This idea that David raped Bathsheba is not new,
but has gathered steam in the current climate of sexual ethics in our country. Paul
Carter answered the question in the affirmative Did
King David Rape Bathsheba?, on a Gospel Coalition posting in April 2018.
Two years earlier, this position was posited by Hilary Lipka, an
instructor in the Religious Studies Department at the University of New Mexico,
in David
and Bathsheba: Affair or Rape? In 2006 Adventist theologian Richard M.
Davidson, in Did King
David Rape Bathsheba? A Case Study in Narrative Theology, declared “that
Bathsheba was a victim of ‘power rape’ on the part of David.”[i] I am not sure how much earlier this idea was
in vogue.
The event in brief is that the king stayed in the
capital city while sending his soldiers to war. One evening David was walking
upon his rooftop. From his vantage point, he saw a woman washing herself. David
noted how beautiful she was and inquired concerning her. The woman was Bathsheba,
the wife of Uriah the Hittite. Uriah was one of David’s mighty soldiers (2
Samuel 11:3).[ii]
That should have ended the matter. However, even knowing the woman in question
was married, David summoned her to the palace. They had sexual relations. The
account can be read in 2
Samuel 11:1-5.
Did David rape Bathsheba? I suppose if we define
rape in modern terms (as Davidson did with “power rape”) and apply that to the
situation, we could answer in the affirmative. However, is that a biblical
approach? Is it the right historical approach? Is it even an honest approach?
Just last week Denny Burk called attention to a
theological article written by Alexander Abasili, titled Was it Rape?
The David and Bathsheba Pericope Re-examined.[iii]
Rather than apply our modern standards to the situation, Abasili interprets the
text in light of the Mosaic biblical definition of rape – an approach that is
not unknown to other Bible students and certainly proper one – but often
overlooked in the desire to defend a modern conclusion. The passage that
expounds the Old Testament legal definition of rape is Deuteronomy
22:23-27. Abasili explains it this way:
In the Hebrew bible, however, the concept of rape, without excluding psychological or social or political or emotional domination, of necessity includes the use of physical force/violence in compelling a woman to nonconsensual sexual intercourse.
For the interpretation of the text, it does not
matter what are the 21st century standards of rape. By God’s standards under
the law, which law David was under, the act was not rape. His sin was heinous,
and resulted in sure, swift, and ongoing punishment. Nevertheless, when
speaking of biblical events we should speak in biblical terms and not invoke
presentism as the deciding factor.
In addition to the law of Deuteronomy 22:23-27,
the Old Testament contains a number of places where rape is described or
implied.[iv]
The writers were not afraid to tell us in those cases, but did not tell us such
in David’s case. There is no physical act of force described in the text. The
language used does not express or imply it. To interpret the act as rape, in
light of the story given by Nathan the prophet, in the end actually minimizes
rape (Cf. 2
Samuel 12:1-10).[v]
Further, while the bulk of the sin, responsibility, and even punishment fell on
David, the death of their child punishes Bathsheba as well (2
Samuel 12:15-22).[vi]
[i] Davidson defines “power
rape” as an event “in which a person in a position of authority abuses that
‘power’ to victimize a subservient and vulnerable person sexually, whether or
not the victim appears to give ‘consent’.”
[ii] She
was also the daughter of another soldier, and granddaughter of David’s counselor,
Ahithophel; cf. 2
Samuel 11:3 and 2
Samuel 23:34.
[iii] Vetus Testamentum 61, no. 1 (2011):
1–15.
[iv]
For examples, Genesis
34:2, Judges
20:5, 2
Samuel 13:14, Isaiah
13:16.
[v]
For example, “thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken
his wife to be thy wife” rather than
“thou hast killed Uriah and raped his wife.”
[vi] While Bathsheba was wrong
in not rejecting the David’s suit, David was the initiator and bears the
greater responsibility. Bathsheba the seductress who set out to snare David
must be imported into the reading. The text does not even say Bathsheba was
naked. The word used – “wash” (Heb. rachats, v.
2) – is the same word used of Uriah washing his feet (11:8).
A man certainly does not have to see a woman’s naked body to think she is
beautiful (v.
2). In context, Bathsheba washed according to the law for
purification (11:4),
which was done in the evening.
No comments:
Post a Comment