Subscription Lists

Nathan – A Prophet; Not a Yes Man (2 of 3)

Focus Text: 2 Samuel 12

From a human perspective, the major players were David, Bathsheba, and Nathan. In the story itself, Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, was but an object that had to be removed in order for King David to have his way with Bathsheba. From a larger perspective, God was an important but undesired aspect of the story. David had wanted to completely forget about God as the plot unfolded but God was not about to forget about David, or Bathsheba, or Uriah, or Nathan.

It happened like this: David wanted Bathsheba for himself in spite of the fact that she was Uriah’s wife. In order to have his way, David arranged to have Uriah killed in a manner that would make it appear that he was a wartime casualty. His plan worked and all seemed to be well; the king had a means to gain Bathsheba and no one was the wiser; just one dead Hittite was the only casualty and he was replaceable – or at least that was what David thought.

Then God entered the picture and sent Nathan to David. God gave Nathan a parable and Nathan in turn told David the story. “There were two men in one city, one rich and the other poor. The rich man had exceedingly many flocks and herds. But the poor man had nothing, except one little ewe lamb which he had bought and nourished; and it grew up together with him and with his children. It ate of his own food and drank from his own cup and lay in his bosom; and it was like a daughter to him. And a traveler came to the rich man, who refused to take from his own flock and from his own herd to prepare one for the wayfaring man who had come to him; but he took the poor man’s lamb and prepared it for the man who had come to him.” (2 Samuel 12.1-4).

David reacted with indignation toward the rich man who took the poor man’s family lamb; “As the LORD lives, the man who has done this shall surely die! And he shall restore fourfold for the lamb, because he did this thing and because he had no pity.” (2 Samuel 12.5-6). Unwittingly, David condemned his own actions. “Then Nathan said to David, ‘You are the man! Thus says the LORD God of Israel: I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that had been too little, I also would have given you much more! Why have you despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in His sight? You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon.’” (2 Samuel 12.-7-9).

One man was already dead in order to satisfy the fleshly appetites of King David; what would another person or two be? Yet, in spite of the possible danger, Nathan had the courage to stand in David’s face and say boldly, “You are the man!” The point being made here is not about David or about his subsequent penitent attitude, but rather, it is about the tremendous courage of convictions that must have typified Nathan the prophet. What a man, what courage, and what conviction it took for Nathan to speak the truth in this circumstance. May all God’s messengers, prophets or no, have the moral conviction to do as Nathan did! Speak as the oracles of God!

Questions:

1. Why did David have Uriah killed? Be specific? What sinful attitudes were involved?

2. What was David’s reaction to Nathan’s parable?

3. What specific application did Nathan make of the parable? How did David react?

4. On Nathan’s part, what characteristics are demonstrated by this story?

"Today's Little Lift" from Jim Bullington

No Harm, No Foul (12-17-10)