The Choice to Serve God and Assist His People 83 2,7.22). Yael invites Sisera to her tent and shows him hospitality. He trusts her (Judg 4,20), while she intends to kill him. (4) A pursuit lies in the background of both stories. In the Rahab episode, the King of Jericho pursues the spies; in the Yael story Barak chases Sisera. In both cases a woman determines the outcome of the pursuit. (5) The two stories occur in the residence of the woman. Rahab gives shelter to the spies in her house and Sisera seeks shelter in Yael’s tent. Rahab sends the soldiers away from her house, while Yael invites Sisera into her tent. (6) In both stories sexual connotations play an important part in plot development. The fact that Rahab is a harlot is a dominant element in her story. As the spies enter the house of a harlot, the impression is that a sexual encounter will ensue. But contrary to this expectation, the verse ends with an assertion that the spies “lay [down] there” (hmç wbkçyw) instead of the similar, but more sexual “lay with her” (htwa bkçyw) (4). A second incidence of the verb “lay” intensifies these sexual connotations (v. 8) (5). The king arrives at Rahab’s house and instructs her: “Bring out the men who came to you, who came to your house” (˚tybl wab rça ˚yla µyabh µyçnah yayxwh) (v. 3). The duplication in the king’s words (1. came to you, 2. came to your house) is meant to convey two possibilities that play on the term “to come”, which connotes sexual activity la awbl. The first possibility is that the spies arrived at Rahab’s house for a sexual encounter and the second is that they came to her house simply to lodge there (6). Rahab deceives the king and chooses the first possibility — “True, the men came to me” — implying that sexual intercourse has taken place between her and the spies. However, the narrator has already conveyed that the spies “lay [down] there” (v. 1) and not with Rahab. By means of this lie Rahab rejects any suspicion that she has cooperated with the spies, suggesting rather that they came, like most of her visitors, for sexual satisfaction, and, when their desires were met, they left. If she had not lied, but rather claimed that there had been no sexual intercourse, and that the spies had come to lodge at the inn, she could not have claimed that they had already left. The apparent sexual intentions of the spies constitute a good alibi for Rahab’s claim that she did not know where they came from (v. 4). In Yael’s story, too, sexual connotations play an important role in the plot. Yael uses her sexuality, and sexually allusive language, to defeat Sisera. She greets him and invites him into her tent. The intention of the invitation, however, is ambiguous: “Turn in, my lord, turn in to me”. Does she mean that he should enter her tent or does her invitation promise sexual relations? The sexual implication in her words may be compared to the invitation which Lot extended to the angels; Lot’s offer is formulated in similar words, yet without any ambiguity: “my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house” (Gen (4) See e.g.: Gen 34,2; 35,22; Lev 19,20; 2 Sam 13,14. (5) For different suggestions about this duplication, see: W.L. MORAN, “The Repose of Rahab’s Israelite Guests”, Studi sull’Oriente e la Bibbia offerti al P. Giovanni Rinaldi nel 60 compleanno da allievi, colleghi, amici (ed. H. CAZELLES) (Genova 1967) 273-284, esp. 275-278. (6) For this interpretation, see: R Isaac ABRAVANEL, Commentary on Joshua (Hamburg 1787) chap 2, v. 3; P.A. BIRD, “The Harlot as Heroine: Narrative Art and Social Presupposition in Three Old Testament Texts”, Semeia 46 (1989) 128-129. ZAKOVITCH, “Humor and Theology”, 82-83, 84.