Well, and the providence of God that He rules over every detail of life can be a motivation for holiness. And we're going to be seeing a part of God's providence in 2 Samuel chapter 12. Hear the word of God. Then the Lord sent Nathan to David, and he came to him and said to him, 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 would come to him, but he took the poor man's lamb and prepared it for the man who would come to him. So David's anger was greatly aroused against the man. And he said to Nathan, 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. 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. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. Thus says the Lord. Behold, I will raise up adversity against you from your own house, and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor. And he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this son, for you did it secretly. But I will do this thing before all Israel, before the son." So David said to Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. When Nathan said to David, the Lord also has put away your sin, you shall not die. However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who was born to you shall surely die. Then Nathan departed to his house. Father God, we thank you for your word and we pray that it would do its work in our hearts. In the name of Jesus, we pray this, amen. One of my favorite scriptures is that love covers a multitude of sins. I think that's where God's emphasis lies. Can you imagine how difficult it would be if God in an instant, you know, wanted us to change all of our sins? He wanted us confronted with everything. We would be totally undone. Instead, God patiently over the course of our lifetime works on various areas of character. And I believe God wants us to have the same patience with each other. Now it's true that the sign, Be Patient, God is not finished with me yet, has been abused by people. It's been used by people to justify absolutely no growth in their lives and to try to get people off their backs, but it's still a great sign. And I think it's one of the reasons why Peter says, love covers a multitude of sins. But another reason that love covers a multitude of sins is that not every sin is equally serious. And we'll look at that a little bit later on. But there do come times in your life when you absolutely cannot overlook the sin in another person's life because it is so serious. You have to have a Nathan moment. And we're going to be looking at what that looks like. In fact, under Roman numeral I, I'm going to be giving you some of the reasons why it might be appropriate when love should not cover over those sins. And the first indicator that it is appropriate is when you see a person who is arrogantly and willfully sinning. And we saw already in the previous sermons that this was definitely the case with David. But let's look at what the law has to say about this. Numbers 15 verse 30 says, the person who does anything presumptuously, and some versions have defiantly, literally it's anyone who sins with a high hand, shall be cut off from among his people. In other words, love does not cover over that kind of sin. Now Hebrews 10, 26 through 27 comments on that verse and says, for if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation. In other words, God treats willful, arrogant sins much more seriously than sins that flow from the weakness of our human nature, but which we repent of, or sins that flow out of ignorance. Those of you who watched the Godfather series may remember the baptism scene in one of the movies where Michael Corleone is acting as a godfather for a baptism of his namesake. Michael Ficci I think is the guy's name, the baby's name. And the priest is talking to Michael Corleone and asking him to take vows on behalf of the baby. I guess that's the way that church does it there. And the priest says to Michael, do you renounce Satan? And while he's saying that, the screen flashes to scenes of Michael Corleone's henchmen killing off various of his enemies. And he affirms during that scene, yes, that he does renounce Satan. And the priest continues, and all of his works. And it flashes to scenes where others are being killed. And Michael affirms, yes, that he renounces Satan in all of his works. And then the priest says, Michael Ricci, go in peace, and may the Lord be with you. Amen. Okay, that is sinning with a high hand. And it's not how big the sin is or how small the sin is, but it's willfully, arrogantly sinning with a high hand that Hebrews says there remains no more sacrifice for sins. You're not gonna have those sins covered over. Now, we gotta keep in mind the distinction that we made last week between The person who is justified and secure forever because of his righteousness of Christ imputed to him. And then the house rules of a father who is fed up with his child. He's not going to be overlooking this anymore. There's not this patience with these kinds of sins. So you've got to keep that distinction in mind. Okay, here's a second question that is worth asking. Is the sin this person is engaged in going to hurt someone else irreparably? Now, obviously, David hurt Uriah irreparably. He hurt Bathsheba irreparably. And you simply cannot overlook sins that are doing severe damage to other believers. Third question, has he fallen so low that he now despises God's law? Take a look at verse nine. Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord to do evil in His sight? Okay, so that would be a situation in which you would have to bring a Nathan moment. Now let me read from the law again, Numbers 15, 30 through 31 that says, when you despise God's law, this is not something that you can overlook, that you can cover over. It says, But the person who does anything presumptuously, whether he is native born or a stranger, that one brings reproach on the Lord, and he shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has despised the word of the Lord, and has broken his commandment, that person shall be completely cut off, his guilt shall be upon him." Well, if despising God's law is a good reason for bringing a Nathan moment, I would say most of the church in America deserves to have a Nathan moment brought to them. I am just absolutely flabbergasted at the attitudes that Christians have to the law of God. I mean, even in this past year, I've argued with a couple of pastors with regard to the law of God. And one of the pastors said, I reject the law of God, the Old Testament. He didn't say law of God. I reject the Old Testament. And I'm wondering, how in the world? I mean, it just makes me cringe when I hear people make statements like this, but he says, no, I'm a New Testament believer. And I said, no, you're not a New Testament believer because Paul says that you need to be following the Old Testament. And Christ said, man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. But in any case, when people despise God's law, express hatred for God's law, God's offended. And we ought not to be covering over such sins. If we love that person, we need to confront them and we need to know how to do it properly. And here's a fourth question. Is what he is doing harmfully evil? The Hebrew word for evil, I've put it in your bulletins there, that's given in verse 9, it can mean just evil in general. But it's frequently used, for example, even of wild animals who tear and destroy. But it's also used of evil that's extremely harmful. And I believe that's the case here. And the reason I believe it's the case here is because David had sins before that were not confronted as seriously. But this was so heinous, this was so serious, that it had to be dealt with. And so this gives a hint that we need to make distinctions with regard to laws. I won't give you all the scriptures that are in my notes here, but the scripture speaks of the least of these commandments in Matthew 5. It speaks of greater commandments. In Matthew 12, it speaks of the greatest commandments. So if there is variations in the law from least to greatest, there's going to be variations in sin. And you see exactly that. I've got scriptures here that speak of sin, great sins, greater sin, exceedingly great sin. And to treat the least of these commandments, which is a reference to Mother Bird and her young, on the same level as fornication would be ludicrous. They're obviously quite different. To treat a sin of ignorance or a sin that a person hates and keeps falling into on the same level as a very willful sin, again, is not following the Scriptures very carefully. So I'm just saying that not all sins are worthy of an eighth and moment. Now here's a fifth potential diagnostic question. Is your David engaged in a crime? Verse 9 lists two sins that David did that were considered crimes in the Old Testament, adultery and murder. And adultery should still be a crime. It used to be in the States, but it no longer is. And if you are covering over in the name of love a crime, you are distorting love, okay? Crimes may not be covered over. Now I'm talking about a biblical definition of a crime, not some humanistically made up definition of a crime. And these servants may or may not have been guilty of covering over a crime, but certainly God did not want Nathan to overlook it. Okay, the sixth test. is the sin destructive to the family. Now, obviously, David's sin was. I mean, the impact upon his children was unbelievable. The impact upon his other wives would have been very, very negative as well. And there are many other sins that impact the family negatively. We looked at that in 1 Samuel chapter 25. And by the way, This passage doesn't say everything that could be said about a Nathan moment. 1 Samuel 25 we looked at a number of principles that relate to this as well. If you're a person under authority like Abigail was, your Nathan moment might look more like Abigail's than like Nathan's. But anyway, you take those two passages together and I think you've got a fairly full picture of how to bring a Nathan moment. Seventh question, this is from verse 10. Is this negatively impacting others who are not involved in the sin? And we could say with David, obviously, it went way beyond negatively impacting Bathsheba and Uriah. It negatively impacted his children. Actually, it negatively impacted the kingdom as a whole. Eighth question. Has he shown that he despises the Lord or despises the Lord's conviction? If you look at verse 10, It says, because you have despised me. Now, David may not have thought that he was despising the Lord, but when he despised God's law, when he despised the Holy Spirit's conviction, and all you have to do is read Psalm 32, which was written right around this period of time, you'll see, wow, he did despise the convictions of the Holy Spirit. He just was resisting, resisting, resisting for eight months at least, we know. It actually would have been almost nine months, wouldn't it, that he resisted the Holy Spirit. And he showed that he really did not appreciate the incredible generosity of the Lord. So those are the ways in which he showed that he despised the Lord. And so we're not talking about the ordinary sins that flow from the weakness of the human heart. We're talking about a hardened heart here. Last question, will this sin cause a bad testimony for the church or cause people to blaspheme God? In other words, to be a bad testimony to God Himself. Verse 14 says, however, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who was born to you shall surely die. And the scripture that I read from Numbers 15 talks about the bad testimony being brought to the church, to Christianity in general, and to God's name. So if the church's reputation is going to be destroyed, if God's reputation is going to be destroyed, I think that's a pretty good reason for bringing a Nathan moment into somebody's life. And if there's no repentance when you bring the Nathan moment, then you move up to the other stages of Matthew 18 discipline. Our book of Church Discipline, which is basically the PCA's, says, "...the exercise of discipline is highly important and necessary. In its proper usage, discipline maintains the glory of God, the purity of His church, the keeping and reclaiming of disobedient sinners." So you can see we don't discipline for every little sin. Love covers over a multitude of sins. But sometimes Matthew 18 discipline has to take place and it usually takes place, not with elders, usually it takes place according to Matthew 18 where one believer confronts another believer over their sin. And if there's repentance that has happened, we elders don't even hear about it. That's the body loving on one another. That's where the bulk of discipline takes place. And an elder, obviously, can be the first one to initiate if he's a witness to the particular sin that's going on there. But ordinarily, it's believers confronting other believers, which means every one of you needs to have some instruction on how to properly, lovingly, graciously, effectively, how to bring a Nathan moment into the lives of other people. And the goal, of course, is repentance and restoration. Now the first thing that I would point out, this is Roman numeral 2.a, first thing that I would point out is that we should really make sure that God wants us to go. Verse 1 says, Then the Lord sent Nathan to David. And we saw last week it was God's love that sent him. Now a lot of times when Christians confront each other over sins, you find that it's pride that sent them, not the Lord. you know, or if it's not pride that sent them, it's maybe bitterness that sends them to give that rebuke, or it may be envy, or judgmentalism, or insecurity, or frustration, or other sins. Those are not good reasons to be bringing a Nathan moment into the life of another believer. We've got to have a God-centered perspective. In fact, that's why Galatians 6 says we need to make sure we're being spiritual ourselves before we restore a fallen brother. It's so easy to have all kinds of sins mixed up. So it says in Galatians 6, those of you who are spiritual, we need to examine ourselves lest we also be tempted before we restore a brother. So easy for sin to actually make a Nathan moment ineffective because our motives are wrong. Christ said, take the plank out of your own eye before you take the speck out of your brother's eye. And I believe the reason for that is so that we can see clearly to be able to bring God's judgment and not our own. And that's point B. The second principle seen in verse one is that you must make sure that you're bringing God's word and not simply your own opinion, okay? The way Jesus worded it in Matthew 7 is judge not that you be not judged. we must never bring our own judgment. Never. Instead, John 7 verse 24 commands us to bring God's righteous judgment by bringing the Word of God. After all, it's God's Word that's sharper than any two-edged sword. Not your judgment, right? Not your opinions. Verse 1 says that the Lord sent Nathan, and Psalm 51 clarifies that it's Nathan the prophet. And then you might say, oh, good, that lets me off the hook because I'm not a prophet. I don't like confronting people. No, you're not let off the hook, believe me, because God has given you this book so that you will be able to bring the prophetic word into each other's lives. It's a responsibility of every believer to be exhorting one another since the days are evil, says Hebrews. And so we're not off the hook. 2 Peter 1 says we have the prophetic word and he's referring to the Bible there. You have in your hands everything you need to bring a Nathan moment effectively and very powerfully into the life of another believer. Because Romans 16 calls this what? The prophetic scriptures. Okay? So when you bring the word of God, you're bringing prophecy into people's lives. This is why 1 Peter 4 11 commands ordinary believers, if anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God. That's an amazing verse because an oracle was a mouthpiece of God. It's like you're being a prophet when you bring these scriptures into the lives of other people. And you're acting as his mouthpiece. Your words are not more powerful than any two-edged sword, but when you are willing to bring God's word to bear, which is God's judgment, not your own, all of a sudden your words have the potential of having the same power that Nathan's prophetic words had in the life of David. And you know one of the advantages of bringing a Nathan moment as the oracles of God is that the person cannot accuse you of judging them. Now, they probably still will accuse you, but you can say, hey, I'm not judging you, brother. It's God's word that is judging you here. Listen, both of us stand under the authority of God's word. We've both got to be in submission to God's word. I'm simply bringing God's judgment. I'm not judging you, okay? So you can say that. So if there's a person who's sleeping around and you're confronting this person Don't simply say, you know, I'm really troubled over what you're doing. Or you might get in trouble with the church if you continue doing this. That's a man-centered reason. No, what you need to do is give God's reason why He needs to repent. Here's what God says to you. And when you bring God's word, then you don't need to be apologetic about it. If all you're bringing is your values and your judgments and your opinions, yeah, you might need to be apologetic, especially if a majority stands against you. But if you're bringing God's words, those words will carry weight whether people respect you or not. God's word will do a powerful work in that person's life. And so to repeat 1 Peter 4, 11, if anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God. Because you have the prophetic scriptures, every believer has the potential of bringing a Nathan moment every bit as powerful as Nathan's moment did. Okay, third thing that will make a Nathan moment more likely be effective is if you bring it face to face rather than via email. Verse 1 says about Nathan, and he came to him. He came to him. You know, it's very easy for email dialogues to take on a life of their own and begin to be misinterpreted and end up making the mess even bigger than it was before and not anything that you intended it to be. And it's also easy for people to not only misunderstand, but even if you've communicated very clearly with an email or with a snail mail letter, it's very easy for that person to initially be shocked but then to begin to think of ways and have the time to come up with excuses, cover his tracks, and come up with a good cover story, right? Very easy for that to happen. But if you are coming to him face to face, number one, you're not going to be as misunderstood because you can read the body language, you can clarify if there's misunderstandings, you can talk back and forth. It's easier for the recipient to see that you really do care about him. And so personal presence, I think, usually is more powerful. And I would say even when you're bringing a Nathan moment to a politician, it's usually much more powerful when you can do that face-to-face or over the phone. I'm not against emails. I use emails all the time and it's better than it's better than nothing But I'm just saying there's probably a reason that most of the Nathan moments that you examine from Genesis through to Revelation Starting with Genesis chapter 3 are not a letter being sent. It's face-to-face communication Okay, third thing that we see is A, B, C, D. Fourth thing that we see is that Nathan sought to connect with David's heart. And he did so in a number of ways. He used a word picture. Word pictures communicate so much more. I think they help us to connect a lot of times on an, not just an intellectual, but on an emotional level as well. They help to capture the imagination. That's one of the reasons why people say that a picture is worth a thousand words. There's so many dynamics that can be communicated with a picture that you can't otherwise. Second, he caught David off guard by drawing out David's sympathies for another person and then comparing the two. And that was a very powerful technique. But I think, thirdly and most importantly, He appealed to presuppositions that David already held to in order to convict David. It's a presuppositional approach to confrontation. By the way, those of you who I like to study apologetics. I can summarize very quickly for you. Point B is the part of apologetics where it says, do not answer a man according to his folly, lest you become like him, right? You've got to ground everything that you say in the word of God. But point D is the second part of apologetics. Answer a man according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes, I think is the way that that says it. And so on David's own fiercely held principles, he was guilty. He's basically tricking David into agreeing with the very presuppositions needed to change him. So let's start going through these fairly quickly. Verse one, and he came to him and said to him, there were two men in one city and he's setting things up so that David is gonna make a judicial decision against one person and for another person. He's wanting David to exercise his thinking on justice. One rich and the other poor. Biblical law over and over established there could not be favoritism for the rich or for the poor. The rich man had exceedingly many flocks and herds, but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb. So now David's beginning to think, okay, Nathan's gonna be asking me on a property decision. Something's happened to property and I've gotta make a judicial decision on this. But Nathan adds some heart strings. issues as he presents his case before David makes his judgment. He says, except one little ewe lamb which he had bought and nourished. And they 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 was like a daughter to him. Perhaps he's giving the idea, okay, this lamb has, mother has died. And this is basically a family pet. The whole family loved this pet and hung around it. So there's a little bit of heartstrings and it's a kind of story I think David as a shepherd could have appreciated. 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 would come to him. But he took the poor man's lamb and prepared it for the man who would come to him. So here is a clear-cut case of theft that he has presented before him. And what makes it so egregious is that he's taken this poor man's only possession. So Nathan lays out the story for David. In effect, he's saying, I'm appealing to you for a judgment. He's getting David to say what his presuppositions are, and that's point E. If the conclusion of guilt comes from David's own mouth, it's going to be a lot harder for David to backtrack or continue his habit of covering his sin. And for those of you who are engaged in debates, I think this is a technique you just need to lay hold of. Too frequently, we get excited about the conclusion. We want to jump to the conclusion. And if you jump to the conclusion and you don't make the other person frame that in his own words, he can just deny it without giving any of the reasons why he is denying it. Instead, ask enough questions that the other person has to audibly state the principles that will prove your argument. let them affirm the conclusion, or at least affirm the steps that would lead to that conclusion. And I think it's pretty obvious from Rodney's talk earlier, and from the talk I gave two weeks ago, this tendency of the human flesh to cover over our sins is so strong, you've gotta use every sharp technique at your disposal to keep people from continuing to cover those sins, okay? So that's what he's basically doing. Once David affirms the guilt over here, Whoa, he's gonna have almost an impossible time backtracking and saying, well, I'm not guilty, and his situation would be the same. Okay, verses five through seven. So David's anger was greatly aroused against the man. And this is an odd psychological phenomenon that guilty people are frequently outraged over the guilt of others. I mean, you've probably seen it many, many times. Anyway, his emotional declaration serves Nathan's purpose. He said to Nathan, as the Lord lives, the man who has done this shall surely die. Now, I don't agree with that translation because I think it contradicts the next words that come out of David's mouth, which is not a judicial declaration he's going to die, but that he's going to pay a fourfold restitution. But I do admit this is an extremely hotly debated Hebrew phrase, and there is differing views, three differing views. on exactly what it means. And so what I want to do very quickly is say, okay, what would be the implications on each of these different translations? If the New King James translation is correct and he says, okay, this guy is going to be put to death, then what it would show is that David has a grossly distorted sense of justice at this point in his life because theft never deserves the death penalty. Now, if this is the correct translation, then it really does reflect what we see in human nature many, many times where people who cover their own sins have a distorted sense of other people's sins. They can be overly lax with this person's sins, overly harsh with another person's sins. It completely messes up our concepts of judgment. So that'd be the implication if the New King James Version is right. Others translate it, he deserves to die. Some commentators say that David isn't really giving a judicial judgment here. He gives the judicial judgment in verse 6, but in verse 5, he's basically giving an emotional outburst. He ought to be shot, you know, is what one commentator said. That's possible, you know, that he's making an emotional outburst that he's not planning on carrying through on. I still am skeptical of that. The third interpretation is just to translate it literally. Literally it means, he is a son of death, which some commentators say is equivalent to saying, wow, he is not acting like a son of righteousness, that is a believer, he is acting like a son of death. In other words, an unbeliever, a person who is in the kingdom of death. And so one commentator said it would be kind of equivalent to saying, what a fiend of hell or what a reprobate. And that's the way I take it. It's just like, what a reprobate. What in the world is he doing there? Now, I'm not gonna settle the translation for you on that. I thought some of you are gonna be curious, what in the world does David mean there? You can take any one of those three as far as I'm concerned, but it is clear, and this is the point I want you to take home, it's clear that Nathan has succeeded in getting David to realize how horrible the injustice was in this story. The rich man is acting like an unbeliever, not like a believer. So in effect, David is saying, that's so wrong. That is satanic. Verse 6, And he shall restore fourfold for the lamb because he did this thing and because he had no pity. And by the way, that is the exact amount of justice that Exodus 22 verse 1 says must happen when a sheep has been stolen. With other property, there's various levels, but with sheep, it's fourfold. With oxen, it is fivefold. So David is giving exactly what the law says that this man deserved to receive. Now I'll be the first to admit that David deserved to die, but because there were no eyewitnesses who were not also implicated in the crime. There is no way that David could be put to death in a court of law. Nathan certainly was not an eyewitness. But in any case, Providence does bring a fourfold restitution against David by having four of David's lambs killed, four of David's sons killed. You have this first child of Bathsheba in this chapter, Amnon in chapter 13, Absalom in chapter 18, and Adonijah in 1 Kings 2.25. I'll not be dogmatic if God intended that parallel or not. But I find it interesting that there was four of his own lambs, his own sons, who were killed. You can make of that what you want. And even though I'm not going to settle those two issues dogmatically, I'm just giving you hints of where I think it's going. It's clear that Nathan let David come up with his own declaration of justice and guilt. And it's fascinating. You've got to try this with your kids sometime. When you've got a particularly hair-pulling, frustrating, puzzling situation with your kids and you're wondering, what in the world do I do here? And ask your kids, you know, once they've admitted guilt, what do you think God, what kind of punishment do you think God would have me inflict upon you? Frequently, you'll find your kids will come up with a more severe punishment that you maybe had anticipated on giving. But the main point is that Nathan is trying to get David to agree to what biblical justice should be. It's harder to evade the truth once they've proclaimed the truth with their own lips. Point F, then deals with the importance of being bold and applying God's word during the Nathan moment. It's so easy for us to go soft, to backpedal, to try to not appear too ornery or too bad, you know, so we try to make things softer. You can't do that. Nathan calls sin, sin. The Nathan said to David, you are the man. And especially if David said he deserved to die, boy, that would have been quite a bold statement. You deserve to die. He's basically saying, you are the man. The heinousness of this story that you yourself have recognized, you are just as heinous. And in a moment, he's going to be saying, you're even more heinous than what that man had done. Nathan though kept it from being a personal vendetta by making sure David understands you have to deal with God Don't argue with me argue with God verse 7 thus says the Lord God of Israel David, you may think you're exempt as a king. You are not exempt. You are under the King Yahweh and you are going to have to deal with Him. You are accountable. That's in effect what he was saying. And I wish there were more pastors who were willing to bring Nathan moments to politicians, even bring politicians under discipline. I think if American Christians as a whole would speak as the oracles of God and stop being so pragmatic and bring God's Word to bear in people's lives, it could make a huge difference in our country. We need Nathan moments in every sphere of life. Anyway, moving on, in verses 7 through 8, Nathan then points out how ungrateful David had been to God. Thus says the Lord God of Israel, I anointed you king over Israel. 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. I also would have given you much more. It just shows God's generous heart. He loves to give to us above and beyond what we need. He's just so generous. But I need to comment on something here because there have been a lot of people who have been stumbled over the fact that God gave Saul's wives to David. What's going on with that? That just seems so wrong. But commentators point out that David did not marry Saul's wives. And he did not, in fact, own Saul's property. In fact, chapter 21 makes it clear that Saul's concubine, Rizpah, didn't even live anywhere near the palace. And that there is no evidence that David ever married Saul's wife. And so there's really no need whatsoever to stumble over the phrase. We've already demonstrated from previous sermons, God disapproved of polygamy. It was a sin. Now he regulated the sin in terms of state law, but it was a sin and he'd never approved of that. Now let me explain what it really does mean. Notice that the text does not say that God gave those women to David as wives, but gave them into your keeping. and it's parallel with gave you your master's house. Saul's house was also in David's keeping. He didn't possess it. Instead, what David did is he protected these women from any abuse, people taking it out on them, any abuse, and he protected Saul's property until such time as he could give that property to one of Saul's grandchildren. In this case, it was Mephibosheth. So he acted as a father to the wives and over the property. It shows, in effect, that David has no danger whatsoever from Saul's house. Nobody's gonna marry Saul's wives and say, look, I'm the rightful heir to Saul's kingdom. He's just saying, this is how secure I have made you in your kingdom. That's what it's talking about. But the point is that God's protection, exaltation, and provision, though rich, yet David was ungrateful for it. In verse 9, Nathan calls a spade a spade. He does not mince words and say, hey, Ammon killed. No, you killed. David killed. He blames David. 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. When you're engaged in a Nathan moment, you have to clearly describe what the sin really is, because David's already been used to rationalizing the sin. I think he's been struggling, Psalm 32 hints at that. But you need to make it crystal clear what God thinks about that sin. In this case, it is nothing less than murder and adultery. But Nathan also boldly spoke about the fact that sin doesn't pay, that you always, always reap what you sow. Why is that important in the Nathan moment? Well, the reason it's important is because you're trying to tear down this deceitful concept that the flesh brings up, tear down this concept that confessing my sins is so much worse than covering over my sins. He's trying to give every reason why it pays to confess your sins and to get it dealt with, put it under the blood of Christ. And so verses 10 through 12. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. Thus says the Lord, behold, I will raise up adversity against you from your own house, and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor. And he shall lie with your wives in the sight of the sun, for you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun. Okay, here is yet another thing that some people stumble over. It looks like God was going to give David's wives to his son Absalom and that this rape that Absalom engages in, in verse 12 God says, I will do this thing before all Israel before the sun. What's going on here? I thought the scripture said that God is not the author of sin. Well, it does. Scripture very clearly says God is not the author of sin. And so let me explain how God can be sovereign over every single sin, every atom, every dust that you breathe into your nose. He is sovereign over everything. For example, He was sovereign over a hundred details, tiny details that had to happen in the crucifixion of Christ, all of which involved the sins of other people. Yet He is sovereign over sin in a way where He is not the author of sin. How can that be? Another way of asking this question is this. How can God later blame Absalom for the sin when the sin was predestined? That's the way some people would phrase this. People have been troubled with that, and the simple answer is, of course he can be blamed. He wanted to do the sin. Absalom wasn't forced to do the sin. This was something that he did of his own volition. He was blameworthy. He wanted to do it. Well, if that's the case, and if Absalom engaged in that sin of his own free will, which I believe he did, Why does God say God will do it? Because God says, I will do this thing before all Israel. How can both concepts be true? Can you see the problem that people wrestle with on this? Now, I've used this illustration before, but I'm going to use it again because I just can't come up with a better illustration. It's great. A.W. Pink illustrates God's sovereignty over sin and our human responsibility for those sins with this illustration. In fact, let me get a book and illustrate it the way he would. He says, what is it that keeps this book from falling to the ground? And the answer is, it's the power, the restraining power of my hand. If my hand were not restraining this book, of its own nature, it would fall to the ground because of gravity, right? I don't have to slam this down to the ground for this to fall to the ground. All I have to do is let go of the book and it's going to fall to the ground of its own nature because of gravity. And Pink says, well, in the same way, because of our sin nature, people are attracted to sin and Apart from God's restraining goodness, men would plummet into any and every kind of sin. And that restraint is a wonderful gift from God. People don't deserve His restraining providences. In fact, they despise His restraining providences. They fight against His restraining providences. They want to go down, and God's holding them up. He's keeping them from sinning as badly as they would need to. And when they continue to suppress the truth in unrighteousness, and they resist the truth, what does Romans 1 say happens to them? Romans 124 says, therefore, God also gave them up to uncleanness in the lusts of their hearts to dishonor their bodies among themselves. He gave them up. How did he give them up? He didn't force them to sin, did he? He didn't slam them down. He just withdrew what they did not deserve, and of their own will, they fell into sin. Romans 1 26 says much the same. It says, for this reason, God gave them up to vile passions, for even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. So what happens when God gives them up and removes the restraints? He guarantees that they will fall into sin. Without his restraint, that's the only direction that their sin nature is going to take them. So this explains why in one generation, America has gone from being a nation where in every state of the union, homosexuality was a crime punishable at law to now being celebrated. And we're the ones who are going to eventually, it looks like, be punishable at law for criticizing that in one generation. Why? Because God has given our nation up to its depraved lusts. And we need to pray and take this seriously and say, Lord, have mercy upon our nation, because apart from an incredible intervention on God's part, we're going to keep plummeting into iniquity in this nation. And so, when God pulls his hand away, gives Absalom up to a depraved mind, he is not withholding from Absalom anything that Absalom deserves. Absalom didn't deserve God's restraint in the first place. God's not forcing Absalom to do anything. But though God does not force Absalom to sin, by the very act of giving him up to a depraved mind, God guarantees that Absalom will. Does that make sense? And thus God is sovereign and Absalom is still responsible. And according to scripture, apart from God's restraining work, every one of us could fall into any kind of sin. We need to have the humility of saying, but for the grace of God go I. This is why I'm scared to death to trifle with God's grace. I cling to the Lord Jesus Christ day by day because I know I could slide if He were ever to withdraw. So God can control what areas will be given up simply by determining when He will remove the restraint in any given area of life. Now some people say God allows sin. That's okay. I don't have any problem with saying God allows sin, but it's predetermined just as surely even though He is not the author of sin. And David gets the point. David does not say it's God's fault. David recognizes completely it is his own fault. So hopefully that illustration will help you to see, yes, God's sovereign over all, but he is not the author of sin. We're totally responsible. Okay, in verse 12, Nathan points out that hidden sins get exposed by God. For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun. God exposed David's sins. And so in those six ways, Nathan boldly, even at the risk of David's anger, showed David the seriousness of his sins and the consequences of those sins. He used several reasons to convince David it simply was not worth it to cover over and rationalize his sin. And that's the goal. That's the goal of a Nathan moment. And by God's grace, David repents in verse 13 and says, I have sinned against the Lord. His repentance shows he truly was a man of God. He truly had a regenerate heart. And you can read Psalm 32 and Psalm 51 to see this was a thoroughgoing repentance. It was not just a trite phrase. It was a deep repentance. Now here's the point I want to make on this verse. Despite the seriousness of David's sin, Nathan immediately gave forgiveness and assured David of God's forgiveness. That's remarkable considering the seriousness of David's sin. It was immediate. You may not be able to say exactly what Nathan does, but you can forgive just as Nathan did. And Nathan said to David, the Lord also has put away your sin. You shall not die. Now we cannot promise a criminal that there won't be any consequences for his criminal act, but we can assure him of forgiveness. In a biblical society, if there were not two witnesses, you could not put a person to death. And Nathan was not a witness. There was no way that David could be put to death in a court of law. Now, David couldn't be given any capital punishment, but God was saying he was in danger of providential death, okay? And he now would not be put to death providentially because of his repentance, his confession, his forgiveness. Now, there are still horrible consequences, and point H alludes to that, but Nathan did not make David stay in the doghouse, so to speak, to suffer his stares and his glares. Once the goal had been achieved, and the goal is repentance, we should move quickly to forgiveness and reconciliation. And some people say, well, I can't do that. I can't give that knucklehead forgiveness simply because he repents and because he says, please forgive me. He's hurt me too bad. I want him to feel some pain. If he proves himself for six months, then I'll forgive him. And in Matthew 18, Christ says, hey, if you take that attitude, I'm not gonna forgive you of your sins. And you just watch the difficulties that you are going to face. In fact, in Luke 17, Jesus says this, take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him. There is the Nathan moment. Rebuke him. And if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you saying, I repent, you shall forgive him. He says, you cannot make him suffer in the doghouse. Okay, that is not forgiving as God forgave you. And people will say, yeah, but you don't understand how serious this sin against me was. Well, look how serious the sin was that David engaged in. And yet he was immediately, immediately forgiven. But in Luke 17, you see the balance of points G and H. Point G says, don't make your David stay in the doghouse, but resolve the issue of forgiveness quickly. Point H says, but in granting forgiveness, don't trivialize the seriousness of what was done and what might result. So when Jesus made his disciples forgive seven times in a day that sin, he is not making light of that sin. Let me read you the whole context of what I just read you, Luke 17, 1 through 4. Then he said to the disciples, it is impossible that no offenses should come, but woe to him through whom they do come. Can you see how he's not in any way downplaying the seriousness of sin simply because that sin has been forgiven seven times in a day. Woe to him through whom they do come. It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea than that he should offend one of these little ones. So hopefully you can see he is taking the sin seriously. Then he reads what I read to you. He gives what I read to you under point G. Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him. And if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times in a day and seven times in a day returns to you saying, I repent, you shall forgive him. And yes, he's talking about the repentance of that serious sin that's so serious, it's better for him to have a millstone hung around his neck and cast into the depths of the sea. You're to forgive even that serious of a sin. And so points G and H need to be held together. Grant forgiveness right away. Don't punish the David by making him stay in the doghouse. But in granting forgiveness, don't trivialize the seriousness of what has been done or what might result. After assuring David of forgiveness, verse 14 says, However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die. Lord willing, we might look at the Laws of Harvest. I haven't figured out what I'm preaching on next week. We might look at that. But it's clear from this verse that even with forgiveness, the sin was still treated seriously. You know, a glue sniffer can be forgiven for the abuse that he is doing to his body. But he's still going to suffer the rest of his life with a fried-out brain, right? And you need to show him, this is stupid to do. And just because you're forgiven does not mean you're going to be healed of that. A murderer can be forgiven and go straight to heaven, but he may still have to face the death penalty if there were two eyewitnesses to his crime. And adulterous May be forgiven may be restored even like Hosea's wife was restored to Hosea But there still is probably going to need to be counseling there may be VD There may be other issues that need to be dealt with and Hosea actually had the right to divorce her Galatians 6 7 warns true believers who were members of the church Do not be deceived God is not mocked for whatever a man sows that he will also reap And there's so many ways that we downplay the seriousness of sin. We looked at some ways last week that people downplayed the seriousness of sin. But there's other ways. One way would be for people, after an apology has been given, to say, ah, don't worry about it. It's no big deal. I'm thinking, why did you bring it up in the first place if it was no big deal? Of course it's a big deal. You don't forgive sin because it's a small deal. In fact, you trivialize the grace of Christ. Ephesians says that we need to forgive in exactly the same way that God forgave us in Christ Jesus. And God did not trivialize our sin. Our forgiveness reflects His forgiveness, which was at the cost of Christ's life, right? So all sin is serious. Okay, the last principle that I see in this passage is that we should not nag the sinner about his sin once the Nathan moment has been finished. In verse 15, Nathan moves on once the Nathan moment has achieved its desired result of repentance. He does give a little bit more information but not a rebuke. It says, Then Nathan departed to his house. I have seen parents nag and nag and preach and preach and preach at a child long after the child has repented and shown true contrition. It's counterproductive, okay? The goal is repentance, so the rest we leave in God's hands. Now let me conclude with a story that was told by Billy Graham. He said there was this one time where a TV station wanted to do an interview of them in their home. And when his wife found out about it, she was like, well, she had to go through the house cleaning up and tidying, making everything look perfect. She said she went through it a second time with a fine-tooth comb to make sure it looked good for this TV crew because it was going to be aired everywhere. And on the day of the interview, everybody was in their assigned seating and Graham said, when suddenly the television lights were turned on and we saw, excuse me, when suddenly the television lights were turned on, we saw cobwebs and dust where we had never seen them before. In the words of my wife, I mean, that room was festooned with dust and cobwebs, which simply did not show up under ordinary light. And that's exactly what happened to David. When Nathan showed up, it was as if God showed up in that room, as if the TV lights were turned on. And it wasn't just the two sins that were exposed. The light was so bright that you look at the Psalms that were written at this time, Psalm 6, 32, 38, 51, and 103. He saw a multitude of sins and cobwebs everywhere. This is why God has us involved in each other's lives. Two weeks ago we saw how blind we can be to our own sins. And sometimes the Nathan moment is needed in the church. There are times when the Davids around us, which includes ourselves, cannot see the cobwebs in the dirt. And if God calls you to bring a Nathan moment, ask God for the courage, the faith, and the love to do it well. Now, we've looked mainly at Nathan, but in response to God's Word this morning, what we're going to do is we're going to respond to the Word by saying, Lord, help me to be a David. Help me to respond with the graciousness and with the humility to a Nathan who brings that rebuke to me, and help me to respond in a way where I will grow. And so let's go ahead and pray, and then I'm going to have you stand, and we're going to sing, Have Thine Own Way, Lord. Father, we thank you for your word, and it is our desire to not only have the courage, the faith, and the love to bring Nathan moments to others, but Father, to have the grace and the humility to receive those Nathan moments as well. May we be like the New Testament church in Hebrews, where we exhort one another, and encourage one another, and stir one another up unto good works. And may we grow as a result of having heard this sermon. We pray it in Jesus' name. Amen.