I’d like to start with two questions. First, how many of you have a “black sheep” in the family, a misfit in the family, a crazy uncle or a wild brother or a weird sister or an unusual grandparent? Second, how many of you talked about that black sheep recently at a meal? In the New York Times Margo Kaufman writes about holiday family meals: “When families gather around the holiday table for the traditional feast, there is traditionally one person who is conspicuous by either absence or presence. Male or female, rich or poor, married or single, young or old, teetotaler or alcoholic – this person is often the object of ridicule, pity, envy, awe, fear, scorn, embarrassment or secret admiration, for as the proverb goes: ‘There is a black sheep in every fold.‘”[1] Thanksgiving and Christmas may be times when we are especially reminded of our family’s “black sheep.” Most of us have one or two and when we get together for holiday meals our conversation inevitably turns to them.
Earlier this year the New York Post reported on the upcoming royal wedding between Kate Middleton and Prince William. The author discussed family members of Kate’s who probably would not be invited to the wedding: a burlesque-dancing cousin named Katrine and an Uncle Gary who was once caught selling cocaine. These were two, the reporter said, of the “black sheep” of the Middleton family. And their presence at the wedding would have cast Kate in a negative light.
The 1996 film “Black Sheep” told the fictional story of Al Donnelly. Donnelly was a candidate for the governor of Washington State. His bid for the governorship, however, was threatened by his unruly brother Mike. Eventually Donnelly hired someone to keep his brother under wraps until the election was over. He didn’t want voters to make assumptions about him based on this “black sheep.”
Black sheep often cast other family members in a negative light. People make assumptions about the whole family because of the behavior one misfit. And especially if you are in a position of power or influence, you want to keep your black sheep secret. We don’t want people reaching conclusions about us based on what they see in the most misfit members of our family.
The same thing was true for those who lived in Jesus’ day. Our current Sunday morning series is focused on the family tree of Jesus, found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. And as I briefly noted last Sunday, ancient genealogies were very common. A good genealogy, a good family tree, could enhance your standing and prove your worth. A bad genealogy tree could diminish your standing and raise questions about your worth. In other words, a black sheep in your genealogy could cast you in a negative light.
And this makes Matthew’s genealogy very surprising. Because he includes some black sheep that he easily could have kept secret. To appreciate what Matthew’s done, we need to understand that ancient genealogies generally only needed to include male ancestors.[2] You might add the names of women ancestors if their presence added to dignity of the family.[3] But otherwise you’d leave them out. Breaking custom, Matthew includes four women (besides Jesus’ mother Mary) in the genealogy of Jesus. And the women he chose to include are questionable. If Matthew was going to include women in Jesus’ genealogy, it would have made sense for him to include the names of four different women: Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Leah. These were considered to be the four model matriarchs of Judaism. There was even a song known from after the time of Jesus which Jews taught their children. This song went something like this: “Who knows four? I know four. Four are the matriarchs; three are the patriarchs; two are the tablets of the covenant; one is our God…” The four matriarchs were Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel and Leah.[4] These would have been natural for Matthew to include because they could have added to the dignity of Jesus’ family tree.
Yet Matthew decided to highlight four different women, four “black sheep”: Tamar (Matt. 1:3), Rahab (Matt. 1:5), Ruth (Matt. 1:5), and “the wife of Uriah” also known as Basheba (Matt. 1:6). We would consider these women misfits. They would have been likely to create some controversy. In fact, they could have easily cast Jesus in a negative light. Let’s take a brief look at these four women.
First, Tamar. Tamar was a Canaanite woman (a non-Jewish woman) who became the wife of a man named Er. Er was the oldest son of a man named Judah (Gen. 38). Er died and Judah, the father-in-law ordered his second son, Onan, to father a child with Tamar. Onan refused and died. Judah then proposed that his daughter-in-law return to her family’s home until Judah’s youngest son matured to the point that he might father a child with Tamar. She did this very thing. But Judah forgot about Tamar. He abandoned his daughter-in-law. He left her with no husband to provide for her and no child to carry on the family name. Desperate, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and tricked her father-in-law Judah into sleeping with her. Tamar became pregnant. And Tamar’s offspring became an ancestor of King David who became an ancestor of Jesus. Matthew intentionally highlight’s this unusual woman in Jesus’ genealogy.
Second, Rahab. Rahab was a prostitute in the non-Jewish city of Jericho. When the Israelites sent in spies to Canaan, they stayed in Rahab’s home which was located in the wall that protected Jericho (Josh. 2). After hiding the spies on the roof and helping them escape, Rahab asked that she and her family might be spared when the Israelites returned and invaded the city. Her request was granted and only Rahab and her family survived the conquest of Jericho (Josh 6). Rahab the pagan prostitute is the mother of a child who is an ancestor of Jesus. Matthew intentionally highlighted her in this genealogy.
Third, Ruth. A family of four moved from Bethlehem to the country of Moab during a famine. The two Jewish sons married two non-Jewish women: Orpah and Ruth. The father died. The two sons died. Naomi, the mother, was left without her husband and her two sons. She decided to return to Israel because she heard the famine was over. She persuaded one daughter-in-law, Orpah, to remain in Moab, her home. But Ruth, the other daughter-in-law refused to stay. She was determined to go to Israel with Naomi. And in a famous line, she said to Naomi, “Your people shall be my people, and your God my God.” (Ruth 1:16 ESV). The line, of course, indicates that Israel was not Ruth’s people and Israel’s God was not her God. Ruth ends up marrying and giving birth to the grandfather of King David, an ancestor of Jesus.
Finally, “the wife of Uriah.” Bathsheba is married to a Hittite (a non-Jewish man) named Uriah (2 Sam. 11). Uriah is one of King David’s top military heroes. One day, while the army, including Uriah, are at battle, King David spies Bathsheba taking her evening bath. He sends for Bathsheba and has sexual intercourse with her. When the king later learns that Bathsheba is pregnant, he orders Uriah back to Jerusalem from the front lines. He hopes Uriah will sleep with his wife Bathsheba and that everyone will thus conclude that the baby is Uriah’s and not King David’s. But Uriah refused to go home and sleep with Bathsheba. Frustrated, David sent him back to the battle and ordered Uriah to be placed on the front lines and then abandoned. As a result, Uriah was killed. David then married Bathsheba, but their child died. Bathsheba had other children by David. And this lineage eventually led to Jesus.
Matthew chose to highlight these four women. And the women and their circumstances could have easily cast Jesus in a negative light. Consider the circumstances of these black sheep. Tamar is the victim of a father-in-law who is, at best, neglectful, and, at worst, a sexual scoundrel. Bathsheba is the victim (we’re not sure how willing she was) of a king bent on sexual conquest and willing to commit murder to cover up the act. Just the circumstances surrounding these women could have raised questions about Jesus.
But consider the women themselves. It’s not that they are sinful and the others in the family tree are not sinful. But they do have qualities which, nonetheless, would have made them less than desirable for including in Jesus’ family tree. Most significantly, all four of these women share a non-Jewish background.[5] Tamar is a Canaanite woman. Rahab is from Jericho, a Canaanite city. Ruth is from Moab, a non- Jewish country. And Bathsheba is married to a Hittite, a non-Jew. Most writers of Jewish genealogies would have done everything they could to keep any mention of Gentiles out of the genealogy because their presence contaminates the blood line.[6] But Matthew draws attention to these four women with non-Jewish ancestries.
In addition, we can assume that at least Rahab and Ruth actively worshiped a god who was not the true God. Growing up in Jericho and Moab, both of them would have had faith in and worshiped gods who were not the true God of the Bible.
Further, Tamar is a widow—a person often neglected in ancient societies. Rahab was a prostitute—definitely someone on the fringe of society. Bathsheba was an adulteress.
In a word, all four all “outsiders.” Matthew highlights these women who turn out to be national, racial, societal, spiritual and moral outsiders. They are racial and national outsiders. They come from or are associated with foreign countries and foreign ethnicities. In addition, Tamar is an outsider in terms of society—she is an abandoned widow. Rahab is a moral outsider—a prostitute in a foreign city. Bathsheba may be a moral outsider–an adulteress, though we do not know how willing or unwilling she was. And Ruth and Rahab, are at the very least, spiritual outsiders—they worship a different god. They are all outsiders.
And the question is this: why would Matthew include these outsiders in Jesus’ genealogy? We might think that their presence casts Jesus in a negative light. But the opposite is actually true. Matthew highlights these four outsiders because they cast Jesus in a positive light. Scholar Frederick Dale Bruner writes this: ““God did not begin to stoop into our sordid human story at Christmas only; he was stooping all the way through the Old Testament.”[7] Matthew wants to paint Jesus as the stooping saviror. He wants to introduce Jesus as one who did not start stooping to our level at the manger. He stooped through his entire family tree. He stooped through racial outsiders. He stooped through national outsiders. He stooped through societal outsiders. He stooped through spiritual outsiders. He stooped through moral outsiders.
And this amazing claim hits home in at least two ways. First, Jesus’ family tree of outsiders means we should welcome outsiders who are unlike us.
A couple of weeks ago I attended a gathering of Memphis organizations who serve ex-felons. One man named Duane was introduced and came to the stage. He shared how several years ago he had served two years in prison. When released, he returned to his wife and family in Memphis. He started a cleaning business. Eventually he won the cleaning contract for a large Memphis hospital. He and his wife started earning a good living through the business. But one day he was called into the office of his supervisor at the hospital. During a routine background check, they had discovered that he was an ex-felon. When Duane confirmed this, they fired him. No questions asked. He had provided excellent service for months. But once they learned he had spent time in prison, they wanted nothing to do with him. His business dried up. Within a few months, he and his wife defaulted on the mortgage of their home in Cordova. They and their five children became homeless. Through the kindness of a friend, they found a hotel they could stay in for three weeks. Then the hotel was sold and they were kicked out. They had to live in substandard housing for months before Duane was finally able to start generating income again. After the speech, one of the hosts of the gathering got up and said, “In many ways, people like Duane are the lepers of our society. Even when they admit they’ve made mistakes, even when they show discipline and determination, even when they become model citizens, they are treated as less than human. Because of something that happened in their past, they are rejected and outcast.”
I suppose that last line describes some of us. Because of something that’s happened in our past, we often feel rejected and outcast. But it certainly describes a lot of people around us. We are surrounded every day by invisible people who feel rejected and outcast. They don’t talk like us. They don’t look like us. They don’t think like us. They don’t dress like us. And they don’t smell like us. And our tendency is to ignore them at best, or to reject them at worst. But the fact that Jesus comes from a long lineage of outsiders demands that we repent. It demands that we accept those others will not. It means that we as individuals, as families, as Reach Groups, as Sunday School classes, and as a church welcome and embrace true outsiders—the ones whom everyone else makes fun of, labels, neglects, or condemns. As followers of Jesus, his genealogy sets the pattern for our lives. Jesus’ family tree included many true outsiders. Ours must as well.
Second, Jesus’ family tree of outsiders means Jesus welcomes outsiders like us.
Julie Fowler is a long-time supporter of HopeWorks and often serves as a faith encourager. Recently she met with a student at HopeWorks. And this student was struggling greatly in her spiritual life. Because of something in her past, she felt judged and rejected by others in the program. She was a former prostitute. And as she shared this with Julie, Julie was inspired. She turned to Matt. 1 and read this genealogy to the student. Julie gave special emphasis to Matt. 1:5 which mentions Rahab. Rahab the prostitute. And Julie showed how this prostitute was actually one of the ancestors of Jesus Christ himself. When Julie was finished sharing, the student started crying. She said, “No one ever showed that to me before.” She couldn’t believe it. But she now knew without a doubt that Jesus accepted her and loved her. If Jesus had come from a prostitute, he would certainly welcome a prostitute.
Jesus’ genealogy is Matthew’s attempt to say to people like her and all of us who feel like outsiders with God: Jesus welcomes you and desires to work through you. Others may treat you as less than human. But in Jesus God stoops to your level. While others cast you out, Jesus welcomes you in. While others reject you, Jesus accepts you. While others say you’re good for nothing, Jesus says you’re good enough for him. The presence of these four outsiders in Jesus’ genealogy stand as proof. Jesus’ family tree of outsiders means he welcomes outsiders just like us.
In our response time this morning, let’s consider both sides of this issue. First, are we welcoming outsiders? Second, are we accepting Jesus’ welcome of us? Our elders host a time of prayer and counseling after each service at The Shepherd’s Corner. It’s located right by the church office. And if you’d like to pray with them about one of those two issues, I urge you to stop by The Shepherd’s Corner this morning. We’d also be happy to pray with you right now. Are you welcoming outsiders? Are you accepting Jesus’ welcome of you? If we can help you answer one of those questions positively, come as we stand and sing.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/23/garden/there-s-a-black-sheep-in-every-family-fold.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
[2] Ibid., 79-80.
[3] Frederick Dale Bruner Matthew: A Commentary Volume 1 (Word, 1987), 5-6.
[4] Ibid., 6-7.
[5] Ben Witherington III Matthew Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Smyth & Helwys, 2006), 40.
[6] Keener, 40.
[7] Bruner, 6.
This was great, thank you. Sadly, though Jesus Christ stooped down to our level from birth, we as Christians, seem to have such prideful standards and look down at some of the same kind of people in the genealogy of Christ..
Comments are closed.