Redefining the Story of Rahab | Jen Wilkin
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2019
- Most people know the story of Rahab and know the fact that she was a prostitute. But has history mistaken how we view her story? In this video from Abundance conference, Jen Wilkin seeks to redefine the story of Rahab and view her in a different light than the commentators who have come before her.
Jen Wilkin is an author, speaker, and Bible teacher.
Find more of Jen's resources here: www.lifeway.com/en/contributo...
Check out more from LifeWay Voices: lifewayvoices.com/
The entire video is above, and the transcript is below.
____________________________________________________________________
Now how has [Rahab] come down to us through history? She's a woman and a Canaanite and a prostitute. She would have been a social outcast even among her own people.
Here's the way that she's often referred to in commentaries. I'm not going to name the names of the commentators, but can I just be honest with you? Male commentators can be super hard on female Bible characters. Abraham can take his wife over to Pharaoh's house and leave her there for several weeks twice basically. Abimelech and Pharaoh. And we're like, "But you know what? It's cool." And then the women, it's like, "Mmm. No. You know why she's a prostitute? Because she wanted to be one."
So let's take a look. Let's see what some of these guys had to say.
One of my favorite commentators refers to her as a "shady lady".
Matthew Henry, we can give his name out cause he's long dead. And this does not mean these men are terrible commentators, it's just a sampling for you. I said I wasn't gonna say their names, I lied. He's describing her taking them up on the roof and hiding them under the stocks of flax and he says, "By these stocks of flax it appears that she had at least one of the good characters of the virtuous woman. However, in others of them, she might be deficient. That she sought wool and flax and wrought willingly with her hands. From this instance of her honest industry, one would hope that whatever she had been formally, she was not now a harlot."
Another well-known commentator, I will not say his name, he says, "We may be appalled at the fact that Rahab was a prostitute or that she was a liar, but the fact is that she was not saved by her works, but by her faith." Now, don't miss that we're supposed to be appalled
And then this is from a book called All The Women of the Bible by a man whose name I very much want to tell you, because I've since read other things he said about other women of the Bible. He says this about Rahab: "Like many a young girl today, perhaps she found the restrictions of her respectable home too irksome. She wanted a freer life, a life of thrill and excitement away from the drab monotony of the home giving her birth and protection. So high-spirited and independent, she left her parents, set up her own apartment with dire consequences." Yeah, right, Herbert. (audience laughs)
Because you know what every little girl says? "When I grow up, I just want to be a prostitute."
History has judged Rahab as a liar and a whore. Is that how we should read her?
I think we've grown in our understanding of things. If you were to google the name Rahab right now, do you know what would come up for you? A list of non-profit organizations. And what do you think that they're involved in? Freeing women from human trafficking.
How do you think a woman gets to be a prostitute in ancient Canaan? I mean, it could be that she chose the profession, but I've heard precious few stories in my entire life that would indicate that a woman chooses that, free of any power dynamic, free of anything societal that's going on. And in fact, we even know from history that it was a common practice in Canaan and other ancient cultures, that when a family could not pay a debt they often had to sell a daughter. It seem far more likely to me that find Rahab in the state that we find her in, not because she wanted to be a prostitute, but because that is where life forced her to be.
We should not be surprised to find a story of redemption, although it is perhaps a little bit of different story than we may have thought it to be because God is always most pleased to work through the last and the least. She is perhaps the perfect person to illustrate that in the kingdom of Heaven, the last shall be first.
In his Antiquities, Josephus calls Rachav(Hebrew Spelling) an Innkeeper. She clearly had other income from the flax she was processing too.
Regardless of her 'old' status, God chose to use her! She desired to escape a society of sin. God blessed her as she assimilated into a better, sinless life. We ALL are sinners & have been rescued from sin because of our desire to follow God. We heard of His goodness & love & wanted to turn from our sin!
“Faith does not eliminate questions. But faith knows where to take them.” Elisabeth Elliot
I once asked myself, why did Rahab betray her own people? After meditating on this for a while, the answer was clear: because her people had forced her to become a harlot, and as a good woman, she despised that work. It should be known that inhabitants of Jericho were Baal worshippers. Baal should not be called a god, because he was very ungodlike. Worshipping Baal was tantamount to worshipping the devil, complete with child sacrifice and sexual orgies. Young girls were abducted into the temple and forced to become temple prostitutes. I believe this is likely how Rahab become a harlot. No wonder she was willing to betray her people in favor of the Israelites. They had betrayed her. She was a sex slave, getting raped daily. It also therefore makes perfect sense why God was willing to have the inhabitants of Jericho wiped out. In their culture, it was routine to abuse women, children, and anyone vulnerable.
Thank you very much for sharing this word. I have been wrestling with this question myself - now though it's crystal clear this was indeed her situation and why The Lord blessed her line going forward with Himself. Thank you and thank The Lord for His amazing grace and awesome mercy!
Anyways, missing the point. Rahab was from a pagan nation, worshipped other gods. Regardless of her moral background (whether she was forced to or not). She chose to believe in God, and God rewards that faith by saving her and her family, as well as being a direct ancestor to Jesus.
Amen to that
Thank you for the refined edition. You are absolutely right! The previous descriptions belittle this behavior. People need to understand WHY PEOPLE DO WHAT THEY DO. NOT JUDGE THEM FOR DOING IT! BLESS THIS RENDITION!
As a male, I agree. Yes and many males will have to answer to our Lord.
However, in Romans 3: 10 to 13, “No one is righteous- not even one. No one is truly wise; no one is seeking God. All have turned away; all have become useless. No one does good, not a single one. Their talk is foul, like the stench from an open grave. Their tongues are filled with lies. Snake venom drips from their lips” NLT
So even if the male gender treated females the way our Lord intended, both genders still have the colossal problem of sin.
The Bible pulls no punches and states the truth that all our deeds are garbage and filthy rags. There are many similar passages throughout the Bible.
So whether we live according to the world standards of equality, both female and male were and are destined for the horrors of hell, unless we confess and repent to the uncomprehending and unfathomable forgiving nature of God. His AMAZING grace and mercy!!
You've met harlots before?
Preach to us Jen!
Love this!
😭❤❤❤
This is not the story of a prostitute or the patriarchy. This is the story of how God saved a woman and her family just as He saved Lot and his family out of a wicked city. Our hearts are all unclean things. Man looks on the outside, but God…He looks on the hearts, and He found Rahab, a believing woman and rescued her.
What is really being said here?
Everything she is saying is true - if it was a man they'd probably say he was manipulated into doing such things. But when it's females, doesn't matter their history, who manipulated and exploited them, none of it is usually taken into account - even the age doesn't matter, it's always her fault or her choice.
That’s why Jesus died for our sins. He’s knows life happens and we fall from grace.
If she was a slave the Bible would have used that adjective but it didn’t, it called her a harlot. Woman do choose sex work all the time because there is lots of $$$ in it. Have you never heard of Only Fans? The beauty in her story is that she repented and chose God over her own sin. Theres no need to white wash someone’s past when Jesus has already forgiven it.
It really doesnt matter what flawed persons commentary says. God took her faith and used her for His glory. Why go down this path we know how Jesus felt about women the point is she was a part of Jesus' family. Let's not divide Christian men and women any further.
The "Rachab" in Matthew 1:5 is NOT the Rahab the Harlot (the Canaanite) in Joshua 2:1. Some will say that Rachab is the Greek spelling of Rahab but in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25, the Rahab in those verses is actually Rahab the harlot of the Old Testament. Look it up, those two names have different Greek spelling. I could break this video down to dust and ashes but I'll leave you with this: the conquest of Jericho and Joshua's time and Rahab's time are around 1400 BCE. Salmon is King David's great-great grandfather. David took the throne in 1010 BCE, putting Salmon roughly 100 years older than David, so that's closer to 1100 BCE. Do you see where this is going? So, you're telling me that Rahab the harlot was 300 YEARS OLD when she allegedly birthed Boaz??? Make it make sense. In the KJV, the Rachab in Matthew 1:5 is a DIFFERENT WOMAN. And, and, for a P.S. moment, when the Israelites came and got Rahab the harlot and her family, there weren't allowed inside the camp, there were left outside the camp but allowed to stay in the land of Israel (Joshua 6:23). Oh, last thing, remember what Moses told the Israelites in Deuteronomy 7:1-4? If you don't remember, here it is:
1When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
2And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
3Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
4For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.
They were commanded to NOT make marriages with the Canaanites. 'Nuff said. Read your bibles.
An absolute mangling of Scripture. May JW repent. Shameful.
1 Corinthians 14:30-36 "If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. 31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?" King James Version.
1 Timothy 2:11-13 "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve." King James Version.
1 Timothy 5:20 "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear." King James Version.
Proverbs 27:5 "Open rebuke is better than secret love." King James Version.
Everything you put forth is proven in the comments section.
An ad hominem attack on your fellow biblical scholars' assertions on Rahab being a liar while admitidly lying in your presentation about nothing of substance isn't poignant, it is however, absolutely degrading to her legacy. It seems you're radicalizing nonsense for a paycheck.
I hear offense, anger and a self righteous spirit using derogatory language such as “pervert” towards other servants of the Lord. This is unworthy speech of a servant of the Lord. May God grant you repentance that you might represent His heart more accurately.
She said "Herbert"
So why concentrate on commentators when we can read it for ourselves? I don’t understand the anger at flawed men with flawed opinions. It’s not really relevant to the story.
I believe it is important to the basis of her contention that men dominated every aspect of life in Old Testament days. So many theologians believe Rahab was a seamstress and inntaker and was referred to by the men of those days as a harlot because she had so much fine linen to sell (symbollic of Revelation "clothed in fine linen" when worthy of the Kingdom of God) that people from other provinces were traveling miles to buy her linen, clothing and garments. And so Rahab took alot of commerce/business from the men and they were envious jealous of her, so many theologians believe Rahab's name was slandered to destroy her reputation. Furthermore, women were not allowed inside the churches or to have had access to the teachings in the churches and synagogues because they were continuously being oppressed and considered second class citizens, so the speakers point/intention (I believe) is can we really trust the actual reporting or account from every "man" in the Bible if it's not directly from God's own word or Jesus words in red ink. I believe your contention may be with her condescending attitude when she spoke about men which does not reflect the gentle meekness of the Holy Spirit, and thus it feels more from a fleshly desire. I felt that same sense of resentment or bitterness and that can easily discourage the listener from what could be a relatively reasonable and sound message. Just a thought. God bless you.
@@davidpadilla9462 it seems to me of much more importance what the original language called her. If the word used in the original text meant "harlot", I'm sure that's what God meant for us to take from it, regardless of what many scholars and theologians might think she actually was. That just seems like a whole lot of speculation and adding to God's word to me. The same God who has preserved our knowledge and worship of a poor carpenter from nowhere Nazareth can surely preserve His word and what it meant. And if we can't believe the words Jesus didn't utter, how can we believe the words he did? How can we trust they were preserved correctly? We must trust that the entire Word is "from God's own word" or that none of it is trustworthy. We cannot pick and choose and still stay faithful to the very foundation of our faith, the infallible, inerrant word of God. Also just my thoughts, and God bless you, too.
@@cherismith5707 Who called Rahab a harlot, was it Jesus or Father God himself, or was it a servant of God who are prone to error? When Jesus asked the 3 disciples to pray for Him when he went to pray and they fell asleep, thats not a proud moment, its contrary to what Jesus ordered. So unless its from God directly or Jesus in red, it is always open to speculation unless you have scripture that cross references it with Jesus in red or Father God saying it. Peter denied Jesus 3 times after spending the most time with him. So Joshua is also prone to error by his opinion, assumptions etc. Im hoping you can provide where Father God/Jesus supports that she was a harlot, prostitute etc, and not a fallible person. Paul made errors too. The story would be much more awesome if that was true, in fact. However, the bottom line is, this in no way determines my obedience to Christ Jesus. All Christians have their own opinion or interpretation, but are they walking in the fullness of Christ by committing no presumptuous sin. Satan knew scripture very well, but it had no influence to his obedience. So what good is it if I am correct or you, are we walking in full obedience to Christ or not, is my primary concern. God bless you. Stay blessed in Christ. Thank you for your humility.
@@davidpadilla9462, if you apply the measurement of "a servant of God who is prone to error", then you call into question every recorded word of God and Jesus, since all of them were penned by human scribes and then later human translators. So unless you think God's finger came down and wrote all of scripture in every written Bible that exists, you always have a human middle man, you always have in the mix a servant of God who is prone to error, so you then by default call into question every single word of the Bible.
It goes without saying that many/most of the characters in the Bible were flawed humans, and we can see clearly many of their flaws as well as their faith. But if we call into question the AUTHORS that God entrusted with His holy message, then we can have no grounds whatsoever to approach His Word with confidence and to stand on it as His infallible message to us. I just think that's treading on some very shaky ground. I'm sure when Joshua used the word "harlot", that's what he meant, because that's what God put in him to say. I hope you can understand why we're playing a dangerous game if we begin choosing what words/sentences/accounts from the Bible we will "keep" and which ones we will toss or call into question because we doubt that Gods' messenger really wrote what God told him to write, to instruct us. Blessings to you as we all learn and grow in wisdom.
@@cherismith5707 No I don't use the same measure with everything. I will show you what I apply:
Joshua 2:6
But she had brought them up to the roof of the house, and hid them with the stalks of flax, which she had laid in order upon the roof.
Why was it necessay to be so specific about what item they were hid under, how much, and why in order. Why not just report she simply hid them on the roof. And how did Joshua determine she was a harlot, by what means, observation, was he told she was a harlot. There is no evidence in the Bible he had known her previously, so was it speculation. Was it intel he gathered from others. Was it an array of fine linen garments on display in her house, as historical evidence reports, greens manuscripts, etc. There are historical and archeological artifacts that claim many kings and queens from other nations travelled quite a distance to have their garments made by Rahab. She was known to do high quality seamstress work, superior craftsmanship, and using top notch materials. So maybe she was a harlot, or maybe she was slandered for taking away the male dominant profession and they were envious and jealous of her. The physical evidence reports she was a well sought out seamstress, if also a hatlot. I havent discovered any historical or archeological evidence that supports she was a harlot, other than "she was a harlot" from men. I dont see where the claim of a harlot was mentioned by Jesus. Doesnt Jesus typically speak of and use as examples significant people, the samaritan woman at the well, alybaster box, mary with demons, etc etc, as acts of faith. Why not mention Rahab? So if her being a harlot and yet acting in a righteous manner to assist the israelites, how come Jesus didnt use rahab the harlot as an example of someone who did the "right" thing like he did with so many others? I just find it odd Jesus did not address it. If so, if you find me scripture, you got me. Maybe she was a harlot. Again, it does not alter my walk with Christ, which is no presumptuous sin as a 55 yr old single male, which is no smoking. No getting drunk. No adultery (dwelling on women with sexual thoughts) . No premarital sex. No hate. No bitterness. No resentment. No hostility. No anger. No sexual immorality. The 10 commandments. I love every person, I have no hate in my heart, no contention. Its taken me 4 years to acquire peace in Christ. So that is what is important to me. And when I do fall, I repent with conviction from my heart because I cannot stand trampling on Christs blood and what He did on the cross for me/us, it breaks my heart. At this point, God says not to debate scripture because its worthless and leads to contention. In closing, its not important I change your mind about something that has no bearing on your salvation. You appear to be a genuine servant of Christ Jesus, and I love and respect that. But I will leave you with some food for thought, if you find the desire to read on.......
(Copy and pasted, I did not write the following but subscribe to it)
Flax was the most important plant fiber in Bible times because it was used to make linen. All clothing was made either of linen or wool. While its production has declined in recent years due to the superiority of cotton that is more easily handled by machines, flax remains one of the most important fiber plants in the world because of the long, strong fibers found in the outer layers of the stem. These are removed by a kind of controlled decay called retting. One of the common forms of retting is allowing the cut stalks of flax to remain in the dew until the fiber containing layers separate from the stem. This is probably why Rahab had bundles of flax on her roof. After retting, the fibers are cleaned and then bleached in the sun.
The scientific name of flax is Linum usitatissimum. Usitatissimum means "most useful," a suitable appellation for a plant used for both food and fiber. Flax is sown in the winter in the Middle East and flowers in the late spring. With sky-blue flowers that open only in the morning, flax is one of the most beautiful of all crops when flowering. It is often planted as an ornamental.
Linen had several uses in Bible times. The most obvious was clothing. But other uses were for wicks (eg., Matthew 12:2) and as measuring lines. The man in Ezekiel 4 had a measuring line made out of linen (flax). Our English word line is from the Latin word for flax. Words such as linear, lineage, etc. also derive from the same root. One use of flax that is not mentioned in the Bible is eating the seeds. Flax seeds, barley, and wheat are among the oldest known foods. Linseed oil is expressed from the seeds of flax.
The Scriptures teach explicitly the significance of linen when used as clothing; it is the righteousness or righteous acts of saints. Put another way, it represents personal holiness and suggests that the person clothed in linen is in a condition suitable to approach God. In fact, one of the synonyms for a priest is one who "wears the linen ephod."
Lady The Words in The Bible were Inspired by The Holy Spirit. But all Bible commentaries are men translating their own thoughts of what the Bible says and are not inspired by The Holy Spirit. So read the Bible for what it says, don’t add to it and don’t take away from it.
Seems a bit uncharitable to call a fellow Christian a pervert because you disagree with his interpretation of something.
Seems a bit uncharitable to read so much into the text about a woman that at the time would have had no power or social status to wield in her favor. If someone blindly reads these assumptions into the text at a time when those things were social norms it definitely speaks of their heart's bent and concerns me how he also puts it in modern day speech. If he thinks this of those who were powerless, what does he think of women today who are perceived to have so much more control over their situations? It's worth chewing on for a while. The issue is not strictly that he interpreted differently. The issue is that his interpretation was so blatantly malicious without cause or evidence to support it.
I thought she said pervert as well, but she said Herbert, the name of the commentary writer.
@@jjjj1352 I listened 2x and I thought she said it at first too, but you're right. In an earlier lesson (2014) on the same topic making the same points, that time using the names of the commenters, she did say "If I ever meet him I'll probably sock him in the face." I don't know why she is demonstrably angry at Rahab's identification as a prostitute. It is the way God chose to identify her. Jen Wilkin does not need to be an apologist for Rahab's reputation, but simply teach the text.
@@bethprata yeah she says Herbert.
@@bethprata as a woman she does not need to teach it. Her willingness to teach and her failure to teach well are part of the same syndrome.
I'm not trying to be "that guy", but I hope one day she finds healing for whatever man hurt her. Jen sounds like she is operating out of hurt in this message, and I feel that it's not a good look. I get it. We get it, there have been a lot of men that have talked bad about female characters of the Bible. This is true. But to be behind the pulpit in a state of hurt, that's cannot be good for the congregants that happen to be attending this message. Once again, there are so many wonderful women that teach the Word of God, and I am totally for Women Preachers, but doing so in a manner of hurt I feel can be hurtful. If I am reading to much into this, I deep apologize. But in the first 30 seconds of the video, my discernment alarm went off. Be blessed.
I sensed a deep profound sense of dignity for herself and other women under slavery of patriarchy. You don't seem to read women well - accidently or intentionally. Who knows. But as a woman - that's where she's operating from indeed.
Yes
100% agree!