There's been some recent discussion about this online. To be honest, it hadn't occurred to me until I saw some people asserting that yes, David clearly committed rape. Thoughts on this?
The "power differential" idea is worth noting, since, David being king, obviously Bathsheba could very well have been put in a difficult spot by his summoning her. Still, it also seems obvious that David was not a rapist when considered in the context of the Mosaic law, and that the argument he committed rape seems pretty anachronistic.
But I think the biggest problem with the idea is what Scripture describes his true crime to be--both given what Nathan said and David's confession in Psalm 51, which focus on his blood-guiltiness in murdering Uriah.
The "power differential" idea is worth noting, since, David being king, obviously Bathsheba could very well have been put in a difficult spot by his summoning her. Still, it also seems obvious that David was not a rapist when considered in the context of the Mosaic law, and that the argument he committed rape seems pretty anachronistic.
But I think the biggest problem with the idea is what Scripture describes his true crime to be--both given what Nathan said and David's confession in Psalm 51, which focus on his blood-guiltiness in murdering Uriah.
Comment