Mikvah
What I fear most is power with impunity. I fear abuse of power and the power to abuse. Isabel Allende
This is a rerun of a post from 2018. A number of comments have arisen, often comparing fallen pastors to King David. Yet they are pastors, and a more apt comparison would be the priests serving the Tabernacle/Temple. David was a king, not a priest. The comparison is not apt. Bathsheba gets a raw deal from preachers and artists who got their knowledge from flawed theologians/preachers. #IstandwithBathsheba.
If you think that standing ovations for pastors who confess sexual liaisons with young women drive me nuts, you haven’t been around me when it comes to the topic of Bathsheba. Years ago, I started reading the stories in the Bible with a critical eye. Exactly what did these stories say, and what did they not say? Early on, the story of Bathsheba caught my eye. I sat through one too many “Bathsheba was a Jezebel” sermons, which would end with women being given warnings to dress modestly so we didn’t cause godly™ men to fall. I even heard women *teachers* during Mother/Daughter modesty programs bring up Bathsheba as the slut who tempted poor David and caused her baby to get murdered by God because of her indecency. How many of you out there sat through similar sermons? How many women were made to feel guilty because they looked like women?
However, as I read, I discovered that the Bible does not mention Bathsheba, “the Jezebel Temptress.” So, how did these wrong ideas about Bathsheba develop?
Works of Art
Famous paintings indicate that men have long viewed Bathsheba as the ultimate temptress. Here are some examples.
Willem Drost, Bathsheba with David’s Letter, 1654 (Ask yourself: What letter?)
#/media/File:Willem_Drost_-_Batsheba_met_de_brief_van_koning_David.jpg){kind=link}
Rembrandt: Bathsheba at Her Bath 1653 (Looks like she is holding a letter as well. Love poems??)
#/media/File:Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_016.jpg){kind=link}
Modern Music
How about the hauntingly beautiful Hallelujah by Jeff Buckley?
Well your faith was strong but you needed proof
You saw her bathing on the roof
Her beauty and the moonlight overthrew ya
Sermons
From Bible.Org: Caught in the Tempter’s Trap—The Story of David and Bathsheba
Read this pastor’s less-than-scholarly take on the account. He believes that Bathsheba was asking for it and that she should have been bathing indoors in her master bedroom suite.
Bathsheba is not guiltless either. She may not have purposely enticed David, but she was immodest and indiscreet. To disrobe and bathe in an open courtyard in full view of any number of rooftop patios in the neighborhood was asking for trouble. She could easily have bathed indoors. Even so in our day, some women do not seem to realize what the sight of their flesh can do to a man. They allow themselves to be pushed into the fashion mold of the world and wear revealing clothes, or nearly nothing; then they wonder why the men they meet cannot think of anything but sex. We must not fail to instruct our younger girls in these matters, particularly as they enter their teen years. Christian parents should teach their daughters facts about the nature of man and the meaning of modesty, then agree on standards for their dress.
David found out who the beautiful bather was, sent for her, and the thought became the deed. There is no evidence that this was a forcible rape. Bathsheba seems to have been a willing partner. Her husband was off to war and she was lonely. The glamour of being desired by the attractive king meant more to her than her commitment to her husband and her dedication to God. They probably cherished those moments together; maybe they even assured themselves that it was a tender and beautiful experience. Most do! But in God’s sight, it was hideous and ugly. Satan had baited his trap and they were now in his clutches.
… Scripture does not tell us, but I am confident that Bathsheba acknowledged her sin also and God forgave them both.
Read the story in the Bible: 2 Samuel 11-12 NIV (Don’t cheat-read it.)
(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.”
6 So David sent this word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent him to David. 7 When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were and how the war was going. 8 Then David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. 9 But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master’s servants and did not go down to his house.
10 David was told, “Uriah did not go home.” So he asked Uriah, “Haven’t you just come from a military campaign? Why didn’t you go home?”
11 Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents,[a] and my commander Joab and my lord’s men are camped in the open country. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and make love to my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!”
12 Then David said to him, “Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. 13 At David’s invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master’s servants; he did not go home.
14 In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. 15 In it he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”
16 So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. 17 When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David’s army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died.
18 Joab sent David a full account of the battle. 19 He instructed the messenger: “When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, 20 the king’s anger may flare up, and he may ask you, ‘Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn’t you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? 21 Who killed Abimelek son of Jerub-Besheth[b]? Didn’t a woman drop an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?’ If he asks you this, then say to him, ‘Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.’”
22 The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. 23 The messenger said to David, “The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance of the city gate. 24 Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king’s men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.”
25 David told the messenger, “Say this to Joab: ‘Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.’ Say this to encourage Joab.”
26 When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him.27 After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeasedthe Lord.
Challenge: Read through 2 Samuel 12 and highlight all the verses that deal with Bathsheba’s sin, not David’s. I’ll give you a few minutes.
Here are the verses that I found.
0
But wait! Didn’t that guy at Bible.Org say she repented?…..No, he said he was confident she repented. This is Christianiese for “It says what I want it to say and I say Bathsheba was a Jezebel.* (One of these days, I want to explore some other women, such as Jezebel, who have also been misrepresented.)
What does 2 Samuel actually say about the actions of David and Bathsheba?
- David was the one on the roof, sneaking a peek at Bathsheba.
- Bathsheba was not on the roof bathing. She was most likely in a private courtyard.
- The word used for bathing could also mean *washing.*
- Bathsheba was beautiful.
- David didn’t seem to know who she was, but he was determined to find out.
- He discovered she was married, and her husband was off at war.
- David sent messengers (some translations say *guards*) to bring her to him. (Imagine saying: “Well, fellas, even though you have swords, armor, and determined faces, I’m still not coming!”)
- She was completing her month-long purification routine (usually done in a mikveh). The text does not say exactly when she was doing the purification routine but mentions it right after he slept with her. It is telling us to pay attention to this.
- The chances of a pregnancy were relatively high due to the timing of the monthly purification ritual.
- When she became pregnant, a guilty David had her husband killed.
- David was told he had sinned. There is nothing said about the sin of Bathsheba.
What is a mikvah?
Since it is possible, but not definite, that Bathsheba had completed her period and her mikvah ritual when David decided to take in the show or directly after he had molested her, here is a description of the mikvah, a ritual bath. The reason that I am discussing this is because the pastor of Bible.Org. seems to believe that Bathsheba should have hung out in her well-appointed bathroom instead of bathing in the nude in her *public courtyard* to tempt poor David.
Briefly: A mikvah must be built into the ground or built as an essential part of a building. Portable receptacles, such as bathtubs, whirlpools or Jacuzzis, can therefore never function as mikvahs. The mikvah must contain a minimum of 200 gallons of rainwater that was gathered and siphoned into the mikvah pool in accordance with a highly specific set of regulations. In extreme cases where the acquisition of rainwater is impossible, ice or snow originating from a natural source may be used to fill the mikvah. As with the rainwater, an intricate set of laws surrounds its transport and handling.
…Family purity is a system predicated on the woman’s monthly cycle. From the onset of menstruation and for seven days after its end, until the woman immerses in the mikvah,husband and wife may not engage in sexual relations. To avoid violation of this law, the couple should curtail their indulgence in actions they find arousing, putting a check on direct physical contact and refraining from physical manifestations of affection. The technical term for a woman in this state is niddah (literal meaning: “to be separated”).
Exactly a week from when the woman has established the cessation of her flow, she visits the mikvah. Immersion takes place after nightfall of the seventh day and is preceded by a requisite cleansing. The immersion is valid only when the waters of the mikvah envelop each and every part of the body and, indeed, each hair. To this end, the woman bathes, shampoos, combs her hair and removes from her body anything that might impede her total immersion.
Most mikvahs in that period were located outside.
A mikvah had to have a source of running water, such as a spring, or fresh water, such as rain. A mikvah had to be large enough to allow an average sized person to immerse his whole body. Stairs would be used to descend into and ascend from the mikvah. Often there was a wall separating the clean side from the unclean side.
Bathsheba: A victim of sexual coercion and assault.
Slowly, some folks are waking up to the real story of David and Bathsheba. David and Bathsheba Is a #MeToo Story; Woman Not a ‘Seductress, was written by Sandra Glahn, an associate professor in Media Arts and Worship at Dallas Theological Seminary who teaches a gender studies course.
“David sent for her, he sent men for her. She is washing. That doesn’t even mean she’s bathing. She could have just been washing her hands. We are reading into that. And so what happens, instead of us seeing the argument of the book, which is David has gone from this shepherd boy, whom God has raised up, and now he’s abusing power. We should all take that as a lesson and a warning. But instead, we’re blaming the person who brought down the power.”
…Glahn explained that when people read the story of David and Bethsheba, they should identify with David by realizing that “I could fall, I could abuse power.”
“Now we know more about power differentials in these sort of sexual relationships, and we know that if you have a lot of power, and you’re with a powerless person, even if it’s consensual, it’s not the same thing.
Why I believe that Bathsheba was David’s victim.
- David sent his men to bring her to him. Bathsheba had no choice in the matter. This opinion is bolstered by David’s willingness to kill Uriah. David was a man to be feared. King David was a political king, not a priest. His power was absolute. Bathsheba had reason to fear for her life. The guards would not have protected Bathsheba if she screamed. They would have done whatever David told them to do.
- No one in the biblical story confronted Bathsheba about her sin, which is one of the most famous stories in the Bible. Indeed, if Bathsheba had been to blame in this situation, God would have made sure the story reflected the sin of a consensual relationship.
One of these days, I would like to discuss the death of David and Bathsheba’s baby because I do not believe that God specifically killed the baby to punish David. However, this would cause a riot, and I need to carefully write my thoughts on the matter. I shall leave it for another day. However, if you are interested in the trajectory of my thinking, start reading here.
Conclusion:
I have spent many decades in the evangelical church, listening to stupid interpretations of Biblical passages. Sometimes, these arguments go beyond foolish and lead to the mistreatment of women in the church. I have been frustrated with supposed *pastors* who glance at a passage of Scripture and then proceed to diminish the role of women in the church while blaming them for tempting men. Bathsheba was not a temptress. She was a woman who King David used. Can you imagine being married to the guy who forced himself on you and then proceeded to kill your husband?
David got away with this because he was a political king, and he had been given the power to do so. Contrary to the arguments of many at Highpoint Church, David was allowed to stay a king, not because he was forgiven, but because he held a political appointment. I wonder what would have happened to him if he had been a priest at the Temple. The Old Testament refers to a number of kings who *did evil in the sight of the Lord.” They, too, were allowed to stay in power. The Israelites demanded that they be allowed to have a king like the other nations. God warned them they wouldn’t like it, but He gave them what they wanted, which wasn’t pretty.
Bathsheba has been given a bum rap by men (and women) who do not carefully read what the Bible actually says. So, next time you sing along to this song, be sure to think about it.
#IStandwithBathsheba
The first question I have is why the h**l was David on the roof to begin with? Instead of say doing the work of a king, meeting with advisors, military commanders (he was at war remember), and so on. You think he would have more important things to do rather than have a midnight stroll. And worse, you think he would more important things to do than trying to stalk some lady he saw. That says not only a lot about his character, but also how well he actually did his job and performed its duties.
Harry Stonecipher, the CEO of Boeing was FIRED for having an affair. But if you one of God’s special pets, you get a pass or a do-over.
I would say that all the kings of Israel were pretty much disasters and POS’es. But I guess that was the point (after all God did warn them what would happen if they got a king).
R’as al Ghul(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Off topic:
Update from Gateway Church
https://gatewaypeople.com/statement-to-the-congregation
(Kevin Grove, Steve Dulin, Gayland Lawshe and James Morris)
“During this temporary leave of absence, these four Elders will continue their important work as valued staff members at Gateway Church.”
Bene D(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
dee , I agree with you about Bathsheba.
So, I have an off-the-wall beside-the point theoretic what-if question: If King David can be used to excuse for sexual abuse then…….. why can’t he be used to excuse for a contract-style murder?
What if some modern-day husband was out of town on a business trip, and some big-wig church pastor had sex (either by force, or consensual) with his wife and impregnated her while hubby was gone……. would these pastor-worshipping sycophants defend the pastor if he had the husband murdered?
Nancy2(aka Kevlar)(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Dee, I too agree with you about Bathsheba.
We might have an inerrant Bible, but what we don’t have is inerrant spin.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Fine, but do we really need more hashtags for this? Surely you don’t want to become the Internet equivalent of that car with all the bumper stickers.
jonnybravo(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
David may not have been a priest with a role in the tabernacle and at sacrifices but as an anointed king in that time and place he was a religious as well as a secular leader (not that there was a line between those two domains then). BTW Acts 2:30-32 describes him as a prophet.
I note the extended details on a mikvah almost certainly didn’t exist until fairly late (the first mikvahs in archaeology don’t show up until the 1st century BCE). However ritual bathing seems to have been required much earlier.
Someone asked what David was doing on the roof. The roof is in hot dry climates often the coolest place to be at night or very early in the morning. People often slept on the roof because of the coolness. Roofs could also be used for drying things. On a big building as the palace presumably was, it could also be a watchpost.
Bathsheba certainly was a victim and the straight story doesn’t depict her as having any choice in the matter. Perhaps she later arranged matters so her son, Solomon, ended up as king rather then any of David’s other and older sons.
Erp(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I have heard, from another Dallas Seminary scholar, that people of of densely-populated, rooftop-dwelling cultures often have norms about NOT looking DOWN onto your downhill neighbors’ rooftops. This norm recognizes that those in (literally) higher positions should respect the privacy of those in lower positions.
Dragonlight(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I might get some flak for this opinion (maybe not on here, but certainly the pharisee holier-than-thou tin pot dictator pastors such as John MacArthur would enthusiastically burn me at the stake).
My opinion is this: I am not a huge fan of King David, nor am I a huge fan of most of the Old Testament in general.
There are some great things in the Old Testament, such as many of the Psalms, and the inspiring story of Shadrach/Mesach/Abednego refusing to worship the idol. And the Book of Job, which I find very helpful when dealing with suffering.
But there are also many things in the Old Testament that I do not like.
For example, as one commenter above already mentioned, the idea that certain people who are supposedly favored by God get a pass to harm others who are supposedly less favored.
That idea is something I strongly disagree with.
I also find it difficult to reconcile the God of the Old Testament, Who often seems harsh, with Jesus Christ, Who is Kind and Loving and Gentle.
So, how am I a Christian, even though there are things in the Bible that I dislike?
My solution is that I trust Jesus Christ alone, and I don’t really focus on what is in the Old Testament.
I also basically ignore some of Paul’s writings, for example where he seems to say that everyone should obey authority (wives obey husbands, kids obey parents, citizens obey the government, women not being allowed to teach men, etc).
I just basically ignore that stuff, since it is not necessary for salvation and I view it as a stumbling block to my faith in Jesus.
I find the idea that Christians must obey authority even when that authority is harming you, to be utterly ludicrous and nonsensical.
Sorry Paul, if someone is harming me or my loved ones, I am NOT going to submit and obey the abuser.
I will resist evil, because I believe that is what Jesus Christ wants me to do.
If the patriots in 1776 had followed Paul’s advice on obeying authority, our country wouldn’t even exist.
As a child, I was severely abused by my biological parents.
If I believed that obeying authority was a mandatory aspect of Christianity, I probably wouldn’t be a Christian.
Thus, I ignore those writing of Paul, because they are a stumbling block and an obstruction to my faith in Jesus Christ.
The most important thing, in my view, is to believe in Jesus Christ and follow Jesus’ Teachings.
I do not consider it important to obey Paul’s inane ramblings on every subject (yes, I said inane ramblings. Burn me at the stake if you want).
I believe in Jesus Christ as Lord, and I believe that He died on The Cross to save humanity from our sins, paying the cost with His Blood so we don’t have to pay.
I try to live my life as I believe Jesus wants me to live.
That is what I consider to be of utmost importance: believing in Jesus Christ as Savior, and following His Teachings, and trying to be a good man as Jesus wants me to be.
In terms of things from the Bible (especially the Old Testament) that I find objectionable, I basically seek Jesus’ and The Holy Spirit’s Guidance and Discernment about what is important to follow, and what can be ignored and disregarded.
I don’t let random stuff from the Bible that I don’t like, become a stumbling block that obstructs my faith in Jesus Christ.
I am not claiming that my approach is the biblical or the correct one. I am simply sharing what works for me, and the mindset that I believe Jesus and the Holy Spirit gave me to help me maintain my faith.
I’m not a pastor or a Bible expert or any sort of religious expert, and I’m not saying that other people should necessarily follow what seems to work for me.
Some people might claim that I’m in error with my mentality of ignoring certain parts of the Bible. Maybe I am in error. I don’t know. All I know is that I love and believe in Jesus Christ, and I am grateful that He died on The Cross to save us all.
I am just sharing how I deal with stories such as that of David and Bathsheba, and other things in the Old Testament and elsewhere in the Bible, which I find difficult to understand.
I know this is a tough topic, so I thought I would share the above, in case it helps uphold the faith of others, who might be stumbling or wavering due to all the horrible things that are going on within earthly “Christianity” lately.
As I said above, I am not claiming that my approach is the correct one. I am simply sharing what works for me, the approach that I believe Jesus and The Holy Spirit led me to.
I’m not a pastor, nor do I have a “bestselling book” where I tell everyone else what to do.
So if my approach seems heretical or wrong to you, please disregard it.
I just shared it in case it helps anyone else who might be struggling to understand certain things from the Bible.
I also pray that nothing I wrote in this post would in any way weaken the faith of anyone else, nor cause anyone else to stumble.
I certainly believe that there are some things in the Bible which cannot be ignored. I am NOT saying that everyone should do whatever they feel like, and if they don’t like the passages where it says not to cheat on your spouse, just ignore it. I am NOT saying that at all.
I think that there is a big difference between certain bedrock Christian teachings that we must follow, and stuff that I consider largely irrelevant, such as most of the Old Testament.
Again, I pray that nothing I said in this post would cause anyone else to stumble.
I just wanted to share what works for me in case it helps anyone.
Commenter23(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“I have been frustrated with supposed *pastors* who glance at a passage of Scripture and then proceed to diminish the role of women in the church while blaming them for tempting men.”
It’s very hypocritical that these macho tough guy pastors blame the women for the weakness of men.
Men who claim the divine right to boss around their wives can’t have things both ways.
If they are the Big Boss, then they are accountable to, and judged by, Big Boss Rules.
If a tough-guy macho man is weak enough to be tempted into sin by a woman, then the fault is HIS (the man’s), NOT the woman’s.
The macho tough-guy dudebro pastors are like narcissistic immature man-children.
They want all of the power, with none of the responsibility or accountability that COMES with having a position of authority.
They preach harsh discipline for everyone else, but when THEY mess up, they expect to be instantly forgiven with no consequences or punishment.
Sorry macho tough-guys, it doesn’t work like that.
If you want to claim that you are the boss of your wife, well, holding a Big Boss position comes with Big Boss consequences when you misbehave.
As Jesus said in the Parable of the Talents, “I will judge you by your own words.” (Luke 19:22)
If the tough guy dudebros want to play dictator of their family, then they should expect dictator-level consequences when they mess up.
When the dictators of countries mess things up, the punishment is usually pretty severe. Nicolae Ceausescu comes to mind.
Similarly, in the military, when something goes wrong, the commanding officer gets punished. He doesn’t get to blame everything on the lowly E-1 and walk away. If a ship runs aground due to negligence, the captain is the one who gets court-martialed and removed from command. As the saying goes, “there are no bad sailors/soldiers, there are only bad OFFICERS.”
It’s called the Responsibility of Command.
In the same way, when an Anointed (TM) Boss-Husband or Boss-Pastor stumbles and has an extramarital affair or whatever, their punishment should be MORE severe, not less, than the punishment for the woman.
I suspect that if such a system were implemented, being a tin-pot tyrant over their wife and kids would suddenly be a lot less appealing to them.
The macho power-hungry Boss-Husbands and Boss-Pastors can’t have things both ways.
If they think that their position gives them the authority to control others, then when they mess up, they should rightfully be judged much more harshly than those under their control.
Commenter23(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I am pretty sure that God will judge husbands who mistreat their wives, parents who mistreat their children, pastors who mistreat their congregants, and leaders who mistreat their subjects, very harshly.
From Matthew 24:45-51
“45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Commenter23(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“But wait! Didn’t that guy at Bible.Org say she repented?”
Your mention of Bible.org reminds me of another prominent “Christian” website that I think deserves to be taken with a grain of salt, namely gotquestions.org.
They have a rather pompous tagline, “Your questions. Biblical answers.”
Appointing themselves as the arbiters of what is biblical is bad enough, but there are other very big red flags.
Apparently the site is run by a guy named “S Michael Houdmann”. That’s right: he expects you to trust him to decide what is biblical truth, but he won’t even tell you his first name.
But there’s more: all of the questions that people submit, are answered anonymously by various unnamed “experts”. None of the “biblical answers” posted on their website are attributed to any identifiable authors.
Houdmann (or whoever actually runs the website) states that they don’t reveal the names of the authors of their “biblical answers”, because they want the “biblical answers” to stand on their own merits.
Sorry, I don’t buy that logic.
The identity of the authors of these “biblical answers” ABSOLUTELY matters, because knowing who the author is and his/her reputation and character is VITAL to determining whether the answer is trustworthy.
Would you trust a “biblical answer” written by Robert Morris or Mike Bickle or Ravi Zacharias or Jerry Falwell Junior? I think not.
The refusal of GotQuestions.org to reveal who is writing their “biblical answers” is suspicious and bizarre, and raises lots of red flags.
In addition to refusing to identify their authors, GotQuestions.org also refuses to provide the dates on which their “biblical answers” were published, for some strange reason.
And here’s another red flag. They tell people who want to cite their “biblical answers” to simply attribute all the answers to the website owner, “S Michael Houdmann”:
“If for some reason you are absolutely required to give the name of the author, while he is not the author of every article on GotQuestions.org, for citation purposes, you may reference our CEO, S. Michael Houdmann.”
Let’s break that down. They ADMIT that S Michael Houdmann didn’t write all of the articles, yet they encourage people to falsely cite him as the author.
This is not only misleading and deceptive, it is considered academic dishonesty in educational settings.
GotQuestions.org refuses to reveal who writes their “biblical answers”, and they encourage people to cite Houdmann as the author, even though GotQuestions openly admits that Houdmann doesn’t write all their answers.
All of this secrecy and evasiveness is very bizarre and concerning.
I wanted to alert The Wartburg Watch to the practices of this dubious website GotQuestions.org, which claims to provide “biblical answers” to people’s questions, without revealing who is writing these “biblical answers.”
I strongly urge anyone reading this to take any “biblical answers” you read on GotQuestions.org with a grain of salt.
I’m not saying that all of their self-described “biblical answers” are automatically wrong, but their evasive refusal to identify their authors, the rather enigmatic website CEO “S Michael Houdmann”, and their encouragement for people citing their answers to falsely attribute all of the “biblical answers” to Houdmann, is odd and disturbing.
There is no way of knowing whether any of their “biblical answers” are written by someone reputable, or a discredited charlatan, or even a criminal such as Robert Morris.
GotQuestions.org claims that their site provides “biblical answers”, but the lack of transparency on their website has left me with even MORE questions, which none of their “biblical answers” adequately address.
Commenter23(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
This year(2024), RM taught a series called “What’s My Purpose?” in which he talked about King David’s “moral failure” when he was 60 years old and how Bathsheba was a willing participant (not raped) because the Bible clearly specifies when women were raped (e.g. Dinah, Tamar), and there’s no text saying Bathsheba said “no”, screamed, or tried to fight. RM did briefly mention the power differential between David and Bathsheba, but said that God had made laws to protect women who are being raped, and if Bathsheba had screamed, the guards/servants/etc. would have been bound by the Law to help her and then only David would have sinned. RM then of course went on to misconstrue the Word and tell the whole forgiveness/restoration propaganda narrative by saying God redeemed David and his purpose even after David’s great sin because David repented. I do believe RM may have even tied in his “moral failure” if I’m remembering correctly, and how God restored/redeemed him after he repented and has greatly blessed RM and used him to positively impact “the kingdom” (if this didn’t happen in this series, it has happened in others).
Also in 2024 (maybe 2023), RM taught on the importance of keeping the Sabbath – it’s in the Ten Commandments so God is serious about it. Then made a comparison/“joke” that fell flat – RM said something to the effect of “If I wouldn’t rape a woman, why would I think it’s okay the break the Sabbath?” When no one laughed, he got a bit flustered, said it was a joke, and then changed it to “murdering someone”.
Former GW member(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I think you’ll find that David was a prophet (Acts 2:29-30 onwards), priest (Psalm 110) and king.
Gérôme’s painting has more to do with style and form and less about the biblical account. “While Bathsheba’s tale is ultimately one of seduction, adultery, and murder, the biblical anecdote plays a secondary role compared to Gérôme’s exploration of the female nude. Scenes of the bath were central to his output, likely inspired by his 1879 visit to the Grand Baths in Bursa. Filled with groups of female bathers naturally posed in various stages of undress, these Orientalist works – such as La Grande Piscine à Bursa shown to great acclaim at the Paris Salon of 1885 – are considered among the best of his oeuvre. Gérôme’s Bethsabée embodies the inherent sensuality and academic idealism of these stunning compositions”. (Artsy.net)
As for the opinions of pastors and theologians regarding Bathsheba, it’s best sticking to the facts, i.e. the biblical record. The sin was entirely David’s for which he suffered the consequences for the rest of his life. Bathsheba may have felt guilt/remorse..
#JusticeforBathsheba is a pretentious tag. Back in the early 1600s the following was written by Arcangela Tarabotti: “Why on earth publish lying fictions just when you dedicate yourselves to assaulting the fortress of chastity as Cupid’s disciples? You preach a sheltered life for women, digging up evidence from the tale of Bathsheba: while bathing in an open place she made even King David lie—that holy prophet whose heart was in tune with God’s. Ask yourselves, witless ones, who was the true cause of her fall, and then deny it if you can. It was nothing else but the king’s lust. Uriah’s wife was at home, minding her own affairs bathing—whether for enjoyment or necessity, it matters little—but David eyed her too. Her beauty inflamed him, and his eyes were the gateway to his heart; by various ruses he obtained the satisfaction his sensuality demanded. What blame can one possibly attribute to that innocent woman, overwhelmed by the splendor of the king’s majesty? She is more worthy of pardon than the royal harp player: she allowed herself to be overcome by a force from on high, as it were; he succumbed to the pull of flesh doomed soon to rot and darts from two eyes that pierce only those wanting to be wounded. (Paternal Tyranny, published 1654)
Lowlandseer(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
You made some excellent points. The Responsibility of Command I had mentioned earlier in other threads. Even if the CO of the ship is asleep in his rack when his ship runs aground, he is one who is beached and his career ended. One can delegate authority, but not responsibility.
R’as al Ghul(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
The story of “David and Bathsheba” is primarily a story about “David and Uriah”—at least that’s how the Bible itself summarizes it. Evangelical Christians and pastors love to dwell on the sexual dimension of the story. But here’s the summary in 1 Kings 15:5: “For David had done what was right in the eyes of the Lord and had not failed to keep any of the Lord’s commands all the days of his life—except in the case of Uriah the Hittite”. David wronged Uriah when he took Bathsheba, when he attempted to make Uriah look like the father, and when he had Uriah killed. The story is not first and foremost about sex with Bathsheba (though that’s involved and sex sells); it’s about the fact that David wronged Uriah.
Sandy Williams(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
The story is not first and foremost about sex with Bathsheba (though that’s involved and sex sells); it’s about the fact that David wronged Uriah.
That was how Nathan confronted David: “2 Samuel 12:4 NRSV
[4] Now there came a traveler to the rich man, and he was loath to take one of his own flock or herd to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him, but he took the poor man’s lamb, and prepared that for the guest who had come to him.”
https://bible.com/bible/2016/2sa.12.4.NRSV
Dan(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I think I can explain that part
When you’re under a lot of stress from a situation (such as wartime), you sometimes have to get away from it all to decompress — like having a midnight stroll just to clear your mind. That is the only rationale I can think of.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
As in “jumped Uriah’s claim and arranged a fatal accident for him to cover it up”.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“Just like (Alpha of Alpha Males) Andrew Tate, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”
(Even including the Andrew Tate-sized cigars when you get to Moscow, Idaho…)
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Yes. And in the larger sweep of the biblical story, it’s also the beginning of the downfall of the House of David, the division of twelve tribes into two mutually hostile kingdoms, their eventual defeat by foreign powers and their exile and finally the (first) destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple of YHWH.
That fateful evening on the roof was one of the most consequential in the history of the people. Israel’s shepherd he was not, that evening.
Samuel Conner(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Sort of a Proto-Mikvah?
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
In one word: YES.
And they’d Praise God and Make Long Pious Prayers over/for/about it.
“TOUCH NOT MINE ANOINTED!”
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Please don’t add to the text. Where in the text does it say he “molested” her?
Where does it say she resisted. The Scripture isn’t shy to say when that sort of thing happens. The text doesn’t say it here.
JAE(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Thank you for the laugh!
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
jonnybravo,
This was written in 2018. when these were popular.
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
So, if it says there is a gate in heaven. there is a gate and we don’t think that one through?
He sent two of his guards to bring her to him. He didn’t send her chocolates and roses. She had no choice. Read the Scripture and think it through.
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Dan,
Well said.
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Lowlandseer,
Bathsheba may have felt guilt/remorse.
#JusticeforBathsheba is a pretentious tag.
Bathsheba saw the loss of her child. And the murder of her husband. There was terrible pain. She was placed into the lineage of Jesus, the wife of Uriah. It was not her fault, but I bet many of the day’s pundits would blame her.
As for pretentious…it was the pastoral authority which has sidelined women who have been abused. It was written in 2018. There was a reason. Can you peer over the divide and try to understand?
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
It is pretty obvious there was coercion by the mere presence of 2 palace guards serving an absolute monarch. If she refused, they would bring her to David kicking and screaming.
R’as al Ghul(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
There are plenty who have no desire to read and think the Scripture through for themselves.
They are more than happy to believe what somebody else says the Scripture says.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Muff Potter,
In my opinion, the Bible is probably the most abused and misused book on the planet.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Muff Potter,
Agreed. I’m in my 70’s and still trying to recover from some of the very damaging ‘Biblical Truths’ I’ve been taught over seven decades.
FreshGrace(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
dee,
I agree… again, so many of these “clowns” warp the story to somehow justify themselves.. It seems we should closely look at the word of Nathan…
Jeffrey J Chalmers(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
JAE,
I think it’s a plausible inference that Nathan’s prophecy in 2 Sam 12:12 is fulfilled in part in 16:22. The text doesn’t say that Absalom’s intimate relations with his father’s concubines were non-consensual or coerced, but I think it’s the most defensible option to interpret them to have been.
Looking back on David’s actions with respect to Bathsheba that first night, through the lens of Nathan’s prophecy and its later fulfillment, I think one is justified in interpreting Bathsheba to have been coerced. David raped her. The text doesn’t say that, but given the power differential and the rest of the story, that’s the most likely understanding of what he did.
Samuel Conner(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Samuel Conner,
One could also add that the disorders in David’s family that arose after “the matter of Uriah and Bathsheba” seem to closely parallel David’s transgressions. What Amnon did to Tamar seems to parallel David/Bathsheba, as does Absalom/Amnon with respect to David/Uriah. Even Absalom’s rebellion against David is a kind of recapitulation of David’s rebellion against the laws of YHWH (which adds some poignancy to David’s lament, after Absalom’s death, that he, David, should have died for his own transgressions).
Samuel Conner(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
FreshGrace,
I too am in my 70’s.
I’ve put the past behind me and I decide for myself what ‘Biblical’ truth is, and I don’t let somebody else decide for me.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Commenter23,
This is because gotquestions.org – though useful in a lot of cases – is openly Reformed (aka Calvinist).
Mark R(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Samuel Conner,
Nathan warned David that “the sword would not leave” his house. The entire account of Tamar, Ammon, and Absalom would take place AFTER the Bathsheba incident.
Mark R(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Samuel Conner,
Our church recently did a Bible study on King David. It was mentioned that, in those times, if someone had relations with one’s concubine(s), it was taken as a challenge to that man’s position and authority. So, Absalom WAS making a claim for the throne.
Mark R(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Absalom was also emasculating David and telling the entire world he was a cuckold. Absalom is alpha now as it were.
R’as al Ghul(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Like I’ve opined before, the whole King David thing is as worn out as the bald tires on a big rig. Dig up some new material.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one’s own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text.[1] It is often done to “prove” a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it.
JAE(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Let’s face it, these guys (pastors who put the blame on Bathsheba) hate women.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Interesting the text doesn’t say Bathsheba was naked. Why does everyone assume she was?
I don’t know about mikvahs but where I live in Asia rural people bathe in public every day at the well or the river. Women wear bath cloths wrapped around their persons. Men strip down to their underwear. NO ONE looks sexually at those who are bathing. That is rude and not acceptable culturally. What David did was wrong from start to finish.
Fisher(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
i.e. Andrew Tate minus the big cigars.
“I AM THE ALPHA!!!!!”
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)