Is it ever permissible to lie? The case of Rahab
The case of Rahab is often brought up (e.g. by some commentators on this blog) as a case in which God approves of lying. The case is described in Joshua 2:
1 Then Joshua son of Nun secretly sent two spies from Shittim. "Go, look over the land," he said, "especially Jericho." So they went and entered the house of a prostitute named Rahab and stayed there.
2 The king of Jericho was told, "Look! Some of the Israelites have come here tonight to spy out the land." 3 So the king of Jericho sent this message to Rahab: "Bring out the men who came to you and entered your house, because they have come to spy out the whole land."
4 But the woman had taken the two men and hidden them. She said, "Yes, the men came to me, but I did not know where they had come from. 5 At dusk, when it was time to close the city gate, the men left. I don't know which way they went. Go after them quickly. You may catch up with them." 6 (But she had taken them up to the roof and hidden them under the stalks of flax she had laid out on the roof.) 7 So the men set out in pursuit of the spies on the road that leads to the fords of the Jordan, and as soon as the pursuers had gone out, the gate was shut.
The first thing to note is that it isn't absolutely clear that Rahab does lie here. How do we know that she did know from where (specifically) the men had come? How do we know that the men didn't leave (leave what?) at dusk, returning to Rahab's later? How do we know that Rahab did know which way they went from wherever it was to her house? And how do we know that Rahab knew that 'you may catch up with them' was false? (Admittedly, the ESV has 'will' for 'may' here.) Anyway, I shall proceed on the plausible but unproven assumption that Rahab was lying: even if her words weren't strictly false she seems to have been out to deceive.The next thing to note is that there is, of course, no commendation of Rahab by God in Joshua 2. But James 2: 25 comes in here. Here is my literal translation from the Greek:
25 But in the same way was not even Rahab the prostitute justified by works, having received the messengers and sent them out in a different direction?
Although this is a question, it clearly expects the answer 'yes', and so may be treated as an affirmation. But note that James 2: 25 doesn't say that Rahab the prostitute was considered righteous because she lied. The Greek says she was considered righteous by her 'works'. The inference is (though this is not explicitly said) that her works were the things mentioned: receiving the messengers and sending them out in a different direction? Who were these 'messengers'? The spies or their pursuers?
In the first case there is no hint of a problem. The word 'received', which can also mean 'welcomed', fits this case better. Also compare Hebrews 11: 31, which I translate literally as follows:
By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those that had disobeyed, having received the spies with peace.
Here the word 'received' in Greek is closely connected with the word for 'received' in James 2: 25, and here there is no doubt that it is the spies about whom we are talking. (Incidentally, some commentators think that 'received' is a euphemism hinting at Rahab doing her job with the Israelites. I doubt that this is true, but if it is it does fit more with the spies than with the pursuers.)
In the second case Rahab is still not commended for lying, but rather for sending the pursuers out in another direction (i.e. as opposed to welcoming them into the house to look for the spies). Sending someone in another direction is not lying. It seems true that Rahab achieved this end by a lie, but it is this end, not her means, that is commended here -- if this interpretation is correct.
The basic point that James is making is, of course, that Rahab didn't just sit around believing, but actually acted on her beliefs . He is not making the point that everything she did was good. I think that Rahab was wrong to lie, but right to try to save the spies, and that this is why she is commended.
One final thought: some may say that one cannot be a spy without lying. But the spies are not commended by God for what they did. In any case, they may be more like SAS-style secret agents trying to move about unseen (unsuccessfully in this case) than like MI6-style spies with false identities etc.
8 Comments:
great to see you today - now what about that controversial question?
No deep thoughts on this one< crawford?
Daniel, you made a good attempt at trying to refute the idea that we can’t use Rahab’s case to justify lying when someone’s life is threatened. I think your best point is that although her other acts are mentioned in the passages where she is commended, her lying isn’t.
The article I was thinking of was this by Ra McLaughlin on the Third Millennium Ministries' website and here is another one on the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals website. (I see you have made number 8 on Google's search for "Rahab lying". Fame at last!)
Now for my thoughts (as I can’t sleep!):
1. Is it not lying to say that you don’t know where people come from and then immediately say to them, "I know that the LORD has given you the land, that the terror of you has fallen on us, etc." (v. 8ff)?
2. Is it not lying when asked if they are in your house, that you say they left? The implication is that they left permanently, not that they skipped off to the corner shop for a paper before retiring for bed! The Hebrew might be even stronger in stating that they left permanently. She is still bearing a false witness.
3. Is it not lying to say that the pursuers could go after them quickly, when they were in her house?
4. Is it not lying to say that they could catch up with them, when they wouldn’t have a hope as she was going to send them in the opposite direction?
5. Her work of sending them out in a different direction is intimately tied-up with sending the pursuers on a wild goose chase by lying. It seems incongruous to say she was justified by her works, when everyone knows this to be the case.
6. The messengers of James 2:25 must be the spies as she didn’t send the pursuers out in a different direction. She told the pursuersshe didn’t know which way the spies went and they decided which way to go themselves
7. Abraham and Isaac are both condemned for lying by clear implication in Gen. 22 and 26, so this makes silence about Rahab’s sin of lying all the more deafening.
8. Even if we exclude Rahab, what about Micaiah’s account of God sending deceiving spirits in 1 Kings 22:19-23 and the Hebrew midwives of Exod. 1:15-21, who also lied to save life?
9. I still think it is significant that the Ninth Commandment is not to bear false witness against our neighbour. (See also your reference to Eph. 4:25.)
10. Although Lev. 19:11, etc., say we should not lie, the Sixth Commandment says we should not kill. Pacifists say all killing is wrong, but we know from the rest of Scripture that this shouldn’t be taken absolutely (as Calvin would say) because killing was commanded for defence and for capital punishment.
11. God punishes Moses, David, Israel, etc., when they don’t use God’s methods, so as he didn’t condemn the spying, then He must have approved of it.
(Crawford, don't think this lets you off the hook!)
Thanks very much for this, Tim.
Thanks for the references; I have read the ACE one, but it fails to mention Lev. 19: 11. I'll e-mail the author.
What is it to lie? It is (a) to affirm a falsehood (b) believing it to be a falsehood while (c) intending that one's audience believe the falsehood. Each of (a) to (c) must be established to show that we have a case of lying.
Now to your points:
(1) Rahab knew roughly from where the spies came, but then the pursuers knew that (Joshua 2: 2). So the pursuers may well have wanted to know from *exactly* where the spies had come, which Rahab may well have not known. Note also that Rahab says (in the NIV) 'I *did* not know', not 'I do not know'. It's quite plausible that she didn't know where they were from when they came to her.
(2) If the men really did leave (we're not told what they left) then condition (a) is lacking and so we have no lie.
(3) In the NIV she doesn't say that the pursuers 'could' go after them quickly. She merely tells them to go after them quickly; hence condition (a) is lacking.
(4) As I said in the original post, this is the trickiest part: the NIV says 'You *may* catch up with them'. But I'm inclined to think that you're right, Rahab must have meant this as that they had a reasonable chance of catching them. One could say that had the pursuers run right the way round the world they might have caught them, but that wouldn't qualify as a *reasonable* chance.
(5) I think Rahab's good work was sending the *spies* in a different direction. Even if I'm wrong here, though, there is still a difference between sending someone off in a different direction and lying -- the latter is an illegimate means to the former (which is permissible).
(6) I agree with you that the messengers mentioned in James 2: 25 are the spies (so the NIV). But our opponents could claim that Rahab sent the pursuers out through the city gate (by implication from Joshua 2: 5), which is obviously a different direction from where the spies were.
(7) I think the explanation for Scripture's silence is twofold: first Rahab did have a very good motive and it was a very tricky situation; secondly, she was a pagan and so wouldn't have been exposed to teaching of the law, which makes her faith all the more outstanding -- she did her very best by her limited lights.
(8) I'll try to post separately on the Hebrew midwives and on Micaiah.
(9) You may be right about the ninth commandment, but what about Leviticus 19: 11?
(10) I don't agree that the Sixth Commandment says we should not kill. I think it says that we should not murder (so the NIV).
(11) I'm not saying that spying is wrong, just that lying is wrong. I think that Lev. 19: 11 shows that. God doesn't punish every sin we commit in this life. In the case of Rahab I think God forebore from punishing her in this life because of her good motive and her relative ignorance as a pagan.
Daniel,
You could do with some help from someone with a bit of Hebrew knowledge to answer the following questions as i don't have a lot of faith in the NIV when it comes to the nuances of translation:
a) Is it "I did not know" or "I do not know"?
b) How strong is the word "left"? Does it refer to permanent leaving?
c) is it "you *may* catch up with them"?
d) Is the 6th Commandment "you shall not kill" or "you shall not murder"?
This isn't a question that is academic; it is an important question. Think of Christians in wartime Europe hiding Jews, or being asked to be spies? I'm sure you agree with me.
P.S. Ever thought of changing from the NIV? ;)
P.S.S. Get that boy Crawford to put in his penny's worth.
Daniel,
You'll be interested in this news item.
Tim,
Thanks for the last two posts.
I agree that I could do with some help from someone with a bit of Hebrew knowledge -- is there anyone out there that can help?
That said, I don't think it matters too much because we agree that Rahab lied; what is in question is whether the Bible commends it.
Daniel,
Not to leave you hanging in the air...
As I said previously, your best point is that although her other acts are mentioned in the passages where she is commended, her lying isn’t.
I'm still not convinced that lying to those who seek to murder our neighbour isn't justified by God's commendation of her and the other passages I mentioned, i.e. Hebrew midwives and Micaiah.
You have made a very incisive point and I will continue to think about this.
"As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend." (Proverbs 27:17)
Post a Comment
<< Home