5 Women of Destiny

He wasn't sleeping, but that, are we done yet? question. I gotta figure out I'm going to be hearing that for many years to come. Kind of relieved when we're down in Pressensburg. You know, Micah Akifli is only two weeks older than Connor, and they have a lot of the same phrases. Like, yippee, we're done, and are we done? Well, brethren, I think one of the most important things that we, as God's true church, understand that many people don't, is that Jesus Christ was the God of the Old Testament. As the first chapter of John says, and I'm just going to refer to this, we've read it many times, it says, In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Further down it says, All things were made by Him. And it tells us, of course, the Word became flesh as Jesus Christ, and dwelt among us. Once we understand that before Christ revealed the Father, and said that no one had ever seen or heard the Father before, then we start to realize that it was the One who became Jesus, as we've sometimes called Him the pre-incarnate Christ, or, as John said, the Word. That was the One who appeared to Abraham, had dinner with him that time, the One who spoke the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai, the One who gave Moses those two tables of stone.

We understand that the Word was God, and He had always been. Now, of course, long before He was incarnated as Jesus Christ and appeared in the flesh.

The Jews of Christ's day didn't understand that. It was something they just had trouble grasping. They didn't understand that the Messiah would be both the Creator God, and at the same time a human being.

I'm going to turn to Matthew 22. This lack of understanding that, or difficulty grasping it, is one of the reasons the Pharisees were totally stymied when Christ asked them a couple of questions in this passage. Matthew 22 and verse 41.

Of course, they'd been asking Him questions. Now He turned the tables.

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying, Well, what do you think about the Christ? And remember, Christ was another word just for the Messiah, the One who'd been prophesied to come. What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is He? Well, they said, The Son of David. They knew the prophecies. And then He said, Well, how then does David in the Spirit, meaning David under God's inspiration, writes, which He did in one of the Psalms, How does He call Him Lord? And then He quotes, The Lord said to My Lord. Now, in the King James, that could be a little confusing, but remember, these are two separate Hebrew words. It says, the YHWH, we often say, The Eternal said to My Lord the Adonai. So, The Eternal said to My Adonai, Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool. Well, if David calls Him Lord, which is not, you could say, Boss or Chief, you know, David calls Him that. How is He His Son?

And as I said, He was pointing out they were having trouble with this, because we understand that Christ was God, but they weren't seeing that. And they knew that custom called for the descendant to look up for and give higher honor to the ancestor, not the other way around. But of course, they had this unique situation where, you know, the Messiah was going to be a physical descendant from David, but would still be God.

Why did Jesus have to come in the flesh? Well, so that He could die. He could die for our sins. He did die to pay the price for all of our sins.

Now, that alone is the subject of many sermons, but I've been saying all this to lead up to the fact that God planned this pretty carefully. How the one who was God was going to come in the flesh, He orchestrated that very carefully, made sure He had every last detail down. And we know that it was planned very far in advance by what it tells us in Revelation 13, verse 8. He's referred to as the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world. So before the world was created, or when it was created, there was this plan for the Lamb of God, which is what Jesus Christ was referred to. That plan for Him to be the sacrifice.

And we just read a prophecy. It was prophesied that the Messiah would be descended from David. Long before that, God promised it to Abraham. Again, I won't turn there, but in Genesis 12, verse 1, we have those famous promises that we say of race, I'll make of you a great nation, and grace, and you, all nations of the earth, will be blessed.

Genesis 49, when Jacob made prophecies of what would befall the descendants of his twelve children in the end times, makes a promise that the Messiah would be descended from Judah. It's in Genesis 49, 10. Once again, I'm just quoting. It says, I don't think these were promises God tossed around lightly. He says, you're going to have the Messiah descended from you. That's not like saying, oh, I owe you a favor. Or, let's get together for lunch sometime. When God promises something like that, that's pretty important.

And if, as we think, God planned very carefully and managed the physical ancestry of Jesus Christ, then we know these were well considered. Now, we could speculate on exactly how and why. Why did God give the blessings through Isaac, but not Ishmael? Did it have to be a descendant of Sarah rather than Hagar? Why the blessings through Jacob and not Esau? And why through Judah?

Not one of the eleven others? And if you think I'm going to give you the answer, actually, I don't know for sure. Why King David? Was God choosing genetic traits? Possibly. Was he doing it just to show that he could? Hey, I'm going to promise it to this person, and then I'm going to make it come to be, because I'm God and I can do that.

I'm going to show that I'm God. Maybe he was making the promise as a reward for righteous character. We would get that feeling from Abraham. But whatever the reason, I suspect it might be more than we're going to figure out at this time. But if every scripture is valuable for instruction, then the genealogy of Jesus Christ is worth us considering and thinking about.

It has value. And in this sermon, I want to examine five particular people that were in that genealogy, and they're highlighted in a way that others are not. And I've got a lesson and an analogy that I want to draw from that. So if you will, let's look at one of the two genealogies in Luke chapter 3. Luke chapter 3. And I'll mention later we're going to go to Matthew 1, but I'm going to refer to them. So you might want to either stick a finger or a marker here in Luke 3, so that we can flip back and forth without having to find it again.

But Luke 3, beginning in verse 23, is where we start this genealogy. Now Jesus himself began his ministry at about the 30 years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, and it begins from there.

Why did Luke write, as was supposed? Well, I think we know he wasn't, you know, Joseph wasn't Jesus' actual father, he was his stepfather. You know, Luke earlier in the account clearly shows that Mary became pregnant through the power of God, and Joseph, of course, still married her and raised Jesus as his own. Jesus was the son of God, Joseph his stepfather. But hold that thought, and we'll see that the genealogy fulfills those promises I referred to earlier.

In verse 31, Now the son of Malia, the son of Menin, the son of Matthah, the son of Nathan, the son of David, okay? Jesus was descended from David. In verse 34, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Tyra, so it did go through Isaac and Abraham, and Jacob, of course. Down in verse 36, The son of Canaan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, and 38 I love, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

But wouldn't that be something to be born and be able to trace your genealogy all the way back to Adam? You know, I'd love to be able to trace my genealogy back two or three generations, but that was something Jesus had that there. Now, you might want to hold a finger here, as I said, and let's turn to Matthew 1. Matthew and Luke both provide genealogies, and the other accounts do not. Matthew gives Jesus his genealogy, but instead of starting with Jesus and then backtracking, he starts with Abraham and works down to Jesus. So he doesn't include the list between Adam and Abraham.

But the two genealogies are the same from Abraham until you reach David. But then there's a difference. Look at Matthew 1 and verse 6. He said it starts there with Abraham and says, Jesse begot David the king. David the king begats Solomon. Wait a minute. Well, I'll say from there, it goes on and it lists all those who were kings in Judah, the same men that we read about in the books of 1st and 2nd Kings and 1st and 2nd Chronicles. But in Luke 3.31, we read that of Nathan the son of David. Okay, now, there are other discrepancies in the spelling of names, but Solomon and Nathan, that's not just a difference in spelling.

Those are two different people. The explanation seems to be found in another significant difference. As we saw in Luke 3.23, list Joseph the son of Heli, if I'm pronouncing it, it might have been Heli, but Matthew 1 and verse 16 says Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary. Okay, once again, Heli and Jacob, two very different names. There's quite a discrepancy, and actually, from the point of David down to Joseph, the names are completely different.

Now, some people have said, well, skeptics say, well, see, the Bible contradicts itself. We know it's just folklore, it's not real. But there's a better explanation that most scholars of the Bible agree on, and which I personally think is correct, and that is that one of these genealogies is for Joseph, and one is for Mary. Most scholars believe that the genealogy in Luke is actually that of Joseph, and that's where we read in Luke 3.23, that should be translated Joseph son-in-law of Heli.

And you'll notice, I've got the New King James, son of, is in italics. Really, the original just says Joseph of Heli, and so the words are provided that weren't there. It should have been Joseph son-in-law of Heli, and so then it goes on from there. That would mean that the genealogy in Luke is that of Mary, while the genealogy in Matthew is the actual genealogy of Joseph.

Jesus' legal ancestry with Joseph as his adopted father. Now you might be saying, huh? Okay, so what? One of the things this shows us, God fulfilled the promises about the Messiah's ancestry through both parents. Legally, through Joseph, Joseph was descended from David, from Judah, from Abraham, and so was Mary.

Oh, yeah, I've got a note here. Sorry, I was looking for it. What are you writing here, Frank? Some scholars actually think it's the other way. There's a small minority that think that Matthew gives Mary's genealogy, and Luke gives Jacob, or, yeah, Joseph's.

But I think most people agree, probably Luke is the one that has Joseph's. For now, that difference doesn't matter, but I am going to come back to that later. But I want to focus on four scriptures in Matthew's genealogy. So I've taken my finger out of Luke. I'm going to look here in Matthew. Matthew 1 and verse 3. Judah begot Perez and Zera by Tamar, and Perez begot Hezron. Now down in verse 5. Solomon begat Boaz by Rahab, Boaz begat Obed by Ruth, and Obed begat Jesse. And verse 6. Jesse begot David the king, and David the king begot Solomon, of her who had been the wife of Uriah.

And then in verse 16. Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who was called Christ. Matthew mentions five women in Jesus's genealogy. Luke lists none, not even Mary. Remember we just read Joseph's son-in-law of, you know, he lists Mary's father, but none of those women are mentioned. Now we should mention, these weren't the only five women in Christ's genealogy. Logic would tell us, there was one woman for each man. So there were a lot of others, but these five were called out and listed.

Now what Luke did was the norm. The culture at that time usually traced the lineage through the men, and most societies still do today. The only exception that Luke made, you know, Luke was the normal one, not listing the women. The only thing he did that was unusual was listing Joseph's father-in-law rather than his father. So for Matthew to specifically mention five women, that's odd. It's unusual. That should tell us, maybe there's something unusual, maybe something special about these women.

Now we might automatically assume that would be so about Mary. Now after all, she was going to have to raise Jesus. The Son of God, she was going to have to carry him in her womb, raise him to adulthood. She had to be special. And that's easily acknowledged. Now I want to make a disclaimer, of course. We want to realize that Mary was not immaculately conceived, as the Catholic doctrine says. She is not the Queen of Heaven. She is not an intercessor for us. At no time should we pray to Mary or worship her. But we should respect her.

Honor her memory and learn lessons from what she did. But what about the others Matthew named? Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba. Although I will note Matthew doesn't actually say the name Bathsheba. He calls her the one who had been Uriah's wife. But think, who did he not name? Well, there's lots he didn't name. He left out Sarah and Rebecca and Leah.

Surely they were very important. And it seems that God chose them specifically. So it's not just people that God chose, or ones that we know are important. But there are others we can't read about. I thought it's interesting. How many of the twelve patriarchs, the twelve sons of Joseph, how many of them do we know the names of their wives? I almost said we don't know any of the other eleven, but we do know the name of Joseph's wife, because she was the... Now I can't remember her name, but... One of the princes, the daughter of one of the princes in Egypt.

But Matthew mentions these five. Three of them were not Israelites. Tamar and Rahab were, we believe, Canaanites. Ruth, we know, was a Moabite. Bathsheba was married to a Hittite, which some people have questioned, well, was she not an Israelite? Only Mary has no negatives about her.

We don't read anything bad about her. Although at the time, people had some negative thoughts about her. A lot of people believed that she was a fornicator, because she showed up pregnant and Jesus was born significantly less than nine months after she got married to Joseph. But why are these women listed? Some people have guessed that God wanted to make sure that we could see how wide His mercy was, because He included Bathsheba, who has a well-known sin.

Some people say He wanted to make sure that His plan of salvation includes many nations by having the Messiah descended from Canaanites and a Moabite, possibly a Hittite. That might be true. And it even makes reasonable sense, but still, the Bible doesn't actually tell us. It leaves us wondering. And the question could come up, is there something else?

Well, I'm doing good about asking a lot of questions that I'm not answering today, aren't I? Well, part of what set me on the track of asking all these and wanting to look into this, at the Winter Family Weekend, they brought the question through Sue. I was doing one of the seminars speaking about using historical methods to study the Bible. And so I mentioned some historical novels that I'd read, and at that point I'd read one of them by Francine Rivers, who wrote the book about Ruth that the Ladies Club discussed today.

I'd read the one by Mary, and I just mentioned it as an aside, as a historical work that could help us perhaps get some insight into Scripture. And so a woman who was there in the seminar was speaking to Sue afterwards, and she said, I guess she was familiar that Francine Rivers had written novellas about each of these five women. And she said, you know, does the church have some special teaching? Do we have some understanding as to why they're there?

So Sue passed it on to me, and I said, hmm, no. As far as I know, I don't know of any special teaching the church has or anything we know for sure about. In some ways, that's nice. That means there's room for us to come up with an explanation, or room for me to come up with one. Now, I do want to mention one thing I'm pretty certain of.

I do not believe that Jesus inherited character traits from these women. Now, He did inherit genetic traits. You know, you get the genes of all of your ancestors, but His character came from being God. He'd existed forever. He had perfect character. So He didn't have to inherit these traits from others. But that doesn't mean we can't consider that these women could each be a good representative of a character trait. Francine Rivers portrays them as that. She calls Tamar a woman of hope. Tamar, by the way, was the one that had the children of Judah.

I'm going to talk about each of them a little bit later, so a lot of this is a setup. But she calls Rahab a woman of faith. Ruth a woman of love. Bathsheba a woman of grace, actually of not showing grace, but receiving grace.

And Mary a woman of obedience. I don't disagree with that. Those are good defining characteristics. I would only add that there are other lessons we could draw from their lives. And I'm sure Mrs. Rivers, if she were here, would probably agree with me on that. And that's what I want to do.

I want to draw a lesson from looking at all five of them together and sort of make an analogy of a process. A process of us being called out of the world, coming into the church, the body of Christ, and then developing Christian character.

Now, I will make the disclaimer, of course, when you make an analogy, it won't necessarily fit everyone. And actually, as I look, I'm going to look at three different ways that we could see representative as people being called into the church. But if the way you came in contact and entered the church isn't covered in this analogy, it wasn't meant as a personal slight. So let's consider this as one way of looking at these five special women.

I call them five women of destiny. Actually, yeah, that's what I put on my title. So if someone wants a title, I'm calling it Five Women of Destiny. Jesus said in John 6.44 that no one could come to him unless drawn by the Father. And we also read in 2 Corinthians 4.4 that Satan is the God of this world, and he's blinded most of the world. And with that as our understanding, then, most people don't understand the Bible the same way we do. They don't have that relationship with God or with his people. But sometimes people come in contact with the church, and they then appreciate the blessings that they see God's people enjoy.

Sometimes they see that and they say, I want that. What those people have is something special. I want to be associated with them. And they might feel that way. In other words, you know, someone comes in contact with God's people and they see them as a group. These people are happy. They seem to enjoy a special blessing. And they might say, I'd really like to have that, even if they don't understand the way of life that brings them or know the God that is behind that. I think that view can provide a way to begin looking at these women, to build my analogy.

And as I said, remember, this is an analogy. So I might at some point say, I think this might be about this woman without having actual scriptural proof. I'm not setting any new dogma. But as I said, I want to consider the different ways that people can come to God and His people and then progress from there. So if you'll turn to Genesis 38, I want to begin with Tamar. Tamar can serve as an example of someone who becomes associated with God's people without having first been convicted of the truth.

Genesis 38 and verse 6. It mentions Judah. This is Judah, the son of Jacob, one of the twelve patriarchs. Judah took a wife for Ur, his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. We don't know much about Tamar going in. We know that earlier in this chapter, it tells us that Judah had married a Canaanite woman and had three sons by her, who would be named Ur, Onan, and Shelah. It's funny, you don't hear those names when you go to school these days. So Judah's sons were half Canaanite. Judah had married a Canaanite woman. That tells me it's almost a certain thing that Tamar was a Canaanite. She was in that same region. Judah didn't have any problem with marrying Canaanite women. I'm making a presumption, but I'm guessing Tamar was probably a Canaanite. If so, she would have been dark-skinned, almost certainly raised in the religion of the people, the pagan practices of the Canaanites. We don't know how long Tamar's marriage to Ur lasted. Hopefully for her sake, not very long.

Because if we read in verse 7, Ur, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Eternal, and the Eternal killed him. How many people in the Bible do you read that about? Not many. I think, boy, he must have been pretty wicked. And I think, poor Tamar. How'd you like to be married to that? But then again, she lived through it, and he didn't. No, as I said, that didn't happen to many other people, but now she was a part of the family of Judah. And that's something that's worth mentioning. And the culture of that time, and actually this extended for many years afterwards, when a bride was sought for a son, they paid a dowry. It was sometimes referred to as the bride price. And it was almost like purchasing this woman, and she becomes part of the husband's family. So she was now part of Judah's family, and even though Ur was dead, Tamar was still part of the family. You didn't go back home to your parents. She belonged to Judah and his family. And so Judah moves on to something Mr. Preston mentioned earlier. Verse 8, Judah said to Onan, Go into your brother's wife, marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother. Now keep a finger here. I'm going to go ahead and turn to Deuteronomy 25 and read the instruction here, because the question comes up.

Really? Apparently, this was a long-term custom, because this was before God gave the law to Moses. But when God gave Moses the law, he incorporated that practice into it. Deuteronomy 25 and verse 5.

It says, If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside of the family.

Remember, she's part of that family now. Her husband's brother shall go into her, take her as wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her. The brothers would have pretty much similar genetics, and they would be in the family. They'd pay the bride price, so the idea is she doesn't have any children to take care of her. It's his duty to go provide her children. And it's interesting, depending on the circumstances, as Mr. Pressin was pointing out, he might either like the opportunity of that duty or not like it at all. And she'll be the firstborn son, which she bears will succeed in the name of the dead brother. So you go in and perform this duty, and she has a child. It's legally not considered your child, but the brothers who died. That his name may not be blotted out of Israel. But if a man does not want to take his brother's wife, and we can imagine what reasons those might be, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate to the elders and say, My husband's brother refuses to raise up a name to his brother in Israel. He will not perform the duty of my husband's brother. Then the elders of the city will call him, bring him in, and speak to him. But if he stands for him and says, I do not want to take her. I never thought I'd be for some reason. Maybe it's because of the lack of contractions, saying, I do not want to take her reminds me of green eggs and ham. I do not like green eggs and ham. I do not want to take her. I don't know how I got that. Anyways, if he says that, then his brother's wife shall come to him in the presence of the elders, remove his sandal from his foot, spit in his face, and answer and say, So shall it be done to the man who will not build up his brother's house. So in other words, it's a bit of a shameful thing to refuse to do. So, like I said, you might imagine whatever reasons those are. And it's interesting, the story in Ruth, he just takes off a sandal and hands it to him. Apparently it evolved over time, and the spitting in the face either phased out, or when Samuel wrote the book, he didn't bother to record that part. But anyways, we see this commanded to the brother of Er and the story of Tamar. So I'm going to go back to Genesis 38. Onan didn't want... It's funny, now that the backwards, you say, maybe the brother doesn't want anything to do with this widow. Here, Er appears that Onan liked the widow, but he didn't want to raise up a son. In Genesis 38 and verse 9, Onan knew the heir would not be his, and it came to pass, he went into his brother's wife, that as the old King James says, he spilled it on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. The thing which he did displeased the Lord, therefore he killed him also. You've got two oldest brothers both killed for being evil. Now I have to tell you, I guess this is aside from the story, but I remember first reading this when I was about 10 or 11 years old, and reading the old King James, and going to my mother and my grandmother, we were at her house, I distinctly remember being in that large farmhouse kitchen, saying, what did he spill on the ground? I mean, what's so bad that God will kill you if you spill it? And my grandfather was still alive at the time, and he thought that was so funny.

And Mom said, I'll tell you when you're older, I'll explain it. And so I likewise, for any of you, if any of you are confused, check with your parents and they'll decide when to explain it to you.

But here we go on with the story in verse 11. Judah said to Tamar, his daughter-in-law, remain a widow in your father's house. So she still belonged to Judah's family, but he gave her permission to go back and live with her parents, till my son Sheila is grown. And the story said, lest he die like his brother. So it wasn't really that he wasn't old enough, apparently, but Judah's figuring, hey, she goes in with him, he's probably going to die, too. So Tamar went and dwelt in her father's house.

Now, if Judah had his way, Tamar was going to stay there for the rest of her life. Probably he'd be happy to never see her again. As I said, he probably figured she's the reason these two fellas died. But Tamar didn't want to be a widow the rest of her life, living with her parents. Now, we can speculate about that. It could be, and it would have been natural to really want to have children. I mean, most women want to get married and have children. It could be that she wanted any type of meal ticket that didn't rely on living in her parents' house. But here's where I want to speculate. Something the Bible doesn't tell us for sure, but perhaps when she was in Judah's household, buried first to her and then on in, she witnessed and partook of the great blessings. Remember the story of Abraham, how God made him exceedingly rich? And then the same thing happened to Isaac and Jacob. Jacob went out with only a staff and came back two bands, and God just blessed these men. They had great luxury. We have no reason to believe that Judah wasn't enjoying the same thing. Hey, these people know how to live. They've got it great. Now, Tamar had been a part of that blessed family, and now she found herself pushed out. Maybe she wanted back in, and she schemed a way to do it. And I said, now this is being a little crass, because I'd like to think there's a little more than just, you know, I want to live well. But she figured, hey, I should have children by the family, and she found a way to do it. In verse 12, we'll pick it up. In the process of time, the daughter of Shewah, Judah's wife, died. Judah was comforted, and so he goes up to his sheep shearers at Timna. He and his friend, Hera the Adulamite. And it was told Tamar, saying, look, your father-in-law's going up to Timna to shear his sheep. So she hears coming to town, she learns his wife died. So she took off her widow's garments, covered herself with a veil, and wrapped herself. I've always wondered, wrapping herself sounds like something pretty form-fitting. Sat in an open place which was on the way to Timna. Why did she do this? She saw that Shewah was grown, she was not given to him as wife. So she's seeing what Judah's up to. Hey, I'm going to leave her there forever, and she's saying, that's not right. So she does this. She wraps herself, puts on the veil. Judah saw her, doesn't see her face because of the veil, and thought she was a harlot because she had her face covered. He turned to her, by the way, and said, please let me come into you. For he didn't know that she was his daughter-in-law. What are you going to give me? Well, I'll send you a young goat from the flock. Well, I don't see any goats here. What are you going to give me in the meantime? I'm adding a little verbiage here. What pledge will you give that you'll send it? Well, what pledge do you want? Oh, your signet cord and your staff, and that is in your hand. That's probably an unusual thing to ask for. Okay. He gave them to her, went into her, and she conceived by him. And he went away. He rose and went away. She laid aside her veil and put back on her garments of widowhood. I'm guessing she probably was aware of her monthly cycle, and she was timing this, planning to get pregnant.

Now, before we condemn Tamar as a fornicator, or anything else, we do need to remember that duty of a brother. As Mr. Preston pointed out, it goes to the nearest kinsman, and if he declines, it could go to the next nearest kinsman. Well, in this case, Sheila was the closest. The next after that would either be an uncle or, logically, Judah himself had the duty as a near kinsman. So Judah had prevented Sheila, the closest male relative, from performing the duty. It could pass after that to Judah himself.

And that's probably one reason, when everything came out in the wash, Tamar was not punished. She hadn't violated the law, really, or done anything wrong. And the children she bore did become legally considered Judas in the place of his firstborn. Now, of course, Judah didn't know any of this as first. If we pick up the story in verse 24, it came to pass about three months after that, Judah was told, saying, Tamar, your daughter-in-law, has played to Harlot, and furthermore, she's with child from Harlotry. Judah said, bring her out and burn her. You know, a real nice guy.

When she was brought out, she sent to her father-in-law, saying, the man to whom these belong, am I with child? Please disturb him in who these are. The signet, court, and the staff, which he knew were his, and perhaps others would too, and he acknowledged them. And he said, she's been more righteous than I, because I didn't give her to Sheila, my son, and he never knew her again.

So Judah didn't have further relations with her as a wife. Apparently, he did support her as the mother of his children. And Tamar, thus, had forced Judah to do the right thing. And she got back into the family. Her son, Peres, became one of the ancestors of King David, and thus of Jesus Christ. The Bible doesn't tell us whether or not Tamar ever came to know about, believed in, or worshiped the true God, who provided the blessings that she was now enjoying.

And that's where I wonder, to fill in the story, did she? Maybe she did. And there's part of me that wants to believe that she did. She wanted to learn who this God is, and how are we supposed to worship Him? So, as I said, in my mind, I want to believe that she did do that. And I'd like to see that in the analogy that I want to make. As I said, an analogy of a person who becomes affiliated with the church, with God's people, and enjoys those physical blessings.

We've seen that most often with maybe the unconverted mate of a member, a husband or wife, who maybe will travel to the feast with their husband or wife. And they enjoy, hey, this feast thing is great! You save up this money, and you eat at nice restaurants. Hey, these people are cool to hang out with. They're friendly, they're nice. I like church socials, potlucks, but I don't know about those weird idea teachings they have. You can enjoy the physical part of it. Now, I'll add, before we look down our noses at people like that, we should remember, of course, as I pointed out, that only God, the Father, calls someone and opens their mind.

So it's not someone's fault if they like the people but don't understand those weird teachings. But also, sometimes a person becomes affiliated with the church that way, and then they start paying attention, and God does open their mind. And they say, oh, now I know why those people are nice. It's not just happenstance. It's because of this God they worship and how they do it. It's because of the Holy Spirit. So in the same way that I want to think of Tamar first wanting the blessings and then coming to worship the true God, I'd like to think a Christian who first notices the blessings and wants to be associated with the nice people might come to worship the God and be converted and really become part of the body of Christ.

I say, in my mind, that was a much smoother presentation. It's going to get more smooth as we go. Let's turn now and consider the story of another of Christ, not forefathers, but foremothers. And we know that she did believe. That was Rahab. For her story, we're going to have to skip ahead a few generations. The children of Israel, of course, after we read about Tamar, they'd gone down to Egypt, been enslaved, God sent Moses, brought them back out, they wandered for 40 years.

Now they're getting ready to enter the Promised Land. But there's a problem. There's a lot of Canaanites living in the Promised Land. And they like living there. They don't want to just get up and leave, so some arrangements got to be made. Moreover, those Canaanites have a very strong, powerful walled city right there by the border, the city of Jericho. So I'm going to turn to Joshua 2, where we'll read the story. Joshua decides he's going to send two men as spies to go into the land of Canaan, and particularly Jericho, and get the lay of the land, find out what the people are thinking.

I find it interesting to think Joshua didn't realize that God already had this planned out. You know, because God will meet with him later and say, okay, here's what you got to do when he does the whole marching around the city, blowing the trumpets thing. Joshua sends the spies. Let's read chapter 2 and verse 1. Now Joshua, the son of Nun, sent out two men from Acacia Grove to spy secretly, saying, go view the land, especially Jericho. So they went and they came to the house of a harlot named Rahab, and they lodged there. Now right off the bat, some people are saying, what kind of spies were these?

The first stop they make is in, you know, a brothel? Now there's long been scholarly debate over whether Rahab was an actual prostitute, or was she an innkeeper? And the Hebrew word that's used can be translated either way. Now most times in the Bible it's translated as, you know, prostitute.

And to be honest, I don't think we have to know. You know, we should remember in the book of James it says that if you break any of the law, you're guilty of all. And of course, when a person repents and accepts Jesus Christ's sacrifice, all sins are forgiven. Not just the ones that are less repugnant, but all sins are forgiven. So whether she was a prostitute or not, she chose to hide these spies, and she had a reason she wanted to do it.

Let's read, picking up in verse 3. The king of Jericho sent to Rahab, saying, Bring out the men who have come to you, who have entered your house. They've come to search out all the country. The woman took the two men and hid them. So she said, Well, yeah, the men came to me. I didn't know where they were from.

And it happened as the gate was being shut when it was dark that the men went out. Where the men went, I don't know. Pursue them quickly, you may overtake them. But she had brought them up to the roof and hidden them in the stalks of flak, which she had laid on the roof. We'll learn why she did this if we drop to verse 8. Now before they lay down, she came up to them on the roof and said to the men, I know the eternal has given you the land. The terror of you has fallen on us, and the inhabitants of the land are faint-hearted because of you. We've heard how the eternal dried up the water of the Red Sea for you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites who were on the other side of the Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom you utterly destroyed.

As soon as we heard these things, our hearts melted. Neither did there remain any more courage than anyone because of you. For the eternal your God, He is God, and heaven above and on earth beneath.

And it'll go on. The men will promise her protection because she hid them. But think about what she said. She said she'd heard about this God. She'd heard these stories of miracles, and she believed it. Now a lot of people want to say, yeah, sure, Red Sea. It was probably just the Red Sea. It was a swampy area that got dry, you know, and modern scholars say that. But she said, no, I think those stories are true. And she said, your God is the God. He's the God in heaven above and on earth beneath, which means He's the only God. She might not have yet known how to worship this God. What are His teachings? What do I have to do? You know, she probably didn't yet know that, hey, thou shalt not bear false witness thing. You're not supposed to lie to the king's men when they come and ask you where the soldiers went. But she would learn. I'm sure she pretty quickly learned, hey, that prostitution thing, that's not okay. And she changed her ways. But like a lot of people in our age who have learned of prophecies of the end time and believed and wanted to be spared, I think she fits with that range. Think back, especially for those of you that go back to the 60s or 70s, you're hearing about tribulation, and then you hear a place of safety. Is there a place of safety from that? I want to be in on that. Please let me go. If Tamar represents coming to God and his people to get blessings, maybe Rahab could represent coming to God and his people to avoid the cursing. And it's worth noting, as I said, she really did believe. So much so, she was willing to turn her back on everything she knew. She was willing to forsake her people. She lied to the king. She was going to throw her a lot in with these Israelites because they worshiped the only real God.

She was willing to give up whatever religion she had before, whatever culture. And God let her start with that. He would teach her everything else she needed to know. Let's go over to chapter 6. Joshua 6 and verse 22.

Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the country, Go to the harlot's house, and from there bring out the woman and all that she has as you swore to her.

And the young men who had been the spies went in and they brought out Rahab, her father, her mother, her brothers, and all that she had. And they brought out all her relatives and left them outside the camp of Israel. That's interesting. I read the story Francine Rivers wrote about that. It hadn't occurred to me before that they didn't bring them into the camp of Israel. They set them outside. You know, they were foreigners. They weren't allowed in. But at some point later, Rahab did come in. It doesn't mention her family again.

But we read late...we already...let me start that sentence over again. We already saw in the genealogy in Matthew 1 that Rahab married a man named Salmon, a Jewish descendant of Peres, and she became the mother of Boaz. Now, I will point out some scholars reading that look at the Greek and say, well, that might mean great-grandmother or grandmother. Some people say that there were some generations that Matthew left out, and I don't want to quibble about those things. I've always suspected...it's funny, it's that way in the fiction count. I always presume she married one of the two spies, that Salmon was one of those two men, even though the Bible doesn't specifically tell us that. She married someone. Well, she married Salmon. You know, he might have been living near the edge of the camp. I said, ooh, look at...she looks nice. You know, who knows what it was? But also, she believes. Somebody taught her the truth, and she accepted it. And of course, she became part of the ancestry of the Messiah. My thought again, I don't think God did this just carelessly. I think He purposely planned and orchestrated it. As a matter of fact, that's one of the things I learned reading that story. It's like, hmm... If God knew He was going to march the people of Israel around Jericho and make the walls fall down, what do you need to send spies in for?

Possibly needed to send the spies so that they could find Rahab and bring her out, because He wanted Rahab to be in Israel and be part of Christ's ancestry. That's speculation, but who knows? In either event, if you come to God's Church because you want the blessings or because you don't want to be in the Great Tribulation, either way, it's a starting point. And then you progress from there.

And of course, I do want to look to that. The next lady, ancestor of Jesus, provides an example of another way of coming in contact. But we'll progress from there because she also shows what we do afterwards. Let's address the calling first, and then we'll look at the practice. And we'll do that with the story of Ruth. The way that Ruth first came into contact with God's people was more like Tamar than Rahab. Ruth 1 and verse 2. Now, actually, I've skipped the first verse. There was a famine in the land, and this man went to the country of Moab. The name of the man was Alimilech. The name of the wife was Naomi, and the names of the two sons, Malon and Killian, Iphrathites of Bethlehem Judah. They went to the country of Moab and remained there. So they traveled to Moab because there was a famine in Judah. Alimilech, Naomi's husband, died. She was left in her two sons. Now, when Alimilech died, the oldest son would become the leader of the household. And Alimilech, now they took wives of the women of Moab. The name of one was Orpah, the name of the other, Ruth. They dwelt there about ten years. Then both Malon and Killian also died. So the woman, that is, Naomi, survived her two sons and her husband. Now, that means, as I said, after Alimilech died, the oldest son became the head of the household. And then when one of the sons died, we don't know if they died the same day, but the surviving son would be the head of the household. When both of the boys are dead, Naomi is now the head of the household. But it's a household that's not just her, it consists of her and these other two women, because remember, the bride price had been paid. They came into that family. They belonged into that family, or belonged in that family. Scripture doesn't tell us how religious any of these Israelites were. We can just guess. Did Alimilech, Malon and Killian, were they careless about God's ways or devout? Well, I guess the fact that God didn't keep them alive might make you think they weren't all that devout. Naomi continually refers to God, and she refers to the fact that he hasn't blessed her, but it seems that she kept in contact with him. She didn't adopt the ways of Moab. So when she decides to go back to Israel, Ruth and Orpah start off with her. As I said, they're part of her family. They don't really just have the option of saying, we're out of here, we don't want to go with you. But Naomi releases them. And in doing so, she refers to that law of the kinsmen redeemer we've talked about in verse 11. Naomi turns to these two ladies and says, turn back, my daughters. Why will you go with me? Are there still sons in my womb that they may be your husband? Now, if you don't understand the idea that the brother is supposed to marry the widow and raise up an heir, you'd say, what is she talking about? Sons in her womb. But if you do understand, it makes sense. But she says, I'm too old to have a husband. And if I should say that I have hope, if I had a husband tonight and she'd bear sons, would you wait for them till they're grown? In other words, say I got pregnant tonight, you're looking at quite a few years.

So she said, no, my daughters, it grieves me very much for your sakes that the hand of the eternal has gone out against me. They lifted up their voices and wept again, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law. Could say she kissed her goodbye because she's going back, but Ruth clung to her. And next we get the strongest demonstration that Ruth didn't cling to her just because she liked Naomi. She had come to accept this God that Naomi worshiped. And of course, this is one of my favorite passages in Scripture. Ruth said, And treat me not to leave you, or to turn back from following after you. Wherever you go, I will go. Wherever you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, your God, my God. Your God is going to be my God. And of course, we know it's the only God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. The eternal do so to me, and more also, of anything but death, parts you and me. And when she saw that she was determined to go with her, she stopped speaking to her. That's funny. Pardon me, always someone says, Naomi gave her the silent treatment. But I think that meant she stopped trying to convince her to turn back. And Ruth joined God's people because of relatives who were God's people. And that's a common way for people to come into the church. As a matter of fact, some time ago, I think leaders in the church did a study and did a survey of members of the church and said, how did you come in contact? Because there was a time when most people came in contact because they heard a radio program or they picked up a magazine. But by the time we got into the 80s, a majority of people that were in the church were there because of a relative or a friend who was in the church. And they saw that example, and they said, I want to be part of that, too. And Ruth represents that way of being called and of responding to the call. And I said, calling is one thing, but Ruth responded, and she wanted to be part of it. Now, that's a simple enough comparison for my analogy. But here's where I can go further with Ruth than we did with Tamar and Rahab, because we have so much more of Ruth's story. We can see from Ruth's story, she made an attempt to serve, to love, to live the way of life. Let's read chapter 2 and verse 2. It says, So Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, Please let me go out to the field and glean heads of grain after him whoever's sight I may find favor. And she said to her, Go to my daughter. This always gave me the impression that Naomi perhaps is older or in infirm health or both. So Ruth says, Look, I'm young and healthy enough to do the work. Let me go work. And she does. We know that she actually ends up in the field that belongs to Boaz. But I want to make the comment that she not only goes and does work, but she's doing works. She's not just saying, Oh, I love God and I love Naomi. She's saying, Naomi needs help. And it's similar to what we read about in the book of James, where you see a brother who needs something and you could say, Be warmed and filled. And then you go your way and don't give him anything. Ruth didn't say, Naomi, hope you're warm and filled. And I'm going to sit here on the other side of the room and hope I'm warm and filled. Now she went out and did works.

In James chapter 2, he says, some of you will say, well, you have faith and I have works. Show me your faith without your works. I'll show you my faith by my works. That was Ruth. She showed her faith by her works. And of course, oh, yeah, I wanted to read verses 11 and 12 to show that not only did she go out and glean heads of grain, but people noticed her character.

Because when Boaz was nice to her, she asked, why are you being nice to me? I'm some foreigner. And Boaz answered and said to her, it's been fully reported to me all that you've done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband. How you left your mother and father in the land of your birth came to a people whom you did not know before. The eternal repay your work a full reward to be given you by the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come for refuge. I like that. She came under God's wings for refuge. She was adopting him as her God. Now, the story goes on from there, and as we comment in the Women's Club, it's like one of those Hallmark Channel movies. You know, it has this nice happy ending, and it is, it's a wonderful story. That's why it's there. Well, I think it's part of why it's there. Naomi points out to Ruth that Boaz is a near enough relative to fulfill that duty of marrying Ruth and having a child to be Malon's heir. So Naomi sends Ruth to the threshing floor, and you know, at night to ask Boaz to do his duty. And it's funny, I don't think anybody mentioned, I remember the Bible story version by Basil Woolverton. I think, doesn't he say that Boaz wakes up in the middle of the night and he thinks that maybe there's an opossum or raccoon at his feet? He's like, what's that? Ooh, it's a woman. And what are you doing here? Well, anyways, it goes on from there, but let's look in 3 verse 10, because he makes another comment on the character that Ruth is developing. Ruth 3 verse 10, he said, Blessed are you of the Eternal, my daughter. She must be a bit younger than her, calling her his daughter. You've shown more kindness at the end than at the beginning. You didn't go after young men, whether rich or poor. Now my daughter, do not fear. I'll do for you all that you request, for all the people of my town know you're a virtuous woman. Everybody in town knew the character that Ruth was developing. A virtuous woman. That reminds us of Proverbs 31, doesn't it? And, of course, the story of Boaz dealing with the man who is a nearer relative isn't interesting, and I'm glad Mr. Pressman touched on it. I'm not going to deal with that today. I want to stress that Ruth can represent this vital stage of Christian growth and development. That is, once a person comes to God, and to the people of God, for whatever reason, however you come in contact, then you begin, you need to begin doing the right things, living by God's law. And in the process, you transform. You start becoming a person of godly, righteous character.

Ruth's story, we get to see a happily ever after. She and Boaz has a son who happens to have been King David's grandfather, and, of course, an ancestor of Jesus Christ. It's not that way for most of us. Hopefully it is eventually, but there's a different experience that most Christians have in the process of growing and overcoming. And for the example of that, we turn to the next woman on the list that is mentioned in the ancestry of the Messiah, and that's Bathsheba. Now, before I go further, I want to make one more digression about the ancestry, and it's one of those things I found interesting. Now, I've been thinking, if this is about the women in Jesus's ancestry, I thought, isn't there a problem? Remember that difference in the two genealogies, one being Joseph and one being Mary's? Well, Joseph was descended from Solomon, who was the son of Bathsheba, but Joseph was Jesus' stepfather. Mary was descended from another son, someone named Nathan. I thought, wait a minute, does that mean Mary's not descended from Bathsheba, and then neither is Christ? And this was my thinking. I thought, well, should I even include Bathsheba in this story? But I kind of want to talk about her because she gives me this angle. And then I found the answer. If you turn to Chronicles, 1 Chronicles 3, and I'm kind of embarrassed that I hadn't realized this before, but maybe if most of you hadn't realized it before either, it won't be so bad. But 1 Chronicles 3 and verse 1, these were the sons of David who were born to him in Hebrew, and it goes on and lists several of the sons and their mothers. Go down to verse 5, if you will. These were born to him in Jerusalem, Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon, four by Bathsheba, the daughter of Amiel. Bathsheba didn't only have Solomon, she had three other sons, and actually one other who didn't survive, but you have to go back to the story for that.

Oh! So this Nathan that was the ancestor of Mary was also a child of Bathsheba and David together. And the account in 2 Samuel only mentions Solomon. But it turns out that both Joseph and Mary had Bathsheba as an ancestor. And of course, Bathsheba is known primarily for that one thing. We might as well go read it in 2 Samuel 11. 2 Samuel 11, chapter, or verse 2. It happened one evening. David arose from his bed, walked on the roof of the king's house. From the roof he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very beautiful to behold. So David sent and inquired about the woman. Someone said, well, isn't this not Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliom, the wife of Uriah, the Hittite? David sent messengers and took her. And by the way, Uriah was off with the army at this time, so they didn't have to get him out of the way. Took her, she came to him, and he lay with her. For she was cleansed from her impurity. She returned to her house, and the woman conceived. Uh-oh. She sent and told David, saying, I'm with child. David, I'm pregnant. Now, we usually focus on this as David's great sin. And it was. Now, we know he initiated. He said, who is that? Go get her. Bring her here. We can only speculate. It doesn't tell us for sure if Bathsheba went along willingly, or if she said, hey, king sent soldiers, I don't have any choice. We just don't know. But we can read what God's law says in the matter. I'm going to come back to 2 Samuel, but if you'll turn to Leviticus 20, what does God say when this happens? Now, by the way, as I said, we're a church. We're not a civil government, so we don't enforce this law. But Leviticus 20, verse 10, The man who commits adultery with another man's wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer, and the adulterous, shall surely be put to death. Committing adultery had a death sentence in ancient Israel. By this law, Bathsheba shared in David's guilt and in the death penalty. But here's where we can make an assumption, and I think it's justified. The biblical story focuses on David's sin and then on David's repentance. And we know that God forgives him. God sent Nathan the prophet who laid this out before David. And when David said, I have sinned greatly, I've sinned, Nathan said, God has put away your sin, you're not going to die. My thought is, if Bathsheba shared in David's guilt, may we not presume that she also shared in his repentance? Let's turn to Psalm 51. With that in mind, think of Bathsheba, and we know Psalm 51, it tells us that David wrote this after his sin with Bathsheba. It's a psalm of great repentance. Perhaps these words can apply to Bathsheba as much as to David. Think of Bathsheba saying these things. Have mercy upon me, O God, according to your loving kindness. According to the multitude of your tender mercies, blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly for my iniquity. Cleanse me for my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions. My sin is always before me. We do know that David remained, or at least became, devoted to Bathsheba as his wife after that. I said, keep a finger in Samuel, and I didn't. 2 Samuel 12, 24, actually it's a pretty... It says, David comforted Bathsheba, his wife, that calls her his wife because he'd married her. He went into her and lay with her, and she bore a son named Solomon.

I wonder what it says. He went in and lay with her. I want to speculate. Most of the wives it mentions them having one son, Bathsheba had four. Maybe he lay only with her from that time on. Maybe part of their repentance was realizing, and I'm speculating here. I don't know, but David might have said, you know, one wife is better than bunches of wives. And I stepped on a limb here, I'm going to be devoted to Bathsheba. And he made her son his heir, and she had these other sons. As I said, I'm speculating a little bit, but we know that they maintained a special and a close relationship. The story in 1 Kings is where we see several years later, you know, when Amnon is about to... Not Amnon. Now I can't remember his name. Another king, or son of David, whose name began with A.

Adonijah. Adonijah decided he was going to make himself king, and Bathsheba goes, didn't you say Solomon was going to be king? But she had this close relationship. She could come to David. None of the other wives came in and said, hey, what's up with that? You know, they were close. Perhaps they lived as husband and wife from that time on. Now, I don't know, but I'm guessing that like David, who repented greatly, Bathsheba, I believe she believed the law of God, and she also repented greatly. And it could be that... well, so for us. Now, it'd be great if we only had to repent that one time at baptism, and we never sin again. But that's not how it works, right? We all... we make mistakes. And that's where Bathsheba's story can fit our allegory. Once we respond to that calling and enter the body of Christ, we still can sin. And all of us do in one way or another. But we also still can repent, like Bathsheba, and be forgiven. Now, we hope the process won't repeat many, many times. Hopefully it gets fewer and fewer. But... and as it does, we start growing into, hopefully, the example that I want to portray with the final woman on our list. So let's talk a little bit about Mary. Actually, I'm not going to talk about Mary at length, because we all know who she was. We know what she did. Her importance is beyond dispute. But how does she fit into my analogy that uses these five women? Well, you can begin by turning to Luke chapter 1, and I'll talk while you do that. But if Rahab and... if Tamar Rahab and Ruth picture different ways that people can come to know about God and His people, and if these ladies can represent the ways that people respond to that calling, and if Ruth can picture obedience to God and developing character through living God's way of life, and if Bathsheba can represent God's mercy and forgiving whatever sins we commit along that way, then I want to consider Mary as the type of a Christian growing into a close, personal relationship with God, something that comes only through time, you know, as a spiritually mature Christian.

In many ways, Mary demonstrated that attitude, you know, that all of us should have. In Luke 1 and verse 38, when she's first told, hey, we'd like you to do a special job, you could say an angel appears, said, you're going to have a child. Luke 1, 38, Mary said, behold, maidservant of the Lord, let it be to me according to your word. So something as big as you're going to have a child, you know, you're not even...

you've never been with a man, you've never been with a child, and he's going to be the son of God. And she says, okay, whatever God wants me to do, I'll do. Turn over to verse 46 of this chapter. Let's just read a couple of verses, because there's a poetic soliloquy we could say that Mary says. She says, my soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior, for he's regarded my lowly state of his manservant.

And he goes on from there. But what a wonderful example and an attitude that Mary has. If you read through this thing, you don't see her use the word I or me very much. She's praising God. And how close of a relationship did she have with Jesus Christ? Well, she raised him from an infant. She carried him in her womb, breastfed him, changed his diapers.

You know, she knew him pretty well. He must have been very comfortable with him, even though he had perfect character. Now, raising a toddler, I think, boy, that perfect character thing would come in handy at times. But, you know, but then again, I know I don't have perfect character. So, I could see where if you had a child who was absolutely perfect, you might feel a little inadequate. But they had a close relationship. That story in John 2 of when they ran out of wine at the wedding feast, I've always find that entertaining because she goes and tells her, hey, they're out of wine. Well, what's that to me? You know, it's not my time yet.

And she turns to her, whatever he tells you to do, do. She didn't even actually ask him. They knew each other so well, she could imply it. He knew what she wanted, and they worked together. I do want to turn to John 19. The last reference, or at least one of the last ones, not the last one, but close to the last of Mary in Scripture, John 19 and verse 25.

Jesus has already been scourged, beaten, put up on the stake that he was crucified on, and said, now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother and his mother's sister Mary, the wife of Clopas, Mary Magdalene, when Jesus therefore saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved, that is John, we believe, standing by, he said to his mother, woman, well, he probably didn't point because his hands were nailed, but he said, woman, behold your son.

And he said to the disciple, behold your mother. From that hour, he took that disciple into his own home. One of the last things Jesus did in his physical life was to make provision for his mother, to make sure she would be taken care of, and to make sure that she was taken care of by a church member, you could say.

You know, he had brothers and sisters, but he wanted her, because he knew she was a believer, to be with one who would be one of the apostles. I also take that as, in some ways, as an example of Mary's submission. She was the mother of the Son of God, but she didn't, from what we know, or from what we see, there's no instance of her claiming some special status.

She joined the other disciples and worshipped the one who had been her son. She came to see and believe that this being that was born from her had existed before that. He had been God, and she was able to worship him as God, even though she had such a close relationship with him, that she could ask him to do something he didn't want to do. How great must that have been? You know, and it's a model, as I said, we want to develop a close relationship with God, with God the Father and Jesus Christ, and that's what we should be striving for. So if we ask, why did Matthew include these five women in Jesus' genealogy?

We might be able to come up with a lot of different answers. And I'm looking forward to asking Matthew. He's going to find out for sure. I might tell him, look, I gave this sermon once, and I made this up as an analogy, but why really did you put him in there?

But I'm kind of happy with this analogy, as I said, that there are various callings to the body of Christ, and then of needing to live that way of life, and of needing to be forgiven, but in the long run, developing a close relationship with God. Now, at the time Christ lived, and for most of history, women have played a very subordinate role. They don't normally show up in a genealogy, as Luke 3 demonstrates. But these five women were important. They were women of destiny. They were part of the genetic heritage that Jesus received when he was born as a human. And as I said, I suspect that God carefully orchestrated this.

Not one of these women was on the list by accident. And we could draw many lessons from their stories. But I think it's important just to mention that we men should look at their stories. The relationship of a Christian with Christ is typified as that of a bride.

Paul told the church in Corinth that I've espoused you to one husband, that I may present you a chaste virgin to Christ. The church collectively is to be the bride of Christ. Now, for men, sometimes it makes us feel a little uncomfortable, but that's just because we don't think of being in the women's role. But we can learn a lot from some important brides.

Here are five women who are brides, and we need to consider them. We would do well to consider their lives and the lessons we can learn, the example they set for us, from these five women of destiny.