View this lesson in a browser and print a "take-away" weekly copy. CLICK HERE (see link below)
The King’s Concubine
There are many references to concubines in the Old Testament (Gen. 25:5, 6; Judg. 8:30, 31; 2 Sam. 5:13–16; 1 Kings 11:2, 3). What can we learn about them from these and other references?
Concubines were often taken from the ranks of female slaves or maids of a family. Their express purpose was to produce heirs, and once they had produced male offspring, their status and social standing were similar to those of regular wives. A man was regarded as his concubine’s husband (Judg. 20:4), and their children appeared in genealogies (Gen. 22:24) and would receive a part of the inheritance (Gen. 25:5, 6). It is interesting to note that concubines appear mostly in the patriarchal period; during the early monarchy, concubines were connected to royal households.
Read 2 Samuel 3:6–11. What can we learn about Rizpah and about her circumstances in that particular time?
Rizpah, whose name means “live coal” (see Isa. 6:6, which uses the same word), is part of the royal household of Ishbosheth (“man of shame”), the only remaining son of Saul, who, through the help of Abner, has been made king over Israel and has moved across the Jordan to Mahanaim (2 Sam. 2:8–10). The mere fact that the biblical author included information about Rizpah’s father (“daughter of Aiah”) suggests that her family must have been important and that she was not a slave. Ironically, the name of the son of Saul appears in another form in the genealogy of Saul, as Eshbaal, “the man of Baal” (1 Chron. 8:33). The form used in 2 Samuel 2:8–10 seems to be a subtle insult by the biblical author: the man of Baal is an embarrassment to the house of Saul and thus a “man of shame.”
Rizpah’s personal circumstances are far from ideal. She belongs to the household of Saul, and even though the able general Abner is propping up Ishbosheth, the weak descendent of Saul, as Saul’s concubine, Rizpah has no security. Her fate seems totally out of her hands, controlled by forces and circumstances way beyond her authority or control.
Jesus tells us that if a man lusts after a woman, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt. 5:28). However, many men of God had concubines in the Old Testament. How do we reconcile this fact with what Jesus said? (As you think of an answer, remember that just because something is mentioned in the Bible as being practiced doesn’t mean God approves of it or that it is the best way to live.)
| SUNDAY | November 21 |
There are many references to concubines in the Old Testament (Gen. 25:5, 6; Judg. 8:30, 31; 2 Sam. 5:13–16; 1 Kings 11:2, 3). What can we learn about them from these and other references?
Concubines were often taken from the ranks of female slaves or maids of a family. Their express purpose was to produce heirs, and once they had produced male offspring, their status and social standing were similar to those of regular wives. A man was regarded as his concubine’s husband (Judg. 20:4), and their children appeared in genealogies (Gen. 22:24) and would receive a part of the inheritance (Gen. 25:5, 6). It is interesting to note that concubines appear mostly in the patriarchal period; during the early monarchy, concubines were connected to royal households.
Read 2 Samuel 3:6–11. What can we learn about Rizpah and about her circumstances in that particular time?
Rizpah, whose name means “live coal” (see Isa. 6:6, which uses the same word), is part of the royal household of Ishbosheth (“man of shame”), the only remaining son of Saul, who, through the help of Abner, has been made king over Israel and has moved across the Jordan to Mahanaim (2 Sam. 2:8–10). The mere fact that the biblical author included information about Rizpah’s father (“daughter of Aiah”) suggests that her family must have been important and that she was not a slave. Ironically, the name of the son of Saul appears in another form in the genealogy of Saul, as Eshbaal, “the man of Baal” (1 Chron. 8:33). The form used in 2 Samuel 2:8–10 seems to be a subtle insult by the biblical author: the man of Baal is an embarrassment to the house of Saul and thus a “man of shame.”
Rizpah’s personal circumstances are far from ideal. She belongs to the household of Saul, and even though the able general Abner is propping up Ishbosheth, the weak descendent of Saul, as Saul’s concubine, Rizpah has no security. Her fate seems totally out of her hands, controlled by forces and circumstances way beyond her authority or control.
Jesus tells us that if a man lusts after a woman, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt. 5:28). However, many men of God had concubines in the Old Testament. How do we reconcile this fact with what Jesus said? (As you think of an answer, remember that just because something is mentioned in the Bible as being practiced doesn’t mean God approves of it or that it is the best way to live.)
No comments:
Post a Comment