Whore

I'm preaching on Rahab tomorrow, to fulfill sermon requirements of (1) preaching from the First Testament and (2) preaching on a female character.  I figure since I'm well on my way to reading every single ATLA article that uses Joshua as a text, and since I just did a paper on Rahab, I'd go ahead and stick to what's easy.

I stumbled across this while reading commentaries:  "Rahab appears to have been an innkeeper; and if she had formerly been one of bad life, which is doubtful, she had left her evil courses."

See, Rahab was a prostitute.  Don't believe me?  How about the Bible?  Rahab is called a prostitute five times (Joshua 2:1, 6:17, and 6:25; Hebrews 11:31; and James 2:25).  People like the guy quoted above are quick to argue that in ancient Hebrew, "prostitute" and "innkeeper" are the same word.  However, the words are different in Greek (porne and pandoceus), which is what the authors of Hebrews and James were using.  Plus there is absolutely zero reason to think the Hebrew text is talking about an innkeeper.

What cracks me up is how some commentators/preachers bend over backwards to claim she wasn't a prostitute, as if a prostitute couldn't do something good, and definitely is not worthy of mention in the Bible.  You know, alongside the Son of God who was born out in the barn with a bunch of animals.  OK kids, I think if you're trying to cover up a convert's sin, you're missing the point.

To be fair, most preachers do say Rahab was a prostitute.  In fact, they love saying it.  That she was, was a prostitute, until she came to Jesus.  Yes, seriously.  I just read a sermon that said Rahab came to Jesus.  These sermons are all about how Rahab had faith, which is (to be generous) a gross anachronistic application of modern concepts of monotheistic faith within the lens of the Christian religion to an ancient henotheistic pre-Christian context where there was really no such thing as faith, because religious conviction was just an extension of society.  One's god was fact, not a proposition to be believed.

But here's the best part: they all say Rahab went from prostitute to woman of faith, from harlot to heroine.  That she quit being a prostitute.

I suppose it is possible that the (fictional) character stopped being a prostitute, but we have no reason to assume that.  Know why?  Because the Bible doesn't say that.  The whole question is totally irrelevant to the story, which really doesn't portray her as a sinner at all.  Just mentions (five times) that she was a prostitute.

No judgment here.

The housesitting underground

(Dream from last night)

I was housesitting, but getting ready to leave and go volunteer at a nearby camp for a week.  A younger girl--maybe in her early to mid teens?--who may have been related to the home owners showed up, and she was going to be there alone after I left.  I fed her, or tried to, and I remember this house had a set of drawers mounted on the wall that were heated, allowing them to contain already-made mac & cheese.

The house was connected to the neighboring houses via a series of underground tunnels (don't think ordinary cellars; think Dwarf mines), and for some reason I decided to leave the house that way.  Luz, an older woman who goes to school with me, and one other person undertook this journey with me.  At one point we came to a ladder, which was on top of a steep set of stairs, so you kind of had the option to climb either way?  Anyway, I climbed the ladder, but Luz moved a set of boxes and found a much more manageable set of stairs to ascend.

I exited the tunnels in the back yard of the original house, from the foundation of a neighboring house.  The girl was in the yard, and expressed sadness that I was leaving.  I decided I might as well stay the week and babysit her, since it was starting to rain and my only way to get to camp was a motorcycle.

Nico-spirituality

I am taking an online course in eco-spirituality, and doing rather poorly.  Not in my coursework, but in my efforts to learn something.

Part of our continuing expectations in the course is nature journaling, and part of my final project is to be a little more in-depth about it.  I've set up a blog to this end that you can check out:  nicospirituality.blogspot.com

Get it?  NICOspirituality.  Ha.

Sneaky bastards

This is the sort of thing that makes me really really angry, but I have nothing I can really do about it.  Except, you know, blog.

My attention was drawn to the office TV (playing FOX News) by something about "Republican governors."  An ad celebrated Republican governors like Walker taking brave stands and saving their states money (you know, by union busting.  Next target: suffrage?)  I actually almost thought the ad was going to be against that, since it sort of let the facts speak for themselves and I sort of think revoking collective bargaining rights and vetoing high-speed rail are facts that say rather negative things.  But the ad went on to say Democrats are trying to build a new bridge from Detroit to Ontario.  A bridge we don't need.  A bridge that will cost taxpayers too much.

What really made me curious, though, was that at the end of the ad, text appeared saying it was "Paid for by the Detroit International Bridge Co."  Sounds kind of weird, right?  Why is a bridge company lobbying against a bridge?

I did some research and found that the Detroit International Bridge Co. operates Ambassador Bridge, also between Detroit and Ontario, and has proposed creating a second span to handle increased international traffic.

So by "the taxpayers can't afford this" they mean "we're trying to scuttle this bridge project so ours will go through."

Holy.  Crap.

Scribble Theology: Joshua (Abridged)

Arts and crafts

I made a mousepad today.