5 Women of the Bible Who Are Overly Sexualized

Shutterstock.com

Sexual immorality is one of the most commonly addressed sins in the Bible. Adulterers and prostitutes make many appearances in various Bible stories, and there are many cautionary tales of what happened to those who strayed outside of what was considered to be acceptable sexual conduct. These sexual sins are most commonly associated with women, and perhaps the most damning label that can be applied to any Biblical character is that of “temptress.”

While there are certainly a number of true “temptresses” in the Bible, there are also many righteous and honorable women. Unfortunately, many of these women are called seductresses and painted with the same brush as Potiphar’s lustful wife or the lying Jezebel. So, why are these righteous women painted as such sexually immoral creatures? A large part of the answer is that times have changed. What was once considered to be perfectly acceptable is now frowned upon. This may seem odd to consider when talking about sex because, as everyone knows, inhibitions about sex have certainly been lessened since Biblical times.

The issues about cultural misunderstanding do not necessarily have to do with the loosened restraints on sex but instead pertain to the cultural context that surrounds sex and marriage. The rules and laws about both were very different in ancient Israel. Since the writers and readers of the early Bible knew these laws they did not feel the need to lay out the context that all readers would already have. They were writing for their current audience, not those who would come 2,000 years later. As such, some of the context has been lost, and a number of virtuous women have been misconstrued as sexually immoral beings. Here are five women of the Bible who are overly sexualized when they were actually righteous women.

Tamar

Public Domain

Tamar is often portrayed as a prostitute, but she was actually an honorable and righteous woman. She appears in Genesis as the daughter-in-law of Judah. Tamar marries Judah’s oldest son, but he dies prematurely. When this happens, a man’s brother is supposed to marry the widow and raise her children as his brother’s in accordance with Israelite law. Judah’s second son tells Judah he will marry Tamar, but then he carefully avoids getting her pregnant.

After Judah’s second son dies as well, Judah blames Tamar for his sons’ deaths. He tells her that she will marry his youngest son when he comes of age as is proper by law, but Judah has no intention of allowing the two to wed. When Tamar gets wind of Judah’s plan, she takes matters into her own hands.

Under Israelite law, if a dead man does not have a brother or his brother refuses to marry his widow, the widow would marry her father-in-law. Tamar knows this law and uses it to uphold both her honor and the honor of her dead husbands. She does not so much trick Judah into sleeping with her as she does trick him into following the law and keeping his word. Judah himself recognizes that she was the honorable one after the fact when he says, “She is righteous. I am not.” Given the surrounding passages, it is possible Tamar saved Judah from more than just losing face. The Bible states that God killed Judah’s older two sons because they refused to do their duty to the family. Had Tamar not acted, what would have become of Judah?

Eve

Shutterstock.com

Eve is often seen as the original temptress. She alone is blamed for the fall of humanity and the birth of the original sin. Somehow, these accusations have also become tangled up in the idea of sexual immorality. That said, Eve is not actually responsible for any of these things.

Adam is with Eve when she is tempted by the serpent. The story of Genesis itself says that “[Eve] took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband who was with her.” Adam stands beside Eve and hears the snake’s lies. He could have walked away. He could have told Eve not to listen. He could have refused the fruit. Instead, Adam is just as entranced by the snake’s lies as Eve, she simply happens to be the one standing closer to the tree and able to reach the fruit easier. Eve does not seduce Adam into taking the fruit and joining her in sin. He is beside her every step of the way.

Mary Magdalene

Public Domain

Somehow, Mary Magdalene has become synonymous with prostitute. When most Christians hear her name they envision a repentant prostitute, a sexually immoral woman who repents of her sins and begins to follow Christ. This, however, is not the background of the Mary Magdalene that is in the Bible. The story of “Mary Magdalene the prostitute” comes from a sermon by Pope Gregory the Great in 591 A.D., and the myth was continued for centuries. The vision of Mary Magdalene as a repentant prostitute continues to be the prevailing image, even after Pope John Paul II corrected the official record and tried to set the predominate vision of Mary Magdalene straight. Given that most people still associate Mary Magdalene with prostitution, Pope John Paul was unsuccessful.

Far from being a former prostitute, Mary Magdalene was actually a righteous woman and was partially responsible for the care and support of Jesus and the Apostles. She, and several other women, provided the daily, material and monetary necessities to Jesus and the Apostles. This is hardly something a repentant whore would have been financially capable of doing.

Bathsheba

Public Domain

Bathsheba is another woman who is automatically associated with sexual immorality and seduction. In reality, Bathsheba probably wanted nothing to do with the events that gave her the reputation of a temptress. Bathsheba is known for “seducing” David, but based on the text and the cultural norms of ancient Israel, it would be more accurate to say that David raped Bathsheba.

The story of David’s obsession with Bathsheba begins when he sees her bathing. This is often interpreted today to mean that Bathsheba was standing outside naked. “Bathe” in ancient Hebrew, though, can mean anything from full body bathing to a person washing their hands. Given the cultural suppression of feminine sexuality at the time, it is more likely that Bathsheba was washing her hands or face. David liked what he saw and wanted to see more. Furthermore, David sends multiple messengers to bring Bathsheba to him. She does not go to him and seduce him. Her king, who holds complete power over all the Israelites, then takes her to his bedchamber. Given the times, what choice did Bathsheba have but to allow David to rape her? Who would dare interrupt the king, especially such a warrior as David?

The Samaritan Woman

Public Domain

The Samaritan woman by the well is victim of much the same unnecessary sexualization as Mary Magdalene. Like Mary Magdalene, modern interpreters assume that the Samaritan woman was an adulteress or a serial divorcee due to the number of husbands she had in the past. This interpretation, however, makes little sense when examined in the context of the culture of the ancient Middle East.

In the ancient Middle East, a woman could not ask for a divorce. Instead, she had to request the intervention of a male relative. If the Samaritan woman was a serial divorcee, she would have successfully talked a brother, uncle or her father into intervening on her behalf five separate times. That would be an impressive gift of persuasion, but it is highly unlikely. Instead, the Samaritan woman was probably a widow several times over. Mortality rates were high in the ancient world, and remarriage was common. Israelite law, for example, required that a man marry his brother’s widow. Given that women often married younger than men, it was more common for a widow to remarry than a widower. As such, it is reasonable to assume that the Samaritan woman outlived several older husbands, and the current man had not given her the dowry document that formalized marriage. This would render her a concubine, a position common in the ancient world, or she could have been his second, and less loved, wife.

The interpretation that she was an adulteress is even more unlikely. The Samaritan woman has been married repeatedly. Assuming she was a serial adulteress would mean that four men married a woman known to stray from her husband. This is extremely unlikely given the importance placed on knowing a child’s paternity in an age before DNA testing. Also, adulterers were normally executed, and the Samaritan woman is clearly still alive and healthy.