We often try to water down what the bible tells us but let’s tell it like it is. King David was a rapist.
Bathsheba was married to Uriah and David, the great king that he was, decided he wanted her so he took her, because he was the king and no-one could do a thing about it.
We use words like adultery to make it sound a little less sever than what it was but here it is: The king sent some of his men (probably with armed guards) to order Bathsheba to come to his palace and then he raped her.
Maybe she was willing, maybe she wasn’t, the bible doesn’t say. Personally I don’t think she was though.
A little while later, it turned out that he didn’t just rape her, he got her pregnant in the process. David quickly called Uriah back from the battle field and tried to get him to go home to his wife so that in nine months time he would think that he was the father of the child but Uriah refused, so David murdered him and married Bathsheba.
*** Edit: I acknowledge that there can be some debate as to what Bathsheba’s intentions and desires were. There has been some interesting discussion in the comments on this sublect. However… either David was an adulterous murderer or a rapist murderer. I acknowledge that although I’m going with rapist, I don’t have any real evidence to back that up ***
God Forgave
Here’s the twist to the story though:
David repented and God forgave him.
Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”
Nathan replied, “The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. (2 Samuel 12:13)
This was a thousand years before the birth of Christ, but there it is in black and white, repentance and forgiveness.
We can learn all sorts of lessons from David’s life but there’s one that really stands out to me today:
David was the golden boy, the ‘man after God’s own heart’, but here he is committing what we would think of as some of the worst crimes: rape, murder and betrayal.
God, though, forgave him when he saw that he was truly repentant – and David’s legacy as the greatest earthly king of all time lives on.
Take Heart From This Story
Why then, do we doubt God’s forgiveness of our own sins?
Why do we fear that we have done something so bad that God is never going to be able to forgive us?
We should all take heart from David’s story and see the true grace and mercy of God.
God is not in the business of finding excuses to cut us off from him. He sent his son down to Earth (which we celebrate at Christmas time) to die in our place so that we can have certainty and security in our forgiveness, our salvation.
Take encouragement and peace today from this terrible story of David’s crimes. God forgave David – and he forgives you.
Don’t ever doubt that!
Amen. Well said.
Luke 19:10
for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”
Thanks Doug.
Have a great day!
Since we can't say for sure that David forced her, can we really say it was rape? That would be no different than if today some Hollywood celebrity had their entourage go to some ordinary girl and say they wanted to have them come party at their house & then he had sex with them. (Given, I know you're going to say he was King and she had no choice but to go but the "awe" factor of celebrity is similar.)
If she was willing, I would say technically it's just adultery. I can understand your opinion being that she was willing but with no way to know in Scripture it's hard to brand the "rapist" label upon him.
I understand your point of view but I think the fact that he was king changes everything.
Sure, there's the awe factor, and sure, she may have been willing but he was going to do it anyway even if she wasn't… and there's the difference. He was intending to rape her and because of his gross abuse of the power and authority God gave him, the intent makes him guilty.
Regardless, all sin is sin, no matter how 'great' or 'small' we think it is and God forgave him for it anyway! 🙂
I certainly agree with that last part!
In lieu of your comment, I have added an edit into the post to try to give credit to the other point of view.
I realize I have no evidence for my view that it was rape, it's just my opinion. So I've tried to make that clear!
Thanks for your comment. I love the fact that the Internet community makes us think about what we believe and why.
Sometimes you read a post and go away wondering what the person was trying to say. This isn't one of those times.
Thank you.
Don't ever doubt God's love, forgiveness and gift of salvation!
Regarding the discussion of "rape or not" I feel it is likely that Bathsheba was a willing culprit to a point. There isn't a lot of detail given, but we have this. She didn't tell her husband but apparently wanted to go along with the cover-up. Now, she might have been forced into it but my reading leaves me thinking she wanted to work with David not against him. Further is the grief both she and David experience at the loss. We see that when Solomon is conceived David goes to her to "comfort her." She wanted the child and didn't seem to have much in line of mixed emotions. She grieved the loss and David comforted her and then she bore another child. She goes on to have a pretty good relationship with David even to the point of being able to give him the extra push he needed to publicly endorse Solomon as king.
Here's the thing, I see it that not only was David involved in adultery and murder, I think Bathsheba was as well. She aspired to be more. I wouldn't go as far as to say she enticed David, but the rest of the story makes it pretty clear she made good use of her gained power.
Maybe you could call what David did rape in the same way that a man of great power taking advantage of a young woman, say an intern, might be called rape. There is a certain point where consent isn't really consent. The law recognizes this idea when it places statutory limitations on sex involving minors. Even with consent it isn't reasonable. Ethical guidelines recognizes this where it is stated that a professor should not have sex with a student or an officer with an enlisted subordinate.
However, if we see Bathsheba's involvement as more than passive or coerced then we see an even bigger picture of God's grace. He has grace to cover the Adultery and murder, but also grace to cover the pain of guilt that Bathsheba certainly felt. She had guilt for betraying her husband. Even if forced she probable felt guilt, and if she was the impressed and flattered young woman I think then she probably felt even more guilt. She felt guilt for allowing her husband's death. She participated in the cover-up before and after. She didn't tell him, didn't warn him. I imagine she thought about that more than once, and worse probably thought about all that she gained from it and then felt more guilty. Her guilt and mixed emotions probably led to more guilt when they lost the child. She almost certainly blamed herself which led to great big huge heaping helpings of guilt.
Despite all of that we see that she didn't grow old and bitter. She genuinely loved Solomon and tried to help others at various times. She found forgiveness and appeared to have let go of any guilt she felt.
GREAT response, Nick!
I had not considered Bathsheba's complicit guilt if she had been a willing party.
It's very interesting how easy it is to read this story differently depending on what position you come at it from.
I think of Bathsheba as being an Esther kind of character. Taken unwillingly but deciding that she had to make the most of the situation even though she didn't want to be there.
The message she sent to David telling him she's pregnant, I read as being one of revenge. "You took me against my will and know I'm preggers. My husband's away at war… people can count… let's see you cover this one up!"
In those times, women were third class citizens at best. I read her whole story as one of a woman trying to protect and do the best for those she loved.
If I come at it from the angle of thinking she's a bit of a Jezabel characterthen the whole thing looks different. David's on the roof, so what does she do? she strips off and takes a bath, knowing he can see her and hoping to seduce him.
Either way… lots of sin and BUCKETS of forgiveness!
I understand the viewpoint that she did not have an option to say no.
But she suffered when her son died as punishment for David's sin. That seems to suggest that she was complicit. How so I don't know. And either way, David was wrong. It's not like Bathseba could have raped him.
I'm glad you brought up Esther, because that's a comparison I thought of when I read your post. I disagree with your view that it was rape as we would define it today. I don't think he held her down or beat her. Now yes, it's highly likely that she could have been punished for saying no, just as Esther could have. I also think of Dinah's story. Her brothers call it rape because they want a reason to fight, but the prince wants to marry her and is willing to pay a bride-price for her. Would you do that to someone you had raped? We don't get to hear her opinion. I think it all boils down to the fact that women were property and whether they were coerced or willing is irrelevant in some ways because either way they had no right. It was going to happen, and the only choice they had was to make it easy or difficult. David's sin is the same whether he was an adulterous murderer or a rapist murderer, he took advantage of the power that had been granted to him and he misused it to hurt people. However, God still forgave him and turned everything to good.
Hi Liz, Thanks for the great comment.
The impression I get from the story is that he took a married woman and ordered her to have sex with him. He didn't need to physically hold her down or beat her, the fear of his power did the same thing.
His power acted like one of those date-rape drugs, she didn't want it to happen but she was powerless to stop it.
I do still concede though that she may have been willing or even the instigator!
As a woman, and as a student (as well as a teacher) of biblical culture, I believe Bathsheba knew exactly what she was doing. A woman sensitive to her body knows when she's most likely to get pregnant, and there was great, great sensitivity to such matters in Israelite culture. I see Bathsheba as being ruthless in her seduction of David, having no regard for Uriah as she knowingly became pregnant with the king's child.
Rape? I think not. David was no innocent. But Bathsheba far less so, regardless of the fact that she was likely a teenager with less sense than David should have had. I do not agree with the biblical fiction authors who give her a redemptive ending. Matthew listed the name of the harlot Rahab in the genealogy of Jesus. Yet he refuses to write Bathsheba's name, clear disdain. She is called only "her of Uriah."
Incidently, the child's death was necessity. The Lord had promised the Messiah to be a son of David. Had the child lived, paternity would have been questionable. David's actions murdered two people.
Wonderful perspective, Anne.
I'd love to be able to hop back in time and find out what the truth really is! 🙂