Bathsheba not named in Matt 1.6 due to unrepented adultery?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Marcia, Dec 28, 2006.

  1. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why is Bathsheba's name is not mentioned in Matt 1.6b? I notice that the NASB has Bathsheba's name with a note that the original says "her of Uriah." "Wife of Uriah," or something to that effect, is also found in the KJV, NKJV, American Standard, the NIV, the HCSB, and the NET Bible.

    Is this because there is nothing in the Bible (that I know of) that indicates Bathsheba repented of her adultery with David? I notice that the names of other less noble souls are there, but none of them I know committed adultery (or they did and repented, as David did).

    In the NASB, it has this for Ps 51:


    I know the statements in parentheses are not considered inspired, but if it's true that Nathan did see Bathsheba, it would indicate that he did confront Bathsheba with her sin. Perhaps she did not repent since there is nothing elsewhere in the Bible to indicate she did.

    I could be wrong but this is what I'm thinking. I find it significant that God does not name her. This is not a big issue for me, but an intriguing one, and I am wondering what others think of this.

    If you don't care about this or think this is silly, please go to another thread. :smilewinkgrin: Thank you.
     
  2. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marcia,

    my opinion is that she is called "her of Uriah" because God is emphasizing the fact that she belonged to another. Perhaps even to point out God's forgiveness of the matter.......Bathsheba was allowed to be in the line of Christ, after all. I think it would be too far of a stretch to take this one line and assume that it means she never repented. Just my personal opinion.
     
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    It would be hard to miss her, since she is clearly there.
     
  4. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,836
    Likes Received:
    115
    Marcia, this is just my opinion.

    King David was not with his men when they were out battling the Ammonites. The bible says that during that time of year, kings were normally with their men in battle.

    David sent his men out and he himself, stayed behind with clearly nothing of value to do.

    He was on his roof just looking around. I was always taught as a child that she was on her roof bathing naked with the intent purpose of tempting him. The bible doesn't say that. David got up from bed one evening and just looked around from his rooftop and saw her bathing. Apparently it was after bedtime and she surely believed she was not being watched.

    I believe that she was innocently bathing.

    He sent his messengers to find out who she was and even though he was told that she had a husband, his didn't care. He wanted her anway. Now think about this. The bible says that he sent his servants to get her. Do you think that she had much choice in the matter when the king summoned her?

    I do not believe that she had any intention of committing adultery. I believe she had no choice, but to obey the king. I do not believe she was raped, I believe that the relations were consentual, but nonetheless, if she was offered the choice, I believe that she would have told him no. I don't believe she willingly offered herself to him.

    If she had been lusting after him in an equal manner that he desired her, I would have a different opinion.

    Nathan, in his sad story to King David about the man who steals the other man's pet sheep and kills it to eat when he had plenty of his own sheep to slaughter, tells us who really bears the bulk of the burden here.

    Did Bathsheba sin? Yes. Was she also a victim? Yes.

    The bible says that Bathsheba cried when her husband was killed. And the that "the LORD did not like what David had done." (2 Samuel 11:26-27)

    Nathan says in 2 Samuel 12:10 that to David that "you took the wife of Uriah the Hittite for yourself". He continues to say that God will punish David in part by taking his wives away from him and giving them to men who are close to him and that everyone would know about it..

    I said all that to say this......to say that God did not name Bathsheba in Matthew's genealogy because she was unrepentant just isn't logical. I believe that God did not name her, but used her husband's name to remind us of all of the tragedy that befell so many people because of this affair.

    She was Uriah's wife first. She should have been only Uriah's wife. God didn't want to ignore Bathesheba.....he wanted to remember Uriah.

     
  5. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Excellent post, Scarlett....and I agree.
     
  6. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,635
    Likes Received:
    45
    Note that the names of Sarah and other prominent women are totally absent.
    Gentile elements of the genealogy are highlighted in the mentioning of certain women, in keeping with a recurrent theme in Matthew of "Gentile inclusion."
    Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth are all mentioned, as is her of Urias (the Hittite).
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, the given name of Bathsheba, is never given anywhere in Scripture. The designation Bath-sheba means the daughter of Sheba, and another place she is called Bath-shua, meaning the daughter of Shua, I believe. As the prefix 'Bath-' has a wider meaning than merely the 'biological' daughter, hence physical offspring of a scion, (as the prefix "Ben" has the meaning for a male) the sufixes of Shua and Sheba merely tell us she was in the line of the two individuals, although probably was the "daughter of Sheba", given the number of times the moniker is used. But as to her personal name, unlike Tamar, Ruth and Rahab, we do not have it actually given anywhere in Scripture, as I understand it. It is never stated that this is the reason for the absence of a personal name, in the Scriptures, as far as I am aware.

    Scarlett has a very good post, also, I agree.

    One might also note that Tamar involved herself in incest, and Rahab was a prostitute, as well, so it is interesting that three of the four women mentioned in Matthew were at least involved in some way in some sexual sin, at best.

    Ed
     
    #7 EdSutton, Dec 28, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 28, 2006
  8. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    So far, very interesting responses! Thanks to all of you.

    Scarlett, I also had thought of what you said - that the Lord was emphasizing her marriage to Uriah since David is the one who destroyed that. Good points in your whole post. :thumbs:

    And Ed, thanks for the insight on her name not really being a proper name. I never knew that. That certainly gives an insight into this. :applause:

    I really am learning from this - this is how I wish all the threads would go!
     
  9. Humblesmith

    Humblesmith
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with Scarlett. She didn't have much of a choice, given that David was king.
     
  10. Joe

    Joe
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    0
    With Scarlettes way of thinking, this means we can't use Bathsheba as an example of redemption from the sin of adultery, as churches often do. That appears good and bad.
    As christians we can offer hope to adulterers yet it can also be used as an excuse. A few co-workers of mine feel adultery isn't the unpardonable sin, using Bathsheba as proof. Both say God forgave Bathsheba because David was a man after God's own heart. God was more upset with the killing of her husband.
    This is their reasoning to continue sinning (for now). I appreciate this thread and will look into it further.
     
  11. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,836
    Likes Received:
    115
    Adultery isn't the unpardonable sin. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the unpardonable sin.

    They are wrong.

    If that's true, then God plays favorites and swept Bathsheba's sin under the rug because David was his "pet project". God doesn't sweep anyone's sin under the rug.

    Sin make God sick to His stomach and God cannot be in the presence of sin.

    God did not even forgive David because of David being a man after God's own heart. Many people completely misunderstand what it means when the bible calls David "a man after God's own heart." Many feel it mean that David was some sort of morally superior man. Not true.

    David had problems. BIG problems. More problems that you will ever hear preached about in church. He wasn't the soft and gentle little boy tiptoeing through the sheep, writing praise songs. That's not what made him a man after God's own heart.

    He was totally governed by his passions, both physical and emotional. He was a horribly neglectful father. He died pathetic and weak.

    What makes David a man after God's own heart and someone that we should emulate was the fact that whenever God convicted him of his sin, he immediately was repentant. For example:

    • When Nathan told the story of the little pet sheep (Bathsheba) that was so dear to the heart of it's master (Uriah) and explained the vileness of the man who took it (David) and killed it for food when he had a whole herd of sheep to choose from (David's other wives), David, at first, didn't know it was a story about himself. But he listened to Nathan and when Nathan very angrily exposed David for a vile sinner and told him that God was going to punish him greatly, he was immediately repentant, to the point that he had a broken spirit. He never questioned God's wrath nor God's punishment. He only begged God to give him a clean heart (Psalm 51).
    • When David and his men were famished and needed something to eat and they came upon Nabal's house and asked for something to be sent to them to eat, Nabal sent only a sarcastic remark..."Who is this David....I don't know any son of Jesse. Why should I help some stranger?" David flew into such a rage that he was preparing to kill not only Nabal, but as he very graphically describes it in the King James Version, "anything that pisseth against a wall"......implying that he was going to kill every man, boy, male servant, and male animal. Just because one man was rude and hurled an insult and wounded his pride, David was going to slaughter innocent people, children, and animals. When Nabal's wife, Abagail meets David in the field with food and tried to sway him from killing the innocent, David listened to her and praised God for sending her his way and stopping him from senseless killings.
    • When David, beginning with himself and continuing through his people raised all of the insane amounts of wealth to build God's Temple, David spent much time in praise to God and asking God to bless his people. David wanted so despertely to build a House for God. God told David that He was not going to allow David to build the Temple because David had too much in his past that tainted him. David was content with God's decision. He acknowledge his own sinful state. And Solomon built the temple.
    Being a man after God's own heart doesn't mean that David didn't sin as much as everyone else, because his life was full of terrible mistakes. BIG mistakes. Mistakes that costs those around him their very lives, souls, and personal happiness.

    Being a man after God's own heart means that David was submissive to God to the point that whenever God had to chasten him or discipline him, he welcomed it and rejoiced in the fact that God loved him enough to correct him. He acknowledged his sinful ways and allowed God to work in his heart.

    That reasoning is faulty.

    The adultery is what led to the killing of her husband. David not being where he was supposed to be in the first place led to the adultery.

    Sinful acts are sometimes create a domino-effect. One domino isn't more powerful than the other. They each knock over the next one.

    Yes, God was upset with the killing of Uriah. But that in no way by any stretch of the imagination overshadows His wrath over the adultery.

    God doesn't play favorites with people. God doesn't play dominos with sin.

    God doesn't play.......period.
     
    #11 Scarlett O., Dec 30, 2006
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2006
  12. Joe

    Joe
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Scarlett,

    Thanks for the information. My co-workers (actually they just share an office nearby in the building, but I call them that) also feel blasphemy is THE unpardonable sin, as you do. My wording isn't the best at times, sorry for the misunderstanding. Your information and knowledge really helps. I enjoy your posts!
     
  13. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scarlett,
    what you said about David is also what Ive been taught, and what Ive seen studying. We don't see it put that way often. Good posts!


    Ed,

    not that it really matters, but isn't saying "Bathsheba" isn't her given name the same as claiming that "Johnson" couldn't be a given name because it means "John's Son"? I mean it could have been a naming style to name a daughter after the father in that fashion, right?
     
    #13 bapmom, Dec 30, 2006
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2006
  14. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    We all could be right, in a way. I believe we find so many answers in scripture. On this one I go to the same Psalm, 51. Verse 9 tells me God answered the prayers of David. "Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities." We see her name never mentioned again after she dies. I believe here God points us to Uriah, a servant of His King to be remembered. In this way she, Bathsheba, is also kept in mind however for she is to be known as wife of Uriah. We cannot separate the head and the body, brought together by "blood". Jesus said male and female He made us, and we become one flesh when we marry, and that "first marriage" is by blood, and they are one flesh, and no man is to put asunder.

    Along these lines it is interesting other scripture seems to point also to this. II Samuel 12:15. " And Nathan departed unto his house. And the Lord struck the child that Uriah's wife bare unto David, and it was very sick." Men can "marry", and make "wives", but God requires "blood", and evidently Bathsheba was the "virgin" wife of Uriah. She will always, as with all women, remain forever the "wife" of the one who brings forth "blood".
     
  15. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have always taken this to mean in God's eyes, she was still Uriah's wife or should I say, God never acknowledged her marriage to David.

    If I steal a car, is it my car or does it really still belong to the owner?

    Their first child died because God was displeased but we all know Solomon ruled during the "golden age" of the nation.
     
  16. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    You couild be right, yet "What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh", I Cor. 6:16.
    Then we agree with scripture. The owner was gone for a while and a neighbor took her for a spin. She wasn't stolen as they only took a joy ride, returned to her own place. She has a "vin" number just like a car and it is Uriah.
    Amen! Solomon was appointed and allowed to build the Temple, for David had shed too much Blood.
     
  17. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ro 7:3*So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

    1Co 7:39*The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

    I kind of see it this a way, her Husband was dead so she may have been ok. But David we know was guilty of Murder for if you think your Brother dead etc...

    Now if I order a hit on a womans Husband to satisfy this law, is this law satisfied?
    Doesn't God deal with the heart?
    I suspect He'd see though this shi-nola.... :laugh:
     
  18. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    As said, you and I seem to agree, but it is for different reasons. David should have left well enough alone. They had their one illicit affair, and he paid dearly for what all was in his heart.
     

Share This Page

Loading...