Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
Thank you for the excellent CT article link.
It is nice I guess that some of you can't relate to what he writes and don't understand how true it is. Sometimes I wish I wasn't aware of the awful things that happen in churches. If God ordained your innocence...or ignorance...its nice you've been sheltered. But I'm glad to know CT published this.
Lynnie this again is an assumption that contributors here are “innocent or ignorant and sheltered”. That is wrong and again speculation. It further assumes that contributors here have not experienced sexual abuse directly. Others should not have to air out dirty laundry just so their answers seem more informed. Not everyone who has gone through a traumatic experience has to write a book to be validated. There are other ways. Based both on my own experiences and developing a Child Protection Policy for our congregation, I can say I have become closely familiar with cases of sexual abuse and yes have had to deal with some hitting close to home. So yes I can relate and others likely can too based on the statistics, but again I disagree with the conclusion “David raped”.
The Author actually states that David’s actions do NOT meet the biblical definition of rape, but meets the “modern” one.
“I agree with Abasili’s analysis that the story doesn’t include the details that seem to be specific to instances of a Hebrew understanding of rape—namely, the use of direct physical force and the victim crying out in anguish for help. And yet, the story of David and Bathsheba appears to many modern readers, including me, to meet contemporary definitions of rape.”
Well there you have it have, the biblical definition (God’s) is being set aside to impose a modern charge of rape on David. So now one would have to admit that society now defines sin instead of God in his Word, if lodging the charge “David raped”. But even then one has to ask himself, do we have enough evidence to charge David with rape as defined in the law today (this already gets close if not crosses into a 9CV)?
See the DOJ’s definition of rape here: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
Well it looks not to be so, as the text seems to show that Bathsheba gave consent in some way, though she was likely under authoritative pressure. Joseph was under authoritative pressure. Joseph had less rights than Bethsheba as he was a slave. Again, by Joseph's example, you can always say “no” even if persecution comes. You yourself have stated that only a man can rape a women, but a women cannot rape a man. That is folly and you should be able to research cases exposing that fact without me having to explain to details of intercourse, though obvious.
I have no issues charging David with rape, so long as the word of God describes him doing as such.
I am happy to try to hammer this out as it is obviously a question being thrown back at the Church.
Last edited: