Dale Ralph Davis on Joshua IV
Ralph offered as a basic element of Old Testament interpretation that we really ought to not so much bring our own ideas and questions, as allow the Old Testament generally, and the emphasis of the passage in particular, to govern what we discovered.
As an example, Ralph pointed out that the preoccupation we bring to Joshua 2 is that when Rahab the prostitute offered shelter to two Israelite spies, she told a lie. There it is in Joshua 2:
Then the king of Jericho sent to Rahab, saying, “Bring out the men who have come to you, who entered your house, for they have come to search out all the land.” But the woman had taken the two men and hidden them. And she said, “True, the men came to me, but I did not know where they were from. And when the gate was about to be closed at dark, the men went out. I do not know where the men went. Pursue them quickly, for you will overtake them.” But she had brought them up to the roof and hid them with the stalks of flax that she had laid in order on the roof. (Josh 2:3-6)
Worrying, isn't it? Especially as the subsequent success of Israel's invasion is aided by the prostitute's protection, and that Rahab is later listed as one of the honoured women in Jesus' genealogy, and as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11. So this lie may well be an issue that needs to be addressed (not, however, in this CHN).
Ralph, however, points out that the stress of the chapter lies elsewhere. We discover where the stress lies when we see that Joshua 2 is structured like a sandwich (a piece of bread, the meat itself —which is the important bit—and another piece of bread). The two pieces of bread in the Joshua 2 sandwich concern the protection of individuals. In verses 2-7, and again in verses 15-21, the individuals protected are Rahab and the spies. But what is the meat in the sandwich? Why, it's verses 8-14, in which Rahab confesses that Yahweh, the God of Israel, has given the people of Israel the promised land, and that he is “God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath”.
He is indeed! What an extraordinary confession from this foreign, immoral woman who by rights has no part in the household of God.
Ralph suggested that to forget this astonishing statement, and to focus on the woman's lie, was a mistake. It's a bit like him ignoring the food his wife had worked to put in the fridge and instead point out the dirty, dusty smear on the fridge top. Ralph spoke like a man who had learned from experience to focus on the meat.