Power Dynamics and Rape

  • Posted on:

The first time I watched this video, I was astounded! I had no idea that the woke crowd thought that David’s sin with Bathsheba was a case of rape. My initial reaction was to find some humor in this farcical claim and to ignore it forever. Unfortunately, something about these claims stuck, and I realized there was something bothering me: I didn’t actually have a good definition of the word rape. With today’s discussions of sexual abuse, sexual violence, sexual harassment, etc, do you know what category the word “rape” fits under? If you had witnessed David’s actions with Bathsheba first hand, would you have considered it “rape?”

Clearly, I had missed something. Among other things, Denhollander specifically mentioned the need to understand the power dynamics in order to interpret this passage of Scripture. How have I not heard of power dynamics? Is that related to engineering? I quickly found out the extent of what I had missed. Rachael’s understanding of the passage is not the crazed exegetical mishap of a single person. It’s actually very easy to find this new narrative online. Paul Carter on The Gospel Coalition made clear that “David was a rapist.”1https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/columns/ad-fontes/did-king-david-rape-bathsheba/ John Piper has stated that “rape” is an appropriate word for the scenario.2https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/did-bathsheba-sin-with-david In 2015, Christianity Today published an article accusing David rape, and Abraham of being a sex trafficker. It should be obvious that there is more at stake than one woman’s rogue understanding of the Bible. There is far more going on.

Warning: This post will not be particularly graphic. I will, however, say the words “sexual”, and “rape” a lot of times. If you aren’t in the mood for tackling this content, I will not be offended if you skip this one. I am inclined to believe, however, that this issue will eventually find it’s way into social circles of every kind. I would hope a discerning Christian has the full armor of God for these situations (Ephesians 6:10-18), prepared to answer all kinds of troubling questions (1 Peter 3:15).

The statue of david

What is Rape?

At first, I thought the definition of rape was obvious. The subject of rape was not one I had considered very much, although I had very strong opinions about it. When considering this subject, I had found myself thinking that it had to be similar to the activity of murder. After all, when examining Biblical law, the punishment of both rapists and murderers is the death penalty. I had imagined that rape was one of the most violent acts a man could perform, and, like murder, was the taking of a thing most precious in the eyes of God. Surely only the most vile of men would perform this heinous act, and only the most heinous society would prescribe anything less than execution for the rapist. When I looked up the definition in Webster’s 1828 dictionary, I found the words for what I had already imagined.

Rape: In a general sense, a seizing by violence; also, a seizing and carrying away by force, as females.

In law, the carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will.”

Webster’s 1828 Dictionary3https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Rape

Violence and rape are inseparable. If you divorce these two concepts, you have lost the definition. At the same time, there is an element to the definition that requires attention. What does rape mean in law? This is a far bigger and more meaningful distinction to be made. After all, what would a society be if it claims to abhor rape and murderous violence, yet does not punish the offenders? Would not that society’s outrage towards rape be meaningless? If we are to understand what rape truly is, we must examine it’s application in the context of the law.

The Law

For those who are unfamiliar with the woman in the video, Rachael Denhollander has been generally credited as one of the first women to speak out against the actions of Dr. Nassar.4https://web.archive.org/web/20220812230724/http://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/sports/larry-nassar-sentencing.html For 18 years, Lawrence Nassar the team doctor for the USA Gymnastics team, and was found guilty of multiple charges of sexual assault, child pornography, and sexual conduct. In the ecumenical circles, Rachael is considered a sexual abuse victim advocate, joining the PCA committee on abuse and the SBC’s abuse task force. After her experience, Rachael was considered an expert in cases of sexual abuse and later worked with lawmakers to stiffen Michigan’s sexual assault laws.5https://wdet.org/2018/02/27/nassar-abuse-survivor-rachael-denhollander-looks-to-change-michigans-sexual-assault-laws/ It was at this point that I realized I had no idea how sexual abuse laws worked.

Larry Nassar was never charged with rape. Michigan has laws concerning “criminal sexual assault”, and rape falls under that category. This is a meaningless distinction to some, but I find that it makes the laws particularly confusing to people trying to think in Biblical categories. Your state may have rape and sexual assault laws, but these vary by location. So, when you are trying to find out what the bible says about rape, and then trying to find out what your state says about rape, you may find out that things do not line up well at all.

So, for Denhollander to claim that king David was rapist, she could have been referring to Michigan laws concerning sexual assault. In this case, the story of David and Bathsheba could potentially fit the definition of criminal sexual assault in the first degree. In order for this charge to be applicable, there must be sexual relations that: “causes personal injury to the victim and force or coercion is used.”6https://apps.rainn.org/policy/policy-crime-definitions.cfm?state=Michigan&group=3&_ga=2.2018481.1406497997.1667266835-1716969658.1667266835 To unpack this we will need to know what constitutes personal injury, and what is considered “force or coercion.”

First of all, what can be considered a personal injury? Well, in the state of Michigan, pregnancy can be considered a personal injury from a sexual assault. In the case of David and Bathsheba, this was the resulting “personal injury” of their relations (2 Samuel 11: 5). In order for this to be considered a rape under Michigan law then, all that’s left is the presence of force or coercion. The definition from the National District Attorneys Association may prove helpful: “Force or coercion includes but is not limited to:

  • actual application of physical force or physical violence
  • threatening to use force or violence on the victim
  • threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim, or any other person… ‘to retaliate’ includes threats of physical punishment, kidnapping, or extortion
  • actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the victim in a manner or for purposes which are medically recognized as unethical or unacceptable
  • when the actor, through concealment or the element of surprise, is able to overcome the victim
  • resistance is not necessary element of crime”7https://ndaa.org/wp-content/uploads/sexual-assault-chart.pdf

It is very difficult for me to theorize as to whether David’s actions in 1 Samuel 11:2-5 would constitute force or coercion for the Michigan courts. I am not a lawyer, but it seems as if many people are able to make this claim without a second thought. For example, if John Piper were on the jury for this case, it is very likely that he would consider David to be guilty of Michigan’s definition of rape.

“He didn’t invite her. He didn’t woo her. He didn’t lure her. He didn’t trick her. He took her. That’s what the text says: he took her. In other words, the description is of a completely one-sided, powerful exertion of his desire, with no reckoning with hers.”

John Piper, “Did David Sin With Bathsheba” – January 24, 20228https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/did-bathsheba-sin-with-david

Despite Piper’s lack of hesitation in his pronouncement, I find myself unable to come to his conclusion. Would David sending his messengers (2 Samuel 11:4) really have constituted an act of force or coercion?

Understanding Power

It should be admitted here that some people accusing king David of rape also admit that this act would not fall under the Old Testament’s definitions or punishments. This is a very modern interpretation of the passage, and only has the support of modern terminology. One of the first scholars to suggest the story of David and Bathsheba qualified as a case of rape was Alexander Abasili. His paper from 2011 re-examined the case, and asked the question in a new light.9https://brill.com/view/journals/vt/61/1/article-p1_1.xml?language=en Abasili’s work provided the ground for many more people to weigh in.

“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.

Kyle Worley, “Why It’s Easier to Accept David as a Murderer than a Rapist” – October 14, 201910https://web.archive.org/web/20191014181804/https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/october-web-only/david-bathsheba-debate-murder-rapist.html

On one hand, it seems as if these people are understanding that the modern definition of rape has changed. On the other hand, it also seems as if they don’t care. Despite the fact that this would have been considered a case of adultery under biblical law, many theological activists want to retry the case. In his article on Christianity Today, an academic administrator at a Christian seminary accuses David of “power rape.” Article author David Lamb states that: “Based on the huge power differential between the king and his subject, it’s more accurate to call this power rape rather than adultery.”11David Lamb, “David Was a Rapist, Abraham Was a Sex Trafficker” – OCTOBER 22, 2015: https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2015/october-web-only/david-was-rapist-abraham-was-sex-trafficker.html

King David’s position was clearly an authoritative one. However, to understand Denhollander’s reference to “power dynamics”, you need to look into psychology. In 1959, two social psychologists (John French and Bertram Raven) first established the idea of looking at power as influence potential. The categorized power into bases (or dynamics): referent, expert, legitimate, reward, and coercive. The power of coercion is considered the only truly negative form of power and is categorized as a “formal power.” In the world of psychology, examples of coercive power include: “…not approving time off, sexual harassment, terminating or threatening to terminate or withhold a promotion, or withholding some other positive within the environment.” 12Mary Kovach. “Leader Influence: A Research Review of French & Raven’s (1959) Power Dynamics” – July 2020: https://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1312&context=jvbl

What is most concerning is that while looking for a strict definition of the concept of power, you quickly find that the word is currently just used as a placeholder. Power is influence potential. Power can mean almost anything. At this point we should be asking ourselves: What else has this capacity for influence?

Rape Gone Rogue

In the modern world, the distinction between rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse, is a giant blur. The concept of power can be applied to any situation, and in almost any way. Some psychologists, influenced by feminism, see an entire sex as a powerful and coercive class.

“Far and away, most sexual assaults and sexual violence are perpetrated by men, and typically arise within asymmetrical power dynamics, where the perpetrator occupies a more powerful or dominant position in relation to the victim. Although the vast majority of #MeToo stories describe occurrences within the family, with a classmate, a man on the street, in a bar or at a party—where men assert power bestowed on them by mere virtue of their being men, the events that propelled the recent social media outcry involve powerful, prominent men who use their positions and the perks of their power to seduce, coerce, manipulate, and attack.”

Jessica Schrader, “Sexual Assault Is About Power” – November 14, 201713https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psychoanalysis-unplugged/201711/sexual-assault-is-about-power

Any attempt to qualify or pin-down the definitions in this system of thinking is futile. In a world that is measured by power and hierarchy, a woman facing discrimination cannot, by definition, be guilty of seducing or manipulating a man. If you haven’t put the pieces together yet, I will assist: the modern conception of power dynamics is just another form of intersectionality. In order to understand the this intersectional world, you must also understand privilege, discrimination, and identity.

Unfortunately, power dynamics doesn’t just affect our understanding of biblical laws concerning rape and abuse. It also affects the biblical understanding of a male/female distinction. Sheila Gregoire, author of “The Great Sex Rescue“, noticed that attempting to study complementarianism vs egalitarianism was problematic.

Sheila Gregoire tweet thread: https://web.archive.org/web/20221105193932/https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1587476695325491200.html

For Sheila, the fact that her complementarianism research questions were copied from the emotional abuse survey was an indicator of how bad traditional patriarchal role definitions were. For someone like me, the fact that abuse is defined so loosely is far more concerning. In a world with power dynamics, anything other than egalitarianism would produce asymmetrical power dynamics, and subsequently, sexual or emotional abuse. In a culture of intersectionality, rape has gone rogue.

Final Thoughts

The David-raped-Bathsheba discourse is one of the dumbest arguments being made today.14Doug Wilson has some valuable thoughts on the subject as well. https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/denhollender-and-david-and-the-question-of-rape.html There is no need for me to do a thorough Biblical exegesis if my work would simple be discarded, and David would be considered a rapist just for being a man. Despite her call to handle scriptures well, it seems as if her judgment on these matters has only gotten cloudier. Denhollander would later go on to pronounce her disagreement with Johnny Depp’s exoneration in his case with Amber Heard.15https://capstonereport.com/2022/07/13/sbc-abuse-expert-rachael-denhollander-sided-with-amber-heard/38482/ Rachael has been blinded by modern day definitions of power and coercion. It was incredibly obvious in her work on the PCA report, a report full of modern psychology and explaining oppression systems.16My thoughts on the PCA report Christians would be wise to avoid her advice, and instead look to scriptures in order to understand this (Deuteronomy 22:22-30).

Today’s muddled definition of rape has another very troubling real-world effect. The culture has attempted to separate rape from violence, and the justice system cannot process it. Historically, rape is considered an under-reported crime, so there are at least 3 major datasets analysts work with. Some account for reporting issues, some look at the nature of the crime, and some just count police reports. On average, less than 1% of sexual assaults ever lead to conviction.17https://web.archive.org/web/20190918055333/https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/09/15/why-are-we-so-bad-at-prosecuting-sexual-assault/ For some people this is evidence of a corrupt justice system. I will wholeheartedly agree. However, I also expect them to agree with me when I say that rape has become a meaningless word. We have created a world where nobody can agree on the terms, so the data that tracks it becomes meaningless.

Rape is unquestionably evil. It is good and right for anyone found guilty of this crime to be severely punished. It is not good to call what is wicked: good, nor to call what is good: evil. The man that cannot properly pronounce evil will be cursed; abhorred by the nations (Proverbs 24:24-25). If we cannot return to a biblical definition of rape, we cannot hope to return to a biblical definition of justice.

Sources:


  • The Admin Avatar
  • Author Information:





Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *