So, is anybody else puzzled by this?
“By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient.” (Hebrews 11:31)
All right, so it doesn’t actually say that she showed great faith by lying to protect the spies. But isn’t that a part of it?
A book I’ve been reading talks about spying being unChristian because of the deceit involved. This incident came to mind. What do you think?
Tim, you be the judge. is this deception ?
Mt:8:4: And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
seems to me he said give another testimony as to how you were healed. explain it this way. Just asking.
I don’t see it as deceptive. Jesus didn’t tell the man to lie, he just said not to go around talking about it. Instead, he was to go show himself to the priest.
And your thoughts on Rahab?
I am not sure what you are saying here, sure she was rewarded for lying, but I don’t know that she lied in faith, The two men were still within her grasp when she made a deal, “I’ll scratch your back, you scratch mine”
I think you might should take a better look at, Mt:8:4:——shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
I could be wrong, wouldn’t be the first time. Sounded like Jesus was giving an excuse for the healing, other than what really happened.
But you are probably right.
Laymond,
A person with leprosy could only be declared clean after shewing themself to a priest and offering a sacrifice (see Leviticus 14). There is no implication that this offering nor the priest’s intervention caused the healing; the ceremony is to be performed by a person that is examined and declared clean.
Without going through this ceremony, a Jewish leper was still ceremonially unclean and would be unable to return to a normal life.
Grace and peace,
Tim
P.S.–Note that it is a “testimony unto them.” He doesn’t say, “Go fake getting healed.” He says, “Go show them that you are now healed.” The Law allowed for spontaneous healing of leprosy, so no deceit is required.
I don’t believe the Rahab passage offers carte blanche in all manner of deceitfulness.
I believe, though, that it should give us some pause when we try to make all sins equal. Which is more important? Love your neighbor, or do not bear false witness?
Jesus answers this question quite bluntly — if we have ears to hear.
Yes, it troubles me — because it makes it clear that living a faithful life is more complicated than just making sure I don’t break any commands.
Tim,
I tell you one that is tough to me, the story of I Kings 22.
Blessings,
ME
Tim said, ” A person with leprosy could only be declared clean after shewing them self to a priest and offering a sacrifice”
well maybe under the law of Moses but maybe not under Jesus.
Lk:17:12: And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off:
13: And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
14: And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.
15: And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
16: And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.
17: And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine?
18: There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger.
19: And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.
I can’t prove it but I believe this Samaritan never made it to the priest. I read it to say he turned back before he reached the priest.
I believe Jesus declared this man clean without a sacrifice. faith does wonderful things. The law couldn’t have applied to this Samaritan, who was never under the law.
A little long but I couldn’t think how to shorten it. sorry but it is still about faith :)
Nick, I have to agree with you. I knew someone who used John 7 to excuse his own lying; I think that we have to tread carefully there. God is truth and there is no lie in him.
Mark: I guess you mean the lying spirit that God sent to the prophets. That is tough, a bit like the spirit that he sent to Saul. Is there any relation, do you think, to Satan being in God’s council in the book of Job?
Laymond: I also think the Samaritan turned back before going to the priest. However, I also think he would have had to present himself to the priest eventually to be accepted in society. Even the Samaritans followed a version of the Pentateuch. Still nothing deceptive about Jesus’ actions in these stories.
The Samaritans followed only Torah. That is why they thought Jerusalem worship was idolatrous. The Samaritans had their own priesthood, and would have followed the Levitical laws.
The priest did not heal — the priest verified the healing so that your family could take you into the house again, and gave you an opportunity to bless God at the place where His name dwelt.
Tim didn’t say that you could only be MADE clean after going to the priest — he said what was quoted. You could only be DECLARED clean. The elders of the leper’s town (ESPECIALLY the Samaritan town) aren’t going to give two hoots about the word of Rabbi Yeshua ben Yusuf. They will require the verification of the priests.
how about God sending a deceiving spirit to wicked kings?
how about Jesus pretending to go further on the road to emmaus?
oh and, and how about Abraham getting rich, blessed by God, because he lied twice about Sarah being his sister.
God made him wealthy, he got wealthy by lying…
Nick said, “The priest did not heal —” Nick have you read Liv.14 lately, that was a healing ordeal that lasted for days, and always the priests come up with a “barbecued lamb”. It says that the priest should look at the residence to see if it is clean of leprosy, we now know leprosy is caused by bacteria, which no one can see, not even priests.
Laymond,
No. That’s not right. This was a ceremony to recognize that cleansing had taken place.
I’m sure you’re able to search for commentaries on the Internet, but I’ll give you a start:
Matthew Henry on Lev. 14
Leprosy in the Bible is not always Hansen’s disease. It was considered to be caused by sin, hence the sacrifices, etc. when the manifestation in the skin went away.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Brian, et al:
I thought of this specific passage because of the implications of espionage and the Christian. I’d love to hear any thoughts on that.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Ok. I reread Liv.13 and 14 and understand why I misunderstood what it was saying, I never fully got involved because I don’t see the relevance to my life today and it is disgusting. and for some reason I don’t have the desire to go read it again.