Study

a Bible passage

Click a verse to see commentary

Select a resource above

Spies Sent to Jericho

Then Joshua son of Nun sent two men secretly from Shittim as spies, saying, “Go, view the land, especially Jericho.” So they went, and entered the house of a prostitute whose name was Rahab, and spent the night there. ²The king of Jericho was told, “Some Israelites have come here tonight to search out the land.” ³Then the king of Jericho sent orders to Rahab, “Bring out the men who have come to you, who entered your house, for they have come only to search out the whole land.” ⁴But the woman took the two men and hid them. Then she said, “True, the men came to me, but I did not know where they came from. ⁵And when it was time to close the gate at dark, the men went out. Where the men went I do not know. Pursue them quickly, for you can overtake them.” ⁶She had, however, brought them up to the roof and hidden them with the stalks of flax that she had laid out on the roof. ⁷So the men pursued them on the way to the Jordan as far as the fords. As soon as the pursuers had gone out, the gate was shut.

⁸ Before they went to sleep, she came up to them on the roof ⁹and said to the men: “I know that the L ord has given you the land, and that dread of you has fallen on us, and that all the inhabitants of the land melt in fear before you. ¹⁰For we have heard how the L ord dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites that were beyond the Jordan, to Sihon and Og, whom you utterly destroyed. ¹¹As soon as we heard it, our hearts melted, and there was no courage left in any of us because of you. The L ord your God is indeed God in heaven above and on earth below. ¹²Now then, since I have dealt kindly with you, swear to me by the L ord that you in turn will deal kindly with my family. Give me a sign of good faith ¹³that you will spare my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and deliver our lives from death.” ¹⁴The men said to her, “Our life for yours! If you do not tell this business of ours, then we will deal kindly and faithfully with you when the L ord gives us the land.”

¹⁵ Then she let them down by a rope through the window, for her house was on the outer side of the city wall and she resided within the wall itself. ¹⁶She said to them, “Go toward the hill country, so that the pursuers may not come upon you. Hide yourselves there three days, until the pursuers have returned; then afterward you may go your way.” ¹⁷The men said to her, “We will be released from this oath that you have made us swear to you ¹⁸if we invade the land and you do not tie this crimson cord in the window through which you let us down, and you do not gather into your house your father and mother, your brothers, and all your family. ¹⁹If any of you go out of the doors of your house into the street, they shall be responsible for their own death, and we shall be innocent; but if a hand is laid upon any who are with you in the house, we shall bear the responsibility for their death. ²⁰But if you tell this business of ours, then we shall be released from this oath that you made us swear to you.” ²¹She said, “According to your words, so be it.” She sent them away and they departed. Then she tied the crimson cord in the window.

²² They departed and went into the hill country and stayed there three days, until the pursuers returned. The pursuers had searched all along the way and found nothing. ²³Then the two men came down again from the hill country. They crossed over, came to Joshua son of Nun, and told him all that had happened to them. ²⁴They said to Joshua, “Truly the L ord has given all the land into our hands; moreover all the inhabitants of the land melt in fear before us.”

New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

4. And the woman took the two men, etc. We may presume that before Rahab was ordered to bring them forth the rumor of their arrival had been spread, and that thus some little time had been given for concealing them. ³⁴³⁴ Had the season of the year when these transactions took place not been known from other sources, the mode of concealment to which Rahab resorted would have gone far to fix it. The “stalks of flax” with which she covered them, was evidently the crop of flax as it had been taken from the ground after attaining maturity, and laid out in the open air to dry, agreeably to a custom still practiced, before it was subjected to the process of skutching, for the purpose of being deprived of its woody fiber. The flax sown about the end of September was pulled in the end of March or beginning of April, which accordingly was the period when the Israelites began to move their camp. — Ed. And indeed on receiving the king’s command, had not measures for concealment been well taken, there would have been no room for denial; much less would she have dared to lie so coolly. But after she had thus hidden her guests, as the search would have been difficult, she comes boldly forward and escapes by a crafty answer.

Now, the questions which here arise are, first, Was treachery to her country excusable? Secondly, Could her lie be free from fault? We know that the love of our country, which is as it were our common mother, has been implanted in us by nature. When, therefore, Rahab knew that the object intended was the overthrow of the city in which she had been born and brought up, it seems a detestable act of inhumanity to give her aid and counsel to the spies. It is a puerile evasion to say, that they were not yet avowed enemies, inasmuch as war had not been declared; since it is plain enough that they had conspired the destruction of her fellow-citizens. ³⁵³⁵ It may either mean that “they” (the Israelites) “had conspired,” as here translated, or as the French has it, that “Rahab had conspired,” — Ed. It was therefore only the knowledge communicated to her mind by God which exempted her from fault, as having been set free from the common rule. Her faith is commended by two Apostles, who at the same time declare, (Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25,) that the service which she rendered to the spies was acceptable to God.

It is not wonderful, then, that when the Lord condescended to transfer a foreign female to his people, and to engraft her into the body of the Church, he separated her from a profane and accursed nation. Therefore, although she had been bound to her countrymen up to that very day, yet when she was adopted into the body of the Church, her new condition was a kind of manumission from the common law by which citizens are bound toward each other. In short, in order to pass by faith to a new people, she behooved to renounce her countrymen. And as in this she only acquiesced in the judgment of God, there was no criminality in abandoning them. ³⁶³⁶ Latin, “Nullum in proditione fuit crimen;” literally, “there was no crime in the treachery.” French, “Il n’y a point eu de crime de trahison en ce faict;” “There was no crime of treachery in the act.” Neither of these properly conveys Calvin’s meaning. From what follows it is evident that he held all treachery to be criminal as implying a deviation from truth; while he also held, that under the special circumstances Rahab was justified in withdrawing her allegiance from her countrymen and transferring it to the Israelites. He therefore only justifies the act without approving of the mode of it. This view appears to be accurately expressed by the term “abandoning,” which has accordingly been substituted in the translation. — Ed.

As to the falsehood, we must admit that though it was done for a good purpose, it was not free from fault. For those who hold what is called a dutiful lie ³⁷³⁷ Latin, “Mendacium officiosum.” French, “Le mensonge qui tend au profit du prochain;” “The lie which tends to our neighbor’s profit.” The mendacium officiosum is an expression of frequent use among the Casuists, and properly means, “a lie which it may be an act of duty to tell.” One of the most common instances given is the case in which a simple statement of the truth might essentially endanger the interest, or, it may be, the life of an individual whom we are under a natural or conventional obligation to defend from all injury. A son, for example, is pursued by murderers; he takes shelter under the paternal roof; his mother has just succeeded in concealing him when the murderers arrive. Is she entitled to give a false answer to their interrogatories? The question is one of the most difficult and delicate that can be raised; but Calvin has undoubtedly given the right decision when he lays down the broad principle, that those who hold any lie to be excusable, “do not sufficiently consider how precious truth is in the sight of God.” Were anything necessary to reconcile us to this decision, we may easily find it in the havoc which has been made of all morality by acting on its opposite, as evinced particularly in the case of Jesuit and other Romish casuists. — Ed. to be altogether excusable, do not sufficiently consider how precious truth is in the sight of God. Therefore, although our purpose, be to assist our brethren, to consult for their safety and relieve them, it never can be lawful to lie, because that cannot be right which is contrary to the nature of God. And God is truth. And still the act of Rahab is not devoid of the praise of virtue, although it was not spotlessly pure. For it often happens that while the saints study to hold the right path, they deviate into circuitous courses.

Rebecca (Genesis 27. ³⁸³⁸ The original text had the reference to Genesis 28, an obvious typesetting error. —fj. ) in procuring the blessing to her son Jacob, follows the prediction. In obedience of this description a pious and praiseworthy zeal is perceived. But it cannot be doubted that in substituting her son Jacob in the place of Esau, she deviated from the path of duty. The crafty proceeding, therefore, so far taints an act which was laudable in itself. And yet the particular fault does not wholly deprive the deed of the merit of holy zeal; for by the kindness of God the fault is suppressed and not taken into account. Rahab also does wrong when she falsely declares that the messengers were gone, and yet the principal action was agreeable to God, because the bad mixed up with the good was not imputed. On the whole, it was the will of God that the spies should be delivered, but he did not approve of saving their life by falsehood.

³⁴ Had the season of the year when these transactions took place not been known from other sources, the mode of concealment to which Rahab resorted would have gone far to fix it. The “stalks of flax” with which she covered them, was evidently the crop of flax as it had been taken from the ground after attaining maturity, and laid out in the open air to dry, agreeably to a custom still practiced, before it was subjected to the process of skutching, for the purpose of being deprived of its woody fiber. The flax sown about the end of September was pulled in the end of March or beginning of April, which accordingly was the period when the Israelites began to move their camp. — Ed.

³⁵ It may either mean that “they” (the Israelites) “had conspired,” as here translated, or as the French has it, that “Rahab had conspired,” — Ed.

³⁶ Latin, “Nullum in proditione fuit crimen;” literally, “there was no crime in the treachery.” French, “Il n’y a point eu de crime de trahison en ce faict;” “There was no crime of treachery in the act.” Neither of these properly conveys Calvin’s meaning. From what follows it is evident that he held all treachery to be criminal as implying a deviation from truth; while he also held, that under the special circumstances Rahab was justified in withdrawing her allegiance from her countrymen and transferring it to the Israelites. He therefore only justifies the act without approving of the mode of it. This view appears to be accurately expressed by the term “abandoning,” which has accordingly been substituted in the translation. — Ed.

³⁷ Latin, “Mendacium officiosum.” French, “Le mensonge qui tend au profit du prochain;” “The lie which tends to our neighbor’s profit.” The mendacium officiosum is an expression of frequent use among the Casuists, and properly means, “a lie which it may be an act of duty to tell.” One of the most common instances given is the case in which a simple statement of the truth might essentially endanger the interest, or, it may be, the life of an individual whom we are under a natural or conventional obligation to defend from all injury. A son, for example, is pursued by murderers; he takes shelter under the paternal roof; his mother has just succeeded in concealing him when the murderers arrive. Is she entitled to give a false answer to their interrogatories? The question is one of the most difficult and delicate that can be raised; but Calvin has undoubtedly given the right decision when he lays down the broad principle, that those who hold any lie to be excusable, “do not sufficiently consider how precious truth is in the sight of God.” Were anything necessary to reconcile us to this decision, we may easily find it in the havoc which has been made of all morality by acting on its opposite, as evinced particularly in the case of Jesuit and other Romish casuists. — Ed.

³⁸ The original text had the reference to Genesis 28, an obvious typesetting error. —fj.