Here, we see two men, chosen by Joshua to scout the land of Jericho. And when they arrive to Jericho, they stay at a prostitute’s house. Her name was Rahab and she is praised in the Hall of Faith and also is an ancestor of Jesus Christ. She was not an “inn keaper” or a “hostess”. If you look at the Hebrew words for “harlot’s house”, you discover it means, “house of a woman who is a harlot”.

Here, we see two men, chosen by Joshua to scout the land of Jericho. And when they arrive to Jericho, they stay at a prostitute’s house. Her name was Rahab and she is praised in the Hall of Faith and also is an ancestor of Jesus Christ. She was not an “inn keaper” or a “hostess”. If you look at the Hebrew words for “harlot’s house”, you discover it means, “house of a woman who is a harlot”.
Rahab later on married Salma and gave birth to Boaz, who ended up being Ruth’s husband, who is an ancestor of Jesus Christ.
So, we see, in the Hall of Faith , she was saved, because of her faith and protecting the spies of God, while being a prostitute:
Even Paul calls her a “harlot” and says she was saved by her faith. How more direct can it be said? If you look at the word “harlot” in the passage, you discover it means, “a woman who sells her body for sexual uses”.
Now, is that the only prostitute that made it to Heaven? A very good question. Here is the answer according to Jesus himself:
According to this scripture, the prostitutes and tax collectors will make it to Heaven before these religious leaders of Jesus day. What an amazing statement ! Can you imagine any person saying such a thing?
If that was not amazing enough, lets take a look at Sampson’s life.
FIRST, he had the Spirit of the Lord within him:
SECOND, he slept with a prostitute (maybe Delilah here?):
THIRD, he did not loose God’s Spirit until his hair was cut:
As you can see in the passage above, the Spirit of the Lord departed him only after his hair was cut. Meaning, God’s Spirit, was in him, while sleeping with this harlot in verse 1 and while again sleeping with Delilah a couple times, thereafter. How do we know that he was having sex and not just “staying the night”? Because he actually left at midnight, not the next morning on the first time. How do we know that Delilah was acting as a prostitute? Because she did it for 1,100 pieces of silver.
Why is it God’s Spirit left him when his hair was cut? It is because he broke his covenant with God. As the Nazarite vow required for their hair not to be cut as part of the covenant vow:
Read this passage above carefully. Notice something? A Nazarite is not allowed to become “unclean” and is to be “holy” . Yet, Sampson, who took the Nazarite vow, had God’s Spirit within him and did not break his covenant with God, WHILE sleeping with a prostitute!
This just goes to prove, it is actually true. A man can sleep with a harlot, without sinning ! Of course, the harlot can not be a “temple prostitute” and can not be “married”. Otherwise, it would be “idolatry” and “adultery”. Further, note that Sampson is not bound in a marriage contract (as his wife died before he slept with a prostitute).
It is one of those things, where you study it and just can not believe it . And you want to return to your previous viewpoint, am I right? You can not even take it, because it seems so wrong according to common teaching from scripture! Yes, I felt the same way when I read this other guy’s argument. But, it makes logical sense and fits too well. Yet, it is like opening some pandora’s box that you were not suppose to find.
Regarding the potential that Sampson sinned and broke his Nazarite vow prior to these events: I don’t think it is as clear and many seem to assume. I have read various comments online, and I am surprised at how quick people are to make judgements based on their understanding. First, one person states that he married a Philistine woman named Timnah and claims that this was obviously sinful. However, Sampson’s own devout parents were not sure if it is of God or not. So, first, his parents were not sure if it was right or wrong, and they knew far more about their own culture, time period and how to apply God’s law to their own lives, than a person today would know. Second, according to scripture, he did it to get a foot-hold of controversy with the Philistines, and that it was “of the Lord”. Second, a person states, he killed hundreds of people, so he touched many dead bodies. However, this is bad logic. All those people he had slain are not actually dead for atleast a few minutes after the death blow (as various functions in the body are still in operation). This would mean, he did not touch any dead bodies, to our knowledge here. Third, many people claim he drank wine. There is not one verse that actually says this, but people so much love to mock and look at Sampson as a sinner, they just automatically assume he drank wine when he was at the feast (which is a very proud judgement without knowledge). Fourth, some claim, because he said to the Philistines, regarding his wife that they were “ploughing with his heifer” that he was saying something evil about his wife. However, such a judgement can not be made, as it was an entirely different culture and could have been a common saying. Further, the understanding of the household structure back then was that a man is head of his household and all in his household was considered his property, unlike our “enlightened” times of today. So, again, no reason to assume sin. Last, there is the fact he turned aside and ate honey from the lion’s dead carcass (which he killed). Whether or not he sinned here, I am not totally sure. Because, the Hebrew word for this command in the Nazarite vow is not entirely clear as to whether it means he can not go near a dead body or if he can not touch a dead body. If it means he can not touch a dead body, it is possible, he may not have touched the dead lion’s carcass, as it never explicitly mentions this, although he was able to get honey out of the carcass (kind of like the game “Operation”, without touching the sides and making it buzz). It is possible it means, though, he can not turn aside and get near a dead carcass. If it means this in the Nazarite vow, he would have sinned when he did this, which is quite possible. I think the point is that Sampson would follow his Nazarite vow, but he was very reckless in his ways with close calls (getting honey from carcass, sleeping with prostitutes, etc). AT ANY RATE, the claim that he was just a “dirty sinner” is frankly easily dismantled just looking at what I just wrote. People should be careful to use God’s Word, rather than to assume their own standards and conjectures when judging someone in the Bible. Unfortunately, most people just read the Bible in English, focus mainly on the New Testament, and are not careful with His Word.

Fucking avas brains out

Glory hole porn trailers

Moisturizing lotions to use for masturbation

Amateur wrinkled soles

Punishment devices for bdsm

Naked gay latino men xxx videos