The Wedding in Canaan
Much is made of Moses placing the “mantle” (of kingship) on Joshua son
of Nun. Strangely though, the succession of Joshua is afterwards not even mentioned.
Instead we get the impression that with the death of Joshua there was no recognized
king in Israel until Saul and then David.
In the interim, the Israelites “did what was right in their own eyes”
and were governed more or less by “judges.”
In the Old Testament, the predecessors of King David are named as Jesse, Obed, Boaz,
Salmon and Nahshon.
It is only in the Book of Matthew that the “harlot” Rahab of Jericho is
identified as the mother of Boaz.
Armed with this new intelligence about Rahab, we might boldly advance that the mantle
or birthright passed from Joshua son of Nun to Salmon son of Nahshon.
However, the Hebrew name Salmon (also written Sala) literally means “mantle”
and the root sal connotes “salvation.”
Therefore, it can be trumpeted long and loud that Salmon son of Nahshon was more commonly
referred to as Joshua son of Nun.
The name Nun is also written as Non and was consequently a short form of Nahshon.
If Joshua and Salmon were two epithets of the same person, then it follows that Rahab
became the wife of Joshua and Joshua the father of Boaz.
Indeed, we are told in the Book of Joshua (6:25) that Rahab “dwelled in Israel”
after the conquest of Joshua.
The Hebrew word translated as “dwell” (yashab) can also be translated
as “marry.”
However, if the hero Joshua had been the direct ancestor of King David, then why would
this not have been fully recorded and celebrated?
First of all, the former marriage(s) of Rahab made her nuptials with Joshua something
less than right in the eyes of Israelites.
Perhaps more disturbing, the future heir Boaz may not have been a true offspring of
Joshua, but a child born to Rahab by a former husband, that is, a son of a rival or foreign king who was only adopted by Joshua!
Thirdly, Rahab herself may have been considered a non-Israelite, and a hated Egyptian
queen at that.
The Hebrew word for harlot, zonah (zaw-naw’), makes a ready play with the Hebrew
word for queen, that is, sarah (saw-raw’).
Both before and after her name was changed from Sarai (“domineering”)
to Sarah, the sister-wife of Patriarch Abram also found herself in a compromising position and her reputation in considerable
danger.
While trying to become pregnant, she was first taken into the harem of a pharaoh of
Egypt and then a king of the Philistines in Canaan.
As a result, Sarah like Rahab was subjected to a stereotype and prominent double standard
of her time.
Women of common birth were considered to be the property of their husbands and could
be punished by death for adultery.
On the other hand, royal women (such Sarah and Rahab) emulated the great goddesses
in their sexual freedom and virtual equality with gods.
Like Isis in Egypt, Inanna and Ishtar of Mesopotamia, and Asherah in Canaan, women
of high birth were actually encouraged to seek out and have children by multiple partners - with or without the covering of
marriage.
In the Egypt of Rahab, a leading queen was designated as the “God’s Wife.”
She could have numerous children (“holy births”) by various kings (“gods”)
and still be considered a virgin.
Outside the context of the royal court however, these ladies would have been thought
of as no better than whores, and the Biblical authors often found it a convenient artifice to model them as such.
Redeeming Magdalene
The epithet Magdalene has the Hebrew meaning of “tower.”
By virtue of this glaring allusion to Old Testament precedent, the marriage of Jesus
and Mary Magdalene is not only to be suspected but also completely expected.
As Jesus is patterned after Joshua, so Mary Magdalene is typecast as the incarnation
of Rahab.
Consistent with this, Mary Magdalene (“Mary of the Tower”) must be rescued
by Jesus even as Rahab was by Joshua.
Joshua marches around the city of Jericho seven times.
Similarly, Mary Magdalene is delivered from the influence of seven “evil spirits.”
That is, before becoming the disciple, patroness, and especially bride of Christ,
she would first have to be divorced from a number of encumbrances, not the least of which was a “bad marriage.”
Joshua kills the king of Jericho and liberates Rahab.
Therefore by association, Jesus must kill, at least figuratively, those who wanted
to confine Mary Magdalene in a tower, that is, to negate her power by engaging her in compromise with the present overlords
of the land.
Ironically, the much-criticized union with Mary Magdalene actually served to make
the Messianic claim of Jesus more legitimate from a Scriptural perspective.
Tradition held that kingly Joshua was married to a harlot, or at least to a woman
who had assumed the literary guise of one.
And this is the context in which we must consider the depiction of Mary Magdalene.
As with her Old Testament archetype Rahab, Mary Magdalene in reality would have been
of the highest social standing, a veritable “queen” and “goddess” within Jewish society of the time.
And like Rahab, the true status of Mary Magdalene is downplayed in Scripture but not
fully suppressed.
Her wealth and influence were not only helpful to Jesus, but actually a necessary
part of her prophetic profile that needed to be documented.
Moreover, her class distinction in turn unveils that of Jesus himself.
Rehab is the second of four women listed in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (not including
his mother), but is the most important as far as the Gospel presentation is concerned.
She is the only woman associated with Joshua son of Nun, the namesake of Jesus, and
a type of “secret wife.”
For effect, Rahab is also placed in the company of three other women who were renowned
for assertiveness, Ruth, Tamar, and Bathsheba.
They were chosen because of all Old Testament women they along with Rahab most nearly
captured the heart and mission of Mary Magdalene.
To varying degrees, all four “played the harlot” in order to improve their
marital satisfaction and the welfare of their children.
For taking courtly initiative each risked the painful stigma of adultery.
Ultimately all were rewarded with greater status in their lifetime and recognized
by posterity as integral to the Messianic line.
The motherhood of Rehab is only made explicit in the Gospels for the purpose of explaining
to those who had “ears to hear” why believers were not to proclaim from every housetop the good news of Jesus’
marriage along with his saving message.
There were very practical reasons for hiding the family life of Jesus under a bushel,
and it also honored precedent.
The marriage of Joshua and Rahab is disguised in the Old Testament.
Moreover, after Joshua and Rahab there is a perceived latency or incubation period
of the “judges” before the advent of a renewed native kingship in Israel under King David.
Again, this provided a blueprint for Jesus and his inner circle to follow.
In the short term, the Messianic successors of Jesus would need to guard their plan
and cultivate belief in Jesus among the masses.
However, within a few generations a Davidic figure would be expected to emerge from
this Messianic line, and in the manner of both David and Joshua, he and his army of zealous followers would “take up
the sword” and “take the kingdom by force.”
Considerable understatement and indirection is used in the Book of Joshua account
of Rahab.
Yet, her royalty (and therefore also that of Joshua) can be easily recognized by the
pseudonyms and symbols masterfully woven as Biblical textile.
This narrative style inspired the later Gospel accounts in which an imperiled royal
line is again not only revealed in Jesus but also re-concealed to those who were not fully initiated into the “mysteries”
of the new religion.
Christianity was from its conception thrust into the world as a two-edged sword.
The fact that Mary Magdalene is strongly typecast in the Gospels as Rahab is certain
proof that privileged leaders of the early Christian Church fully acknowledged her role as mother of a new ruling house.
To wit, the basis for that role is easily established from canonized Scripture alone.
If Jesus were intended to be a Messiah to end all Messiahs, then there would have
been no point in even mentioning Rahab, or Tamar, Ruth and Bathsheba for that matter, in the genealogy of Christ.
However, they are, and with the realization that Jesus had a regal wife comes the
knowledge that he also had an underlying political agenda.
Therefore, Rahab of the Old Testament represents the cherished New Testament “Bride
of Christ” in more than one sense.
She prefigures the body of believers who were to be “saved” and “sanctified”
by Jesus, but more tangibly foreshadows Mary Magdalene as the liberated woman of Christ and a willing accomplice in dynastic
intrigue.
