04.1.3. Women's Names Recorded In The King's Genealogy

Chapter 3 - WOMEN’S NAMES RECORDED IN THE KING’S GENEALOGY
The list of women in the genealogy of our Lord is a wonderful display of not only God’s unmerited favor on sinners, but also a miracle that His human nature was not contaminated by depravity. The women’s names were included not for the purpose of genealogy but for the manifestation of God’s grace.

Tamar

Tamar (also spelled Thamar) was one of the women whose characters were far below average who were included in Christ’s pedigree, and yet the Lord of glory was not disgraced by them. Tamar’s name was the first listed in the division of the generations that stress God’s promise. After the death of her husbands, Er and Onan, Tamar disguised herself as a harlot and tricked her father-in-law into an incestuous relationship by which she brought forth twins. Since we have already discussed Tamar in connection with Judah and the twins, Pharez and Zarah, we will proceed to the second woman named in Christ’s pedigree.

Rahab

Rahab (also spelled Rachab), a prostitute saved by God’s grace, became the mother of Boaz, fathered by Salmon. It was Boaz who purchased Ruth and married her. The harlot Rahab became an unexpected ally of God’s chosen people (Joshua 2:1-24). Like Cornelius before Peter was sent to give him words whereby he could be saved, Rahab had already been quickened by God’s grace before the spies came from Jerusalem. Joshua’s sending two spies to secretly observe Jericho was not by chance. In God’s providence, the spies must go to Rahab’s home, as the Lord Jesus Christ must go through Samaria because one of His sheep was there (John 4:1-54). The former harlot needed the message of the spies to convert her and give her assurance of her salvation. By Rahab’s choice, she became a whore; but by God’s choice, she had been quickened by Divine grace (Psalms 65:4; Ephesians 1:4). Although saved by grace, Rahab carried the stigma of harlotry into the New Testament record (James 2:25). The sending of the spies by Joshua was not from his lack of trust in God, but it proves that faith does not preclude the use of proper means. God’s promises intensify affection, induce caution, and prompt obedience. The effect of God’s promises is to stimulate zeal. Hence, to expect the fulfillment of promises without working is to test God, and to work without expecting their fulfillment is to dishonor Him. The promise that Israel would possess Canaan caused Moses to send spies to view the land (Numbers 13:1-33), and Joshua followed the example of his predecessor. God promised success to His ancient people, but possession is impossible without dispossession. This is a lesson all Christians must learn, regardless of the age in which we live.

Although the men Joshua sent forth were spies, they were also messengers in relation to Rahab. Saving faith cannot exist with deadly sins. Therefore, the gift of faith which Rahab possessed could no longer permit her to be employed in the trade of prostitution. The context gives evidence that at the time the Jewish spies came to her home, she was employed in the preparation of flax. She “hid them [the spies] with the stalks of flax” (Joshua 2:6). The outstanding characteristic of faith is that it is always inclined to salvation. Rahab had both hearing ears and seeing eyes. The confession of her faith is revealed in her statement to the men:

I know that the LORD hath given you the land.... For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red sea...and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom ye utterly destroyed. And as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt.... —Joshua 2:9-11

Since faith is always put to severe tests, Rahab’s faith was no exception. The crucial question is, how could she lie about the spies? A long list of those who lied could be added to her name. Why did Abraham, the father of the faithful, lie before Abimelech about his wife (Genesis 20:1-18)? Why did Peter lie before the damsel about being one of Christ’s disciples (John 18:15-18)? The question about Rahab’s lying has given rise to several false views. Some think the end justifies the means; therefore, anything goes if you get results. This view is employed by religionists in general today. Others say circumstances alter certain cases; therefore, in the case of Rahab, she was justified in what she did. It was better to lie and save the spies than to tell the truth and have them killed. Such reasoning leaves God out altogether. People who advocate this view would call Rahab’s falsehood a white lie, believing that a white lie is not criminal. The truth is that Rahab, like Abraham and Peter, sinned by lying. However, she was not as well-informed as either Abraham or Peter.

James mentioned Abraham and Rahab together. They were different vessels, but the same treasure of grace was placed in each. Whether the vessel is reputable or disreputable, what God puts in the vessel is important and not the vessel itself. The grace of faith distinguishes a person with God. Grace sanctifies the vessel. (See James 2:1-26.) The only bounds known to grace is the one limited by the eternal covenant.

Rahab’s falsehood, although it was for the purpose of saving life, did not vindicate her on that ground. As there were mixed actions in Rahab, in a moral sense, there are mixed actions in all Christians. For instance, one may take a conglomerate mineral and single out one ingredient for discussion, thus drawing attention away from the other ingredients. One aspect of a complex Christian life may be singled out for either admiration or condemnation; but continual actions, not occasional actions, determine the Christian’s character (1 John 2:29; 1 John 3:1-10). A person’s genius may be emphasized without approving his principles or his skill praised while disapproving of his policy. Hence, Scripture commends Rahab’s faith without approving of her falsehood. The New Testament speaks of Rahab’s faith and works without mentioning her sin: By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. —Hebrews 11:31
Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? —James 2:25

Saving faith always manifests itself by works. Rahab tied the scarlet cord in the window as she had been instructed by the spies. She said, “...According unto your words, so be it” (Joshua 2:21).

Both God’s blessing and His curse are represented by cities. Jerusalem is called a place of blessing (Psalms 48:1-3), and Jericho is called a place of curse (Joshua 6:17). Rahab represents one who has been delivered from a place of curse—“shall be accursed” (Joshua 6:17), and she was destined to a place of dual peace—“peace of heart and peace of society.” Heart peace is a present enjoyment. Society peace will be enjoyed in the new Jerusalem (Revelation 21:1-27). Although she was destined for Jerusalem, she was left in Jericho for a time. As Christians, we have been delivered from this evil age; but we are left in it for a time of training, testimony, and work.

Rahab’s life had sunk to a level lower than most others in Jericho, but by grace she had risen higher than all. Although Rahab was a harlot, the Lord told the religious Pharisees that the harlots would go into the kingdom before them (Matthew 21:31). She did not perish with those who did not believe. There is no more saving merit in faith than there is in works. One is not regenerated because he believes, but he believes because he has been quickened. Rahab’s faith caused her to live a lonely life in Jericho, but that is the testimony of all Christians in every age. The gift of faith cuts us off from the world, which is lying in the lap of the Devil (1 John 5:19). However, the believer knows that he will be rewarded for his faith and obedience. Rahab was rewarded in time by becoming the mother of Boaz (Matthew 1:5).

Rahab’s faith can be summed up in the following ways:
(1) Its nature was that it was God-given, and she did not continue as a harlot. (2) Its confession was that as soon as she heard the message of the spies her heart melted.
(3) Its imperfection was that she lied about the spies. The Psalmist said,
“If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?” (Psalms 130:3). (4) Its reward was that her name is eternally inscribed on the imperishable scroll of Scripture not only in the hall of faith (Hebrews 11:1-40) but also in the genealogy of Christ.

Ruth The book that bears Ruth’s name is a literary and spiritual classic. There is nothing in human literature more beautiful than Ruth’s address to her mother-in-law: Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus may the LORD do to me, and worse, if anything but death parts you and me. —Ruth 1:16-17 (NASB).

Ruth is the only book in the Bible which is wholly devoted to the history of a woman. Therefore, it is not surprising that Ruth’s name is found in the genealogy of our Lord. The chief purpose of the book is to trace the genealogy of David and David’s Lord. Ruth was a Gentile who married a Hebrew, Boaz, the son of Rahab. He was the kinsman redeemer who lifted Ruth from the ash heap of Moab to sit as a princess with himself. There are thirty references in this short book to the redeemer or kinsman. Boaz declared that in redeeming the property of Elimelech and his sons, Chilion and Mahlon, he had also purchased the widow of Mahlon—Ruth—to be his wife (Ruth 4:10). What the nearer kinsman was unable to do, Boaz performed. This describes what Jesus Christ has done for the elect: For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. —Romans 8:2-3 The book of Ruth (the name means “satisfied”) begins with a story of wanderers from God. Elimelech (the name means “my God is king”) took his wife Naomi (the name means “my pleasantness”) and his two sons Mahlon (the name means “sickness”) and Chilion (the name means “consumption or wasting away”) and went to Moab. Famine had made their home in the area of Bethlehem (the name means “house of bread”) uncomfortable. Elimelech did not patiently endure God’s will for his life; therefore, he departed from God’s land, God’s company of people, and the privilege of God’s revelation. God sent temporary trouble, and Elimelech fled from it. But how mournful are the consequences of wandering from God. The “house of bread” is better in a time of famine than the land of Moab in the time of plenty.

Elimelech was a Hebrew whose inheritance was in the area of Bethlehem. Because of the sins of the Israelites, tolerating idolaters and public monuments of idolatry (Judges 1:1-36; Judges 2:1-23; Judges 3:1-31) and the Israelites themselves falling into idolatry (Judges 2:11-13; Judges 2:17), God sent a famine to chasten them (Leviticus 26:18-20). When God chastens by famine, the duty of His people is to submit with contentment. God’s people are to bear the rod of Him who appointed it. Elimelech, however, went to Moab because abundance was in that land.

Moab was a doomed country. Before Ruth’s birth, Balaam issued a prophetical statement about Moab:

I shall see him, but not now:I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star our of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth. —Numbers 24:17

Balaam’s prophecy reminds one of Caiaphas’ prophecy to his own condemnation, but he declared the truth of God (John 11:50-52). God often uses extraordinary means of awakening men to a sense of sin. Christ is not viewed in the prophecy of Balaam as coming out of heaven but out of Jacob. The Sceptre will rise out of Israel. This is the same Jacob and Israel seen in the other parables spoken by Balaam, but they are now seen as those out of whom Christ will come to reign. The Star is a symbol which is evidently in the night period. The Star coming out of Jacob and the Sceptre rising out of Israel portray that Christ, as He is presently known to His saints, is coming to introduce the day and to reign. Shall we, like Elimelech, go down to a condemned world to seek help? It may seem strange that Christians should suffer famine when worldlings wallow in plenty (Psalms 17:14; Psalms 73:4; Psalms 73:12), but one must not lose sight of God’s chastisement of Christians. Elimelech sought livelihood in enemy country but forfeited life itself. He sought bread apart from the house of bread but found a grave (Ruth 1:3). The sons of Elimelech married strange women. Mahlon married Ruth (Ruth 4:10), and Chilion married Orpah. After ten years in Moab, Mahlon and Chilion died. Naomi was left a widow with two daughters-in-law in enemy country. There was death for those so dear to her and solitude for herself. Her losses made her think more about Canaan, the land of promise. News also came to her about the Lord giving bread to the famine-stricken people. During her ten years absence, Naomi had a rest and reality of spiritual strength that never departed.

Naomi began her journey back to the land of Judah. God’s providential dealings with Naomi brought recovery. A broken and contrite heart is the result of God’s judgment, which is absolutely necessary for all recoveries. Without a sense of departure, there will be no desire for recovery. This lack is the spirit of our age. Mercy is rich in affliction which brings us from worse to better, from Moab to Canaan, and from being afar off because of sin to being near the Lord again because of repentance. The two daughters-in-law said to Naomi, “Surely we will return with thee unto thy people” (Ruth 1:10). Orpah promised but did not purpose to go. Ruth promised and purposed to go. A person who merely promises may manifest religious zeal, but for want of a regenerated heart his promises come to nothing. Promises of the mouth often proceed from passion and not from principle. The bud of a mere promise will not ripen into precious fruit. It is like the seed that was cast on stony ground. It grew rapidly, but withered when the sun began to shine. This was Orpah’s experience. She kissed Naomi, but turned back to her people and to her gods. (See John 6:66-67.) Conversely, Ruth promised and also purposed by cleaving to Naomi. Ruth persevered because she made the following choices with a purposed heart (Ruth 1:16-17 NASB):
(1) She chose Naomi’s path—"where you go I will go."
(2) She chose Naomi’s habitation—"where you lodge I will lodge."
(3) She chose Naomi’s people—"your people shall be my people."
(4) She chose Naomi’s God—"your God shall be my God."
(5) She chose Naomi’s death and place of burial—"where you die I will die, and there I will be buried." The strength of Ruth’s purpose was manifested when she said, “...If anything but death parts you and me” (Ruth 1:17 NASB). The bond of faith is so powerful that it makes believers desirous and resolute to live and die together. When Naomi heard Ruth’s confession, she was convinced of her sincerity. She had been tried and proved. Failure to try a person before trusting him is want of wisdom, but refusing to trust him after he has been tried is want of love. The backslidden Naomi returned to the place from which she had departed. She and Ruth arrived in Bethlehem at the time of barley harvest. Naomi’s good reputation among the Jews was manifested by the people being stirred by the couple’s presence in the city. The question was asked, “Is this Naomi?” (Ruth 1:19). Naomi expressed her regret by saying, “Call me not Naomi [pleasantness], call me Mara [bitter]” (Ruth 1:20). She knew from the promise of Scripture that she was guilty of distrusting the Lord: “Trust in the LORD, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed” (Psalms 37:3). The humbled Naomi came back empty. Many people are humbled but not humble; they are made low but not lowly. Naomi went out full not because of desire but from fear of want. Although in the strict sense Naomi did not come back empty, she must not assume the credit for Ruth’s accompanying her. God had overruled her disobedience; and because of her repentance, He gave her a traveling companion. Only a restored backslider can be a blessing to others. Upon returning, Naomi found a well-spread table and the precious blood of the paschal Lamb, because it was the time of barley harvest—the passover. This is what the backslider finds when he returns to God. The book of Ruth belongs to the time of the Judges. It stands in relation to a time of failure and departure. There had been repeated departures by God’s people and God’s gracious interventions to raise up deliverers. However, there is no account in the book of Judges of recovery to the normal enjoyment of the inheritance. The judges were all marked by defects. Not one of them was able to reinstate the people to the enjoyment of the inheritance according to God. This is where the book of Ruth stands out like an oasis in the desert. The inheritance was recovered. One appeared who was great enough to exercise the right of redemption, redeem the inheritance, and secure a seed to enjoy it. Naomi had a kinsman of her husband, a mighty man of wealth. His name was Boaz (the name means “in him is strength”), the son of Rahab, who was able to redeem what Naomi had lost through poverty. This redemption involved his marriage with Ruth. Therefore, Ruth would be wise to abide with the maidens of Boaz and seek no other field in which to glean. The law opposed Ruth because she was a Moabitess, a Gentile, which prevented her from entering into the congregation of the Lord (Deuteronomy 23:3). The law can only condemn. Boaz must purchase Ruth from a kinsman who had a prior claim but could not redeem her lest he mar his own inheritance. This left Boaz free to do what the kinsman nearer than himself could not do. Therefore, Boaz purchased the inheritance of Elimelech. Thus, he bought Ruth the Moabitess to be his wife to “raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance” (Ruth 4:10). The nearer kinsman represents the law (legal principle). He could not redeem the inheritance for himself (Ruth 4:6); therefore, he plucked off his shoe in token of giving place to another, namely, Boaz. Since the law cannot redeem, it must give place to Him who is full of grace and truth (John 1:14-17). Christians have become dead to the law by the body of Christ in order that we might be married to another, even to Him who was raised from the dead (Romans 7:1-6).

Estates fall into litigation in court when there is no heir whose title can be established. Without heirs the inheritance would go into the hands of the state. However, God’s purpose cannot be invalidated because “he is in one mind, and who can turn him? and what his soul desireth, even that he doeth” (Job 23:13). Hence, a seed who was capable of enjoying the inheritance was secured through Boaz and Ruth. A son was born (Ruth 4:13) who had the right of redemption (Ruth 4:14). They called his name Obed (the name means “serving”). Obed was the father of Jesse (the name means “my subsistence” or “God exists”), and Jesse was the father of David (the name means “beloved”). As to the flesh, Christ is the son of David (Matthew 1:1; Romans 1:3-4). We are tracing the genealogy of David and David’s Lord. Ruth is connected with the Messianic line. In Christ’s humanity, He is our nearest kinsman. In His Deity, He is able to supply our needs and defend us from all danger. As the promised Redeemer, the Lord Jesus has a special relation to Israel and a particular personal relation to every regenerated and converted person. He is the kinsman Redeemer of Israel. He is the seed of Abraham in whom all nations are blessed. Furthermore, He is the seed of David and is therefore the ultimate Son who shall sit on David’s throne. The following are qualifications the Redeemer must meet:
(1) He must be willing to perform the work of redemption.
(2) He must be absolutely free from sin.
(3) He must possess the ability to redeem.
(4) He must have the price of redemption.
(5) He must be a near kinsman. In Christ’s humanity, the first and fifth qualifications are met. In His Deity, the second and third are fulfilled. In Jesus Christ as God-Man, the fourth is fulfilled.

Bathsheba The list of women’s names concludes with Bathsheba. She is not specifically named in Christ’s genealogy; but her second son, Solomon, is referred to as being fathered by David “from the wife of Uriah [ek tes tou Ouriou]” (Matthew 1:6—translation). Bathsheba was an adulteress who exploited her beauty by bathing in a place where she could be seen. As she made her body available to David’s eyes, she made her heart available to the King’s desire. A woman who dresses immodestly to arouse the passions of a man is as sinful as the man who looks upon her until he commits heart adultery. Bathsheba’s exploitation of her body led to an adulterous relationship between David and herself. David, a man after God’s heart, committed adultery in his heart before he committed the act. The sin of adultery is the Devil’s nest egg which causes many sins to be laid one after another.

Fashion designers today are bold to say their fashions for women are designed to attract the sensuous nature of men. There is no doubt that present day dress codes have contributed to the rising crime of rape and other crimes. Christian women must in good sense dress modestly. The Bible explicitly describes the modest apparel with which women should clothe themselves:
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest [aidous, genitive singular of aidos, which means a sense of shame or modesty] apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety [sophrosunes, genitive of sophrosune, which means soundness of mind, self-control, or sobriety]; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. —1 Timothy 2:9-10

David’s sinning went from seeing the woman to sending for Bathsheba to climax his act of adultery. David was enticed by his own lust; and when his lust conceived, it brought forth sin (James 1:14-15). Although Bathsheba stood naked before David’s eyes, the real sin could not be attributed to providential circumstances. Bathsheba was only the occasion for David’s passion to be inflamed. Christians are presently subjected to things almost as bad as that which David saw three thousand years ago. Every Christian is thankful for restraining grace. Bathsheba was not free from fault in the adulterous act with David. She prostituted her beauty near the King’s court for the purpose of enticing him. The prostitution of herself was followed by her willingness to respond to the King’s first invitation. When any woman goes as far as Bathsheba did, she is a push-over for man’s first advance. Like David, Bathsheba was guilty of adultery in her heart before she committed the act.

David’s sin went from adultery to an attempted cover-up of his sin. Under the Jewish law, adultery was a capital offense. Therefore, David contrived to conceal his sin by having Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, brought home from the battlefield. The King thought that by Uriah’s lying with his wife, he might believe her conception was of his own fathering. In his conference with Uriah, David inquired about Joab, the people, and state of the war. David’s attempt to appear interested in the importance of a firsthand report from his trusted servant reveals how deceptive a Christian’s heart can be in devising a cover-up. David used his office of kingship to appeal to Uriah. The King instructed Uriah to go home and refresh himself. Surely he would take the opportunity of rejoicing with the wife of his youth (Proverbs 5:18). After Uriah’s departure from the King’s house, David sent a present to him. After all of this, David’s scheme failed. While trying to hide his sin, his deceitful heart overlooked the providence of God. Uriah did not go home, because his loyalty to the King led him to sleep at the King’s door with the servants.

David was informed that Uriah did not go home, as he had instructed. The King was dissatisfied with Uriah’s reply to his inquiry as to why he did not go:

...The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in tents; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields; shall I then go into mine house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? as thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing. —2 Samuel 11:11

Tenderhearted David became a monster. This shows what sin will do to a Christian when passion gets the upper hand. If David would take advantage of Uriah’s absence to commit adultery with his wife, Uriah’s expressed loyalty would not affect the King. Hence, the failure of his first plot only caused the King to invent a new one.

David’s next step in trying to conceal his sin was to make Uriah drunk, hoping that by intoxication Uriah would break his vow of not lying with his wife. But this also failed: And when David had called him, he did eat and drink before him; and he made him drunk: and at even he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but went not down to his house. —2 Samuel 11:13

However, David refused to give up; and he pursued a more deadly course. King David framed a letter to have Uriah killed and sent it to Joab by the hand of him who was to die. Thus, he involved another man in an unjust and atrocious act to cover his own crime. The letter instructed Joab that Uriah should be placed where he would be most exposed in battle that he might die by the hands of Israel’s enemy. The record states that Uriah died in battle, which proves that no sin stands alone. The little break in a dam widens until the whole dam gives way, and a little speck of rot slowly spoils fruit of its useful character. Scripture states that the little foxes spoil the vine (Song of Solomon 2:15). When Bathsheba heard that Uriah was dead, she mourned for her husband; but her mourning was short-lived because the next day she became David’s wife. The hasty marriage of widows and widowers manifests the hypocrisy of such sorrow. Those who consider hasty remarriage may not be guilty of the act of adultery or murder, but they evidence lust in the heart. They seek to cover their lust with the excuse of desiring companionship.