“Moral courage is higher and a rarer virtue than physical courage” (William Joseph Slim).
The Bible contains many examples of people who acted courageously. I think of examples such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Daniel and his three friends in Babylon, and many others, including the prophets of the Lord. One of the prophets that exuded courage was Nathan. This prophet may not have written a book of the Bible, but we might say he “wrote the book on courage,” so to speak. The reason is as follows.
Imagine a scenario where your boss has just committed a very serious crime, and not a victimless one. You have knowledge of the crime and are tasked with confronting him. Would it not be easier to just “let things slide” or “sweep things under the rug?” Might there be repercussions if you say something? But it would be morally wrong to ignore the responsibility of confronting sin. Nathan found himself in just such a situation.
Second Samuel chapter 11 tells of when David committed sin after sin involving the beautiful (but married) woman Bathsheba. After gazing upon her from his rooftop as she bathed, David 1) enquired about her, 2) was told that she was a married woman, 3) pursued her anyway by having her brought to him, 4) committed adultery with her, 5) tried to cover his sin up by bringing her husband (Uriah) home from battle, even 6) getting Uriah drunk as part of his scheme. When Uriah honorably refused to be with his wife, David then 7) murdered Uriah by having him put on the front lines and intentionally cut off from the rest of the troops. The story has the makings of a best-selling true crime novel, but it really happened.
Enter Nathan the prophet. In 2 Samuel chapter 12, God tasked Nathan with confronting David for his egregious list of sins. We will examine that confrontation in a moment, but think about the stakes of this confrontation from Nathan’s point of view. What if, after being confronted, David had exclaimed to Nathan “off with his head!” in a fit of rage? Even though this would have been further sin on David’s part, David as king certainly had the power to do so. He also had a conscience that was so seared that he had already killed one man, so it is not unreasonable to conclude that this was in the realm of possibility.
Perhaps that is why what follows in 2 Samuel 12 is so remarkable. Through inspiration, Nathan picked the perfect method for confronting David – using a parable to veil the identity of the true offender until David’s wrath could be provoked, and then “laying it on him” that he was the real offender! It is a brilliant method, for it removed the possibility of arguing with the facts of guilt.
The parable was as follows:
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 Sam. 12:1-4).
Without applying the facts of the parable to himself, David in his wrath pronounced the death penalty and fourfold restitution upon the offender (v. 5-6). This is when the story reaches a crescendo: “Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man!” (v. 7a). In subsequent verses, Nathan continued to rebuke David, and to David’s credit (because he was a man after God’s own heart), David promptly repented, simply stating “I have sinned against the Lord” (v. 13).
What would have happened if this unsung prophet of the Lord had not had the courage to confront this powerful king? We can only imagine, but Nathan’s example of courage in proclaiming truth should remind all (especially those who preach) of the seriousness of confronting sin when it is present.