Thoughts on Rahab’s Lie

For many people, the troublesome aspect of the story of Rahab is it she apparently uttered a boldface lie by telling the king of Jericho’s messengers that the Israelite spies had fled when in fact they were hiding in her house. (See Joshua 2:4)

The Bible never tells us that she was censured for it. In fact, she and her family were spared by the Israelites in Joshua chapter 6:25. Twice in the New Testament to Scripture commends her for  glowing faith, see Hebrews Chapter 11: 31 and James 2:25.   The question that we need to ask is how the world could she receive such positive treatment in the face of this lie that she has told?

 Generations of Christian ethics have considered Rahab’s case carefully. In her case, too absolute principles of moral behavior seem to collide. First, there is the principal that it is  wrong to tell a lie. Second,  there is the principal that one must protect human life.

In Rahab’s case, it appears, in order to save the spies live, she has no alternative but to lie. If she had told the truth and refilled the spies physician their lives would have most likely been forfeited and who knows if  Israel would have inherited their inheritance. 

 Generally speaking there are three positions that many biblical insights have suggested. The first position involves what we call “conflicting absolutes” sometimes this is referred to as “the lesser of two evils.”   Those who hold this position argue that in a fallen world, sometimes two or more absolute principles of moral behavior will conflict absolutely.  This  position leaves us with no recourse,  at the end of the day one has to sin.   In such a case the Christian’s obligation is to commit the lesser of the two sin,  and then repent of it.   So for Rahab, the lesser sin was to lie thus sparing the spy’s life, but she was wrong to lie. She would’ve also been wrong if she told the truth, resulting in the lies exposure and death.

 The second position is often labeled, “graded absolutism”.   It is here that many argue there’s an ordered  hierarchy of absolutes, so that there are some values that have priority over others. In the cases of conflict, where it is  impossible to obey both commands, one should act according to the greater good,  for the higher command.   In doing so one is “exempt” from the lower command. In Rahab’s case the greater good was to save the spies life rather than to tell the truth and us she did not send in telling a lie because she was exempt from it by the higher good of saving lives.     People who hold this position look into  Exodus chapter 1:15–21,  insights the Hebrew midwives lying to the Pharaoh in order to save the Israelite boy.   Sometimes they point to Luke 14:26 when Jesus said we should hate our fathers and mothers and wives and children brothers and sisters in order to follow him.  {  in that case I think they’ve misunderstood the word hate,  see my recent comments in the sermon that I preached on January 13, 2013.} 

 The Third position speaks of “nonconflicting absolutes.”   Here, in any given situation, seemingly opposed absolute norms do not conflict in reality. In this view, God does not set aside or exempt certain absolutes inserted to a and, but he holds them absolutely. In situation where a these may seem to conflict, there is always some “third way” that avoids sin.   They point to passages such as 1^st Corinthians 10:13. In that Rahab’s case, she should not applied, the trusted God to provide for her another way to protect the spies that did not necessitate sinning.

 I think each of these positions take the Bible seriously. Each of these positions attempt to do justice with biblical principles. And still each position possesses some unsatisfactory conclusions. In the 1^st position it is difficult to conceive of God holding people responsible for sinning when their only choice was to sin.   The 1^st position really complicates the passage in Hebrews chapter 4:15 that tells us Jesus and always was tempted as we were and yet remained sinless.

 Many Christians adopt a Second position, that allows for the idea of God to exempt people from certain sands in certain situations.   This is an attractive viewpoint and it does indeed appear to have some biblical value especially in light of Matthew 23:23. However whether sins are greater or lesser my argument is there still sin. Furthermore God never laid out an order of hierarchy. He never prioritize sin.  Furthermore, human judgment is not reliable in establishing this system. 

 The third position is often criticized as naïve.   Especially in the case of Rahab, because it appears as if she had no third choice.   It is easy for us with our cool lit lights,  in nice warm and comfortable homes, offices,  or churches to  condemn Rahab for lying  in the heart of very real, stressful, and life-threatening situations. They be easy to condemn her unjustly.

 Personally, I find this to be a very difficult issue. However, I tend to favor the third position.   If you know me then you know I do not tend to be legalistic. I do believe that despite the apparent problems this position best fits the scriptural data as a whole and contains the fewest difficulties. The ends do not justify the means. In evaluating Rahab, we must render a mixed verdict.   One that does not condemn her life and momentary lacquer trust in God, but one that commends her faith both in deed and word. It is never nor can it be lawful to lie.    Telling a lie is contrary to the nature of God,  and therefore it is never right.  However, given the information I have in Scripture I think I would’ve done the same thing.   At the same time Rahab was not devoid of praise and virtue. Although it is not spotlessly pure her faith is monumental. It was to Rahab’s credit that she trusted God. That is why the New Testament commends her so highly.   Hebrews 11:31 commends her faith. Jane chapter 2 verse 25  commends her faith. when you examine the texting James a careful reading shows us that Rahab’s lie  is never commended.   It is her fate that is rightfully upheld as an example to follow. It is her actions in helping the spies that are shown as an example to pattern.  The passage in James is clear:   there are 2 actions commended, giving lodging to the spies and sending them out to a safer route. It does not mention the lie for her protection.   In my mind it is possible to change very well might have omitted mentioning the deception deliberately to avoid the appearance of condoning it.

 I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on this issue you can e-mail them to me at encountergod@me.com.

Can I hear from God?

Hearing God.  

Is it important? 

Is it possible?

1 John 1:3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

Do you take John seriously?   I happen to believe that John meant those words for all of us. I think John had experienced fellowship with the father and his son Jesus Christ. Also believe that John thought it possible for every believer to experience the same thing.

 Our heavenly father wants fellowship with us. Do you find that as amazing thought? He wants to commune and communicate with us  In a true Fellowship of love and enjoyment of each other! 

 Hearing God.   Is important? Absolutely. Is it  possible?   Yes.   I’m afraid that many of us want to “get more from God”, but I think the emphasis from Scripture is for us to have fellowship with him. Fellowship with God is impossible if we cannot hear him as well as talk with him.

A HEARING EAR

 What we must develop  is an ear  to hear.   The challenge is to learn to listen to God.   To develop a hearing   ear we must make a choice.  15 times the statement is made by our Lord and is quoted in the New Testament. It indicates to me the importance of 2 things:  (1) a basic premise: having ears to hear; (2) a basic choice: choosing to use those ears to hear.

 When someone receives spiritual new life one receives the abilities in the spiritual life. God’s gift of spiritual life contains the ability to hear in and from the spiritual world.

 Without the ability to hear -  communication, meditation and hearing our heavenly father are not possible.

 The baby is born with the physical ability to hear but does not know what he hears.   Likewise a baby sees but does not know what he sees.   What is the difference? Understanding. Comprehension. These 2 must be learned.

 Listening is a communication skill that we practice often but many of us really never learned to do it right. Communication is a learned ability not an innate behavior.

 In a marriage relationship husband and wife soon learned by trial and error the importance of learning to listen.

 In the spiritual realm Christians equipped with “ ears to hear”  must learn to communicate with their Lord and father in heaven in an ever-increasing way. This is where the choice comes in.   Choosing to use your ears to hear. 

 If the capacity to hear is there, then the ability must be developed.

First secret:   hearing God must become vital to you.

 Something is vital only if it is perceived as necessary to live.

 If the Scripture is vital to us then we will give it priority in our life. If building a relationship with God is vital to us then we will practice it whatever the cost. Like you I have known people that encounter God only in a time of great need or personal crisis. Why is this so? The answer is simple. In times of crisis we don’t know who to turn to or how to handle it so for our survival in a crisis we often turn to God.  

Our desperation, coupled with our inability and our weakness makes hearing from him an absolute necessity.

 The great tragedy is that most of us only come to God in times of crisis you move from crisis to crisis and never learned that we need him and his words for every part of our life.   And until hearing from God becomes vital to you and to me we’re not likely to experience him on a daily basis.

Second secret:   developing a hearing here requires exercise.

 Recently, It became apparent that my blood pressure had gotten too high.   The doctor was insistent on putting me on medication.   I begged him not to.   As a compromise I asked for a few weeks to exercise and change my diet to see if my blood pressure would come down.    You see, It became vital  to me.   So, I sought after exercise.   So far so good it has worked.

There are 3 steps to this process,  I  must become fit.  (physically and spiritually) to become fit spiritually parallels becoming fit physically consider the following:

F  is for frequency.   I must make a deliberate choice and effort to set my mind on God.   I must learn to ask his help to turn my undisciplined mind into something he can use. 

I  is for intensity.  I must make deliberate choices to exercise my mind and focusing on God. The best way is for me to give myself a regular time to pursue this relationship intently, purposefully, and regularly.   Like other forms of exercise, I must begin at low levels and increase gradually.

 T is for time.   I must set my mind on God in every area of my life.   I must determined to consciously bring every thought captive to God and immediately turned to God in every circumstance.    Over time it will become a natural spontaneous reaction.   It will become in time a natural reflex as you develop the habit.

Churches today are filled with spiritual babies who are failing to grow in the likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It is because we have substituted a real relationship with God with so many things.   My next blog entry in this topic will deal with the substitutes that we embrace.