Joshua 2:1-7

THE SPIES GO TO THE HOUSE OF RAHAB

"And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two men as spies secretly, saying, Go view the land, and Jericho. And they went and came into the house of a harlot whose name was Rahab, and lay there. And it was told the king of Jericho, saying, Behold, there came men in thither tonight of the children of Israel to search out the land. And the king of Jericho sent unto Rahab, saying, bring forth the men that are come to thee, that are entered into thy house; for they are come to search out all the land. And the woman took the two men, and hid them; and said, Yes, the men came unto me, but I knew not whence they were: and it came to pass about the time of the shutting of the gate, when it was dark, that the men went out; whither the men went I know not: pursue after them quickly; for ye will overtake them. But she had brought them up to the roof, and hid them with the stalks of flax, which she had laid in order upon the roof. And the men pursued after them the way to the Jordan unto the fords: and as soon as they that pursued after them were gone out, they shut the gate."

"Joshua ... sent out of Shittim ..." This place was five or six miles east of Jordan, just as Jericho was about the same distance west of Jordan. "Shittim means Acacias, and they are still found in that area."[3]

"Two men as spies secretly ..." The critics insult this passage as being "redundant,"[4] That type of cavil is based on the proposition that the word "spies" automatically means "secretly," such a cliche being itself untrue. When Joshua himself went out as a spy forty years earlier, all Israel knew of the sending out of those spies and of their disastrous report (by the majority) that resulted in the cursing of Israel for the space of forty years. Thus, the word "secretly" in this place means that Joshua concealed their mission from everyone, even in Israel, except from himself. This clearly was done to avoid the mistake that followed the earlier example of sending out spies. Keil and many other able scholars have accurately discerned this. "This was done so that, if the report proved unfavorable, the people might not be thrown into despair as they had been in the times of Moses."[5]

"The house of a harlot whose name was Rahab ..." Adam Clarke and others have insisted that "harlot" here actually means "innkeeper," and that there is no reason to question the character of this woman.[6] It is true that many harlots ran inns, casting some doubt upon what, exactly, may be meant here, but we believe that Matthew's mention of only four women in the ancestry of Jesus - the four being: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba - is powerful evidence that Rahab was a common harlot. There is no other consideration that would entitle her to a place in this list. Also, the particular words used with reference to Rahab, both in the O.T. ([~zownah]) and in the N.T. ([@porne]) "definitely class her as a common harlot, not as a [~qedeshah] (temple or cult-priestess)."[7] Then, there is the almost invariable custom of the times in that part of the world, that, "Inns, in the ordinary sense, were never kept by women."[8]

Such a fact as this truth about Rahab always embarrasses "nice people," who in all too many cases are too conceited and self-righteous ever to be saved. In all ages, it has been the worst of sinners, in many cases, who most readily turned to God for salvation. Christ himself stated that, "The publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God" (Matthew 21:31) before the Pharisees! This pattern distinguished the early church also, which counted among its members those who once had been the very worst of sinners, including, thieves, drunkards, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, revilers, extortioners and covetous persons (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

Therefore, we favor understanding Rahab as a prostitute in the ordinary sense of the word. Our word "pornographic" comes from the Greek word applied to her in the N.T. How, then, should we account for the declaration that, "She was an innkeeper"?[9] We believe that men have always been reluctant to admit either their own sins, or the former sins of the saved, whether in their own case, or in that of others. Similar efforts have been applied to the story of Mary Magdalene. Christ came to save sinners, and it does the Lord no honor to cover up the sins of the people whom he redeemed. It is the same foolish effort that marks the words of apologists who deny that Rahab's lie was sinful. Holwerda, for example, in a passage quoted by Woudstra, argued that, "Truth can mean something different than agreement with fact! It means loyalty toward the neighbor and toward the Lord!"[10] This is certainly a sinful and unlawful "crutch" to support a lie.

The story of Rahab has always intrigued the Christians of every age. Charles H. Spurgeon delivered one of his most memorable sermons on "Rahab." (For a sermon outline based partially upon Spurgeon's great masterpiece, see Vol. 10 of my N.T. commentary series (Hebrews, under Hebrews 11:31).)

Although Plummer freely admitted the immorality of Rahab, he nevertheless tried to justify the entry of the spies into Rahab's house, saying, "It does not appear that the spies entered Rahab's house with any evil intent!"[11] We are not at all convinced by such an opinion. The basic truth is that, as soon as these men hit town, they made a bee-line to the most popular whorehouse (known to the king) in town not to do anything wrong? We pray that Plummer was right! In favor of that view is the observation made by Philbeck that, such a place, "Was the least likely to arouse suspicion."[12]

"And Jericho ..." "At least three cities of this name have been identified in this location: (1) the Jericho of the N.T.; (2) the Jericho of the O.T.; and (3) the Jericho of Roman times."[13] Two of these existed simultaneously in days of our Lord's ministry, the same being the explanation of why one of the synoptics described a certain miracle of Jesus as taking place "as he was leaving Jericho," and another said the same miracle took place "as he was entering Jericho." Both Jericho's were mentioned by Taylor: "A town grew up near the ancient site (razed by Joshua) ... There were two adjacent cities by that name, so the miracle was wrought at a place between the two."[14]

The location of the Jericho that fell to Joshua is not definitely known. Woudstra says, "The question of identification must be left open. There are still many unexplored tells in the area."[15]

"And it was told the king of Jericho ..." At that time, and until about the 9th century, kings, even of extensive areas were called after the name of their capital. In Jonah, for example, the king of Assyria is referred to as "the king of Nineveh." Such designations are a mark of very great antiquity, and such signs compel us to look at the age of Moses and Joshua as the period when all of these first O.T. books were written. Palestine at the time of the conquest by Israel had about thirty-two such kinglets over that many little kingdoms.

It is significant that the king's representatives were very easily deceived by Rahab, indicating that the king himself considered her to be dependable.

Most of the recent versions supply in this chapter at appropriate places the pluperfect tenses which are missing in the Hebrew (due to the deficiency of that language in those days) translating Joshua 2:6, for example, thus: "The woman had brought them up on the roof, etc." This necessity is well understood by translators. Holmes professed ignorance of this, however, and stated that, "Joshua 2:15-17 should be omitted. We can hardly think of the conversation being continued between Rahab at the window and the spies on the ground outside the wall!"[16] The use of the pluperfect in such verses clears up everything.

The general morality of people throughout the world at the times in focus here was very imperfect, even on the part of the Israelites. Rahab, like the Israelites, is commended in the Word of God, "not for her immorality (adultery and falsehood), but for her FAITH,"[17] and especially for her works in moving to support God's people. See Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25.

"The stalks of flax ..." (Joshua 2:6) reveal several things: (1) The time of the year was about March or April, that being the time when the flax was ready to harvest.[18] (2) It also meant that the Jordan was flooding (Joshua 3:15), as it always did at harvest time. (3) Likewise, there is a glimpse here of Rahab's cultivation and processing of flax, indicating that that industry was at least one source of the woman's livelihood. The flax industry dates from "the earliest times in Palestine."[19]