Did David rape Bathsheba?

[Difflugia]

David did not "rape" Bathsheba, but he was guilty of adultery and having her husband murdered.

2 Samuel 11:2-4:

It was evening and David arose from his bed and walked on the roof of the palace. He saw a woman bathing from the roof and the woman was a very pleasant sight. David sent and asked about the woman and someone said, "Isn't that Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the woman of Uriah the Hittite?" David sent messengers, he took her, she came to him, and he lay with her. She had been sanctified from her impurity and she returned to her house.

Note that the word translated as "he took her" means to take something into one's possession, including things like spoils of war and slaves.

Question for debate: Did David rape Bathsheba? Is coercion implied in the above narrative? Is the answer different by ancient lights when compared to modern?

[Difflugia]

Now, now, now, Diff...lets not get disingenuous just because you're losing the argument.

I'm not sure I'm either of those. I guess we'll see.

Sure, to grab, is to take...but to take, is not necessarily to grab.

Are you sure about that in this context? Or are you bluffing and hoping I won't have a better hand?

The verb לָקַח is overwhelmingly used of inanimate objects in contexts where the thing taken is grasped in the hand or carried away. When it's used of people, the most benign uses either refer to someone being physically carried (1 Kings 17:19, "And he took him out of her bosom, and carried him up into the chamber...") or in the sense of being summoned (1 Samuel 16:11, "And Samuel said unto Jesse, "Send and fetch him..."). Even though we might think of it as ambiguous, when a man is "taken" (or "fetched"), the person doing the taking is nearly always someone with the power to compel compliance, like a prophet or king. It doesn't seem to be used of mere fellow travellers. Otherwise, it's used of slaves and prisoners of war. In no case does meaningful consent seem to be in view.

When the direct object is a woman, it can take on a few more meanings that modern readers might consider to involve consent, but I think that says far more about our modern sensibilities than Hebrew vocabulary. In addition to physically carrying (like Judges 19:28, when the man took his dying or dead concubine up onto his donkey), it is also used of women being taken in marriage. Unless women suddenly have a lot more agency overall than men, it looks like marriage in general is more about being, at best, summoned.

If you think I'm cherry-picking, find a concordance and check my work. I think you'll find that even in the best situations, we're dealing with a master and a subordinate. In Biblical Hebrew, לָקַח implies power over another. A man might לָקַח his woman or a father his child, but neither of them would לָקַח the man anywhere unless he were unconscious or incapacitated.

Basic reading comprehension here.

It might help if you go a bit beyond basic.

I'll ask her did she feel forced...violated...based on the fact that I "took" her to the hotel.

If she had a say in the matter, you didn't "take" her in the sense of לָקַח in the Bible. If she didn't, then you and David have something in common.

[SiNcE_1985]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #31]

Rationalize it however you want.

2 Sam 13:11-14

If that is too much for you to read, just drop down to verse 14.

Do you see that? That's what a narrated rape looks like.

11 But when she took it to him to eat, he grabbed her and said, “Come to bed with me, my sister.”

12 “No, my brother!” she said to him. “Don’t force me! Such a thing should not be done in Israel! Don’t do this wicked thing. 13 What about me? Where could I get rid of my disgrace? And what about you? You would be like one of the wicked fools in Israel. Please speak to the king; he will not keep me from being married to you.” 14 But he refused to listen to her, and since he was stronger than she, he raped her.

And the crazy part about it is; this is literally the very next chapter from David and Bathsheba.

You can have the last word here, I'm out.

[Difflugia]

Rationalize it however you want.

I find it funny that you're referring to language analysis as rationalization.

Do you see that? That's what a narrated rape looks like.

That's what one narrated rape looks like and it's interesting to examine why they might be different.

Notice that in verse 13, the offered solution is to talk to the king, because he "won't keep you from me." The focus, again, isn't on Tamar's willingness or agency, but on the property rights of the king over his daughter.

And the crazy part about it is; this is literally the very next chapter from David and Bathsheba.

Yeah. That's the crazy part.

You can have the last word here, I'm out.

Since you didn't bother engaging with the language analysis, there's still a lot more to talk about, if you decide you're up for it.

[Wootah]

Yes David raped Bethsheba.

Yes Bethsheba seduced David.

The sin was against Uriah. The guy that murdered remember lol.

All sex outside of marriage is rape.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Wootah in post #34]

Yes Bethsheba seduced David.

Still haven't seen any witnesses against Bathsheba produced.

All sex outside of marriage is rape.

That's a convenient way to smear sex between unmarried consenting adults, but on what do you base it?

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #34]

Yes Bethsheba seduced David.

Still haven't seen any witnesses against Bathsheba produced.

All sex outside of marriage is rape.

That's a convenient way to smear sex between unmarried consenting adults, but on what do you base it?

Wisdom judgement. How can it not be?

Men in society are learning in real time that it is rape if the girl simply regrets it the next day.

But it's just robbing each other off their innocence and purity.

[benchwarmer]

Yes David raped Bethsheba.

I lean this way as well, but you didn't say why you think this.

Yes Bethsheba seduced David.

That's possible, but how are you so sure? She was bathing somewhere with no roof it seems (like a modern day outdoor swimming pool I guess) and she may not have been expecting creepers spying on her from rooftops. Or maybe she knew full well that David hung out on his rooftop and if she 'showed him the goods' she might get an invite for some 'play time' and maybe even hook him for marriage. Hard to say from the text unless you have something we haven't seen?

All sex outside of marriage is rape.

Umm, no. Rape has a specific definition. Rape can happen inside a marriage as well (though I'm sure there are those who think it can't and they are equally wrong).

If you want to call sex outside of marriage a 'sin' that is your business as each religion will define sin how they define it. However, rape involves forcing someone to have sex without their full consent. Full stop.

Now, there is the concept of 'statutory rape' which is a legal definition that involves having sex with minors. The reasoning being that minors are not mature enough to understand what they may be consenting to and thus can't give 'consent with understanding'. In other words, a minor may consent to sex and this is not strictly rape, but laws have evolved to cover this dangerous situation to protect those who haven't developed the maturity to understand what they are consenting to.

[Wootah]

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #37]

I think it's a literary text. You are correct we should argue our view. If a hot girl is bathing where the king can see then she wants to be seen.

It's actually similar to Trump and his grab them on the p***y comments from a few years ago. Rich guys have girls throwing themselves at them.

David is meant to be wise but he took the fruit before time.

On my rape opinion.

You can argue legally, but I am debating as a Christian and Jesus said if you have looked lustfully then you have committed adultery.

Just be aware that when you use legal definitions you are in the seat of the Pharisees.

I am saying of course a one night stand is rape when you view it properly. Two people fruit stealing from each other rather than honouring each other as children of God.

My wisdom experience tells me this culture has been raped physically, emotionally and spiritually.


edit: Yes since no one can refuse the king it is rape.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Wootah in post #38]

If a hot girl is bathing where the king can see then she wants to be seen.

David is supposed to be out at war at that time, and there's no indication in the story that Bathsheba knows he's there.

Again, no witness against her.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #38]

If a hot girl is bathing where the king can see then she wants to be seen.

David is supposed to be out at war at that time, and there's no indication in the story that Bathsheba knows he's there.

Again, no witness against her.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

11 In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, David sent Joab out with the king’s men and the whole Israelite army. They destroyed the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem.

2 One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, 3 and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” 4 Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.) Then she went back home. 5 The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”

David is meant to be at war. David was at home. David saw her bathing.

It is a literary text and open to interpretation but mine is that the town would know David was not at war but at home. Bethsheba knows her husband is at war. Bethsheba knows where she lives and it's location to the king's house. But it's a very convoluted way of catching David's attention. But it's like being a girl sunbathing at a beach, you don't know who might see you but you sure hope he is rich and good looking.