A few clarifications about my last post:
1) I wrote it before the previous two posts went up – it seems that I was incorrect about what thechoiceismine meant.
2) Only the first two paragraphs were specifically addressed to writersoul.
3) ????? ?????? ???? should be ????? ??????? ????
4) I didn’t really explain the Gemara in Kesubos and what I was doing with it. So here goes: R’ Elazar says that a woman becomes assur to her husband if she was warned about and was then secluded with another man (????? ??????), just like in the ???? ???? of David and Batsheva. The Gemara questions this since in the ???? ???? there was no ????? ?????? and Batsheva didn’t become assur to her husband. The Gemara proceeds to clarify what R’ Elazar actually said and then asks why l’maaseh didn’t Batsheva become assur to her husband. The Gemara answers that Batsheva was taken unwillingly. The Gemara offers an alternative answer that Batsheva was not an eishes ish since Uriah gave her a some type of get before going to war. The first answer definitely seems to be assuming that she was an eishes ish, just that an eishes ish who is taken unwillingly does not become assur to her husband. The Chelkas Mechokek (and the Rashash as well) use this answer as the halachic source that an eishes ish does not become assur to her husband if taken unwillingly. This can only be a source if Batsheva was actually an eishes ish. (The Chelkas Mechokek grants that the Gemara gave an alternative answer but that the halacha of the first answer is still true.) I haven’t seen any mefarshim use this Gemara against the Gemara in Shabbos (although I have seen people say this – but not people who qualify as mefarshim).
5) The Abarbanel’s main point is that the Gemara in Shabbos is completely against what it actually says in the pesukim.