As I was reading my book tonight, I got to thinking back on Sunday's sermon. Ok, back up...I'm reading about Rahab the prostitute and how she trusted in God to save her. the spies came back into the city after Joshua and his posse destroyed the city and brought her and her family to safety, just as promised. Well it referenced a verse in James (I'd tell you which one, but I'm too lazy right now to go in the bathroom and get my book...yeah TMI prob! lol) that said, "wasn't
Rahab the prostitute declared righteous too after what she did" (carley summary...). So, why after all these years, and being brought into the lineage of David, still referred to as a prostitute? Can't she just drop the title and just be Rahab?
So, back to the sermon...Keith said that the gospel isn't exclusive. and I recalled hearing something about not referring to someone as, "so and so the drunk," "so and so the child molestor," "so and so the crack addict," because in all actuality...we're all just as bad as the worst person you can think of and all in need of a savior. So, are labels neccessary, and if not - why was Rahab still called "the prostitute" in the New testament. The author says that it's to remind us of her past and how she's rose above it. It's not intended to glorify the sin, but to glorify God's grace.
So, I'm in full agreeance that the gospel is not exclusive - but are labels neccessary? If not, how do you look past them?
1 comments:
OK here are my toughts...
1) you don't look PAST labels - you look THROUGH the lens of the gospel at the labels. When you do, the person behind the label appears very different to us.
2) I think that including th label for Rahab serves to show us today the beauty of grace. If the label had been lost, we would not know Rahab's past.
3) That a harlot is in the lineage of Jesus is also beautiful. Religion would say that the Son of God's human lineage should be 'perfect, pure, and holy' - isn't that religion's expectation - perfection.
Post a Comment