appealing to Scripture, including Exodus 21:10.
The announcement generated debate about biblical marriage, pastoral accountability and the interpretation of Old Testament law. It is important to distinguish the reported public statements from matters that remain unverified, including the precise legal status of the second union. The complete theological defence promised by the pastor was not available for comprehensive evaluation when this article was prepared.
Nevertheless, the controversy raises a legitimate question:
Can the historical existence of plural marital arrangements in the Old Testament justify their deliberate adoption by contemporary Christian pastors?
My theological position is that such a conclusion cannot be established simply by citing Abraham, Jacob, David or the Mosaic regulation of secondary wives. The Church must interpret those passages alongside Jesus’ teaching, the apostolic understanding of marriage and the moral qualifications of Christian leadership.
Personal conviction does not remove the responsibility for careful biblical examination. You Can Be Anointed and Still Fail Through Ignorance explains why calling must remain accountable to knowledge, character and disciplined interpretation.
16. African Christianity, culture and pastoral sensitivity
The subject is particularly relevant within African Christianity. Various African societies have historically recognised polygynous marriage and other forms of complex household organisation. These institutions cannot be understood responsibly without considering their social, economic and historical settings.
Christian missions and indigenous churches have long confronted difficult questions concerning converts who entered Christianity while already living in plural households. What responsibilities remain towards existing wives and children? How should churches distinguish between the admission of converts, the pastoral care of families and the qualifications for ordained ministry? How can biblical convictions be upheld without abandoning vulnerable people?
These questions require both theological clarity and pastoral compassion.
The Church must not confuse cultural longevity with divine authorisation.
Yet neither should it pursue doctrinal consistency through injustice. Women and children must never be treated as disposable consequences of ecclesiastical policy. A responsible Christian response must uphold dignity, protection, justice and existing obligations.
This is especially important when interpreting ancient texts in which women often possessed limited power over household decisions.
17. Women, power and the interpretation of Scripture
One of the most important contributions of contemporary biblical scholarship is its insistence that we examine whose voices are prominent and whose experiences remain largely unspoken.
Traditional readings sometimes concentrate almost exclusively on the decisions of patriarchs and kings. But what happens when we ask about Hagar? What about Bilhah and Zilpah? What about the unnamed woman in Judges 19? What about Rizpah?
These questions do not require us to reject Scripture. They require us to read it more attentively.
Narrative criticism examines how biblical stories communicate meaning through characterisation, repetition, silence, conflict and literary structure. Feminist biblical scholarship has also highlighted the vulnerability of women within patriarchal social systems. Such approaches must themselves be evaluated critically, like every interpretative method. Nevertheless, they can illuminate dimensions of the biblical narratives that have sometimes been neglected.
The experiences of vulnerable women are not peripheral to Christian ethics. They are relevant to how we understand justice, covenantal responsibility and the moral character of religious leadership.
A theology that defends the privileges of powerful men while ignoring the suffering of vulnerable women is an incomplete theology.
The Church must take seriously the whole biblical witness. How to Recognise Spiritual Manipulation in a Christian Relationship considers related questions of religious authority, accountability and human dignity.
18. My theological conclusion
The biblical institution of concubinage presents a complex intersection of household organisation, reproductive expectations, social hierarchy, political power and sexual ethics. Its historical existence is beyond dispute. Its precise legal and social forms were not uniform. Its appearance in Scripture cannot simply be erased or denied.
Yet the fact that concubinage existed within biblical history does not automatically establish its legitimacy as a contemporary Christian marital institution. The narratives themselves frequently expose suffering, rivalry, insecurity, violence and the misuse of power. The legal texts demonstrate attempts to regulate existing arrangements, but regulation should not automatically be equated with moral idealisation.
The teaching of Jesus directs Christian marriage towards the creation pattern. The apostolic writings emphasise covenantal fidelity, mutual responsibility, sacrificial love and exemplary household leadership.
Therefore, I maintain that the cumulative biblical witness provides compelling theological grounds for monogamous covenantal marriage as the normative Christian pattern, particularly for those entrusted with ordained ministry.
This conclusion must be accompanied by compassion towards people already living within complex family structures. Christian truth and pastoral responsibility should never be separated.
After many years of pastoral ministry, theological teaching and engagement with the realities of family life, I have become increasingly convinced that responsible Christian leadership requires more than the ability to quote biblical passages. It requires the wisdom to interpret them faithfully.
We must never confuse what God allowed human beings to do with everything God intended human beings to become.
And we must never use Scripture to protect the powerful while overlooking the vulnerable.
The ultimate question is not simply whether Abraham, Jacob or David participated in complex marital arrangements. It is whether our contemporary understanding of marriage, sexuality and Christian leadership faithfully reflects the teaching and character of Jesus Christ.
The Bible must be interpreted, not merely quoted.
Theology must seek truth, not merely defend tradition or personal preference.
Christian leadership must reflect the character of Christ.
A question for thoughtful Christian readers
When Scripture records concubinage among biblical patriarchs and kings, should Christians interpret those accounts as enduring moral permissions, or as historical realities that must be evaluated through the wider biblical revelation?
What role should the teachings of Jesus Christ play in resolving this question?
I welcome thoughtful, respectful and biblically grounded contributions.
About the author
Apostle David B. Ogunseyin
Anglican Priest
Founder & Lead Pastor
Prophetic Voice Restoration Global (PVRG)
Restoring Lives • Rebuilding Hope • Reviving Destinies
Editorial note — 27 October 2026
This article is an independent theological and pastoral examination of concubinage in biblical history and its implications for contemporary Christianity.
It incorporates historical-critical interpretation, Hebrew terminology, biblical exegesis and published academic scholarship.
Its discussion of the October 2026 announcement involving Pastor Israel Ford and LifeWorks Church is based on publicly available reporting. The legal status of the reported second marriage has not been independently established, and the pastor’s complete theological defence has not been comprehensively reviewed for this article.
The article does not allege criminal conduct, coercion or personal misconduct beyond what reliable evidence establishes.
The theological conclusions represent the author’s interpretation of Scripture and are presented for responsible Christian education and discussion.
The purpose is to promote biblical literacy, theological reflection, pastoral responsibility and respect for human dignity.
Scholarly References and Further Reading
1. Isabelle Hamley, “‘Dis(re)membered and Unaccounted For’: *Pîlegeš* in the Hebrew Bible”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 42, no. 4 (2018): 415–434.
2. Carol Meyers, *Rediscovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context* (Oxford University Press, 2013).
3. Phyllis Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Fortress Press, 1984).
4. Tikva Frymer-Kensky, *Reading the Women of the Bible: A New Interpretation of Their Stories* (Schocken Books, 2002).
5. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, lexical entry for פִּילֶגֶשׁ.
6. The Holy Bible, King James Version. Principal passages: Genesis 16; 21; 29–30; 35:22; Judges 8–9; 19–21; 2 Samuel 3; 5; 15–16; 20–21; 1 Kings 11; Exodus 21:7–11; Deuteronomy 17:17; 21:15–17; Matthew 19:3–9; 1 Corinthians 7:2–5; Ephesians 5:22–33; 1 Timothy 3:1–7; Titus 1:5–9.
7. The Roys Report, “Ohio Pastor Announces Second Wife, Embraces Polygamy”, 26 October 2026. This report is cited only for the factual public-announcement context, not as academic authority for the theological conclusions.