Did King David rape Bath-sheba?

[Lemonvariable72]

I find it interesting that according to this story god is punishable by death according to his owns laws. He states clearly several times throughout Leviticus and deuteronomy that son shall not pay for the sins of the father. However what does he do here? Makes the son pay the price for his sin. So since he violated his law of prescribing punishment and the child died he is punishable by death for breaking one of the ten commandments.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Well, Bath-sheba got pregnant so no it wasn't rape because the female body has ways of shutting that stuff down.

[John V]

I missed it. So it seems to have been consensual, since the story doesn't tell us what she did. I think it's safe to assume that someone would have heard.

Agreed.

So we are left to wonder why there is no accusation of adultery.

There is. The accusation of taking another man's wife, which you mistook for a charge of rape, is therefore a charge of adultery.

That's what makes it an interesting question. I am wondering what sort of details would be important enough to keep, and what sort would be important enough to leave out. And what that might tell us about the men who wrote the story. Bath-sheba is treated as little more than a prop throughout the tale, which makes it so we need to find more context to get a better idea of what they may have missed.

David had another child by her, and made that child his successor despite him not being the eldest. This indicates to me that David had love and/or respect for her, and is further reason to doubt rape.

The child's death is described as punishment for David's sin: "because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of Jehovah to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die." There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that this is referring to Bath-sheba or any part she played, since this is the discussion Nathan is having with David about his crimes, and is part of his response after David repents for his actions.

This is again an argument from silence. David could have been punished in many ways that would have had no effect on Bathsheba. The death of the child presumably hurt her. From this we can infer that she was being punished as well. It's circumstantial, but as you agreed above that it was likely consensual and not rape, this explanation fits well.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Only if you don't have 50 silver handy.

You only think that if you haven't read the preceding verses.

Deut 22:25 25 But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.

One of the lecherous pervert's sons raped one of the pervert's daughters and the pervert didn't say or do squat about it. The girl's brother killed the rapist. http://www.thebricktestament.com/king_da...13_01.html

[Lek]

I know the answer. If you're an atheist you think Bathsheba was raped. If you're a christian you don't know for sure.

[Bad Writer]

I know the answer. If you're an atheist you think Bathsheba was raped. If you're a christian you don't know for sure.

Except that many atheists on this thread just admitted that the data is inconclusive. You know what is demonstrable though? Your staggering lack of reading comprehension.

[Tonus]

David had another child by her, and made that child his successor despite him not being the eldest. This indicates to me that David had love and/or respect for her, and is further reason to doubt rape.

That's... kinda creepy. Though it makes for a more interesting story.

This is again an argument from silence. David could have been punished in many ways that would have had no effect on Bathsheba. The death of the child presumably hurt her. From this we can infer that she was being punished as well. It's circumstantial, but as you agreed above that it was likely consensual and not rape, this explanation fits well.

I was thinking on this one and I think the best explanation is that it's a plot hole, at least from my perspective. But I think yours works if we have to make it work, in that your explanation holds up (IMO).

It was as I was considering that last part that I realized that Bath-sheba really is just a prop in the story. The foil in this story is Uriah; it is his decision (to show a sort of spiritual solidarity with his brothers on the battlefront) that leads to David going from a man who suffered a moment of weakness to a man who allows his inner demons free rein and brings Yahweh's anger crashing down upon him and his house. Bath-sheba is so incidental to the story that the writer never bothers to consider her thoughts or feelings, and so we know almost nothing of how she reacts to anything that is happening. And we're not supposed to: David is the character that matters.

Perhaps the same writer wrote Solomon's story, as we see a bit of similarity: a man who rises to greatness as a testament to Yahweh's strength and power, yet eventually falls in disgrace. David at least seems to gain a measure of redemption, but I don't think we ever learn of Solomon's fate, save that he eventually abandons Yahweh and serves lesser gods.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Don't overlook the fact that the God character was the Assyrian/Babylonian Emperor and David was just his flunky. The story is similar to what a crime boss might do to one of his flunkies if the flunky screws up.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

I don't think it matters anyway to Christiams because David was never respected for his morality.

[John V]

It was as I was considering that last part that I realized that Bath-sheba really is just a prop in the story. The foil in this story is Uriah; it is his decision (to show a sort of spiritual solidarity with his brothers on the battlefront) that leads to David going from a man who suffered a moment of weakness to a man who allows his inner demons free rein and brings Yahweh's anger crashing down upon him and his house.

No, you have to back up to the beginning. David's downfall comes from his own laziness.
2 Sam 11
1 It happened in the spring of the year, at the time when kings go out to battle, that David sent Joab and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the people of Ammon and besieged Rabbah. But David remained at Jerusalem.

It was the time when kings go out to battle, but David didn't. If he had, none of this would have happened.

More regarding rape: note that David was a celebrated warrior, a poet, a musician, and king. Uriah had been away from Bathsheba for some time. Seduction is very reasonable to conclude from the situation.