Up to this point in the book, we have learned two things about Nathan the prophet; firstly, he did not follow Adonijah, and secondly, he was not invited to Adonijah’s coronation feast. In this verse he becomes an actor in the narrative. Though he was not invited, he knew about the feast and the reason for it. Adonijah had, for all practical purposes, become the new king without the knowledge of the old king who was still alive.

Sensing the trouble that this spelled for those who had not followed the usurper (one who takes an office without the legitimate right to do so), Nathan went to give the news to Solomon’s mother Bathsheba. She and her son would have been two of the chief targets for assassination if Adonijah was not stopped. The question he brought to Bathsheba is phrased in a way that, under normal circumstances, would expect a positive reply, that is to say, Yes, I have heard this. Yet sometimes the original Hebrew uses this way of speaking simply to create interest in the hearer.

In Bathsheba’s case, she probably had not heard the report of Adonijah’s plot to become king, since the wives of the king tended to live a secluded life. What Nathan was really saying is that the news of Adonijah’s power grab was something Bathsheba did not know, but something she ought to have known.

There is another one that did not know the news according to Nathan, and that is David whom he calls our lord. This way of speaking of David is proper court etiquette, but it also serves to remind us that David was still officially the king.

It often happened in that era that a ruler would place his chosen successor upon the throne while he still lived, and they would serve as co-rulers until the old king dies. The important difference in our situation in 1 Kings is that David did not place Adonijah on the throne. This was not legal succession; it was rebellion.

The ignorance of David highlights his isolation from the matters of government, and thus it emphasizes the instability of the kingdom. Yet, we may ask, how Nathan knew that the king was uninformed about the situation. He might have known this because of the revelation of God to Nathan as his prophet. Another possible answer is the very fact that the king took no action to stop this rebellion.

The first answer would remind us that no action of men, however secretly conceived and executed, is hidden from the Lord. The second answer would show Nathan’s confidence that David continued faithful to his oath that Solomon would be king after him.