The men of Israel were distressed that day; for Saul had adjured the people, saying, “Cursed is the man who eats any food until it is evening, and I am avenged of my enemies.” So none of the people tasted food.
All the people came into the forest; and there was honey on the ground. When the people had come to the forest, behold, honey was dripping, but no one put his hand to his mouth; for the people feared the oath. But Jonathan didn’t hear when his father commanded the people with the oath. Therefore he put out the end of the rod that was in his hand, and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth; and his eyes brightened. Then one of the people answered, and said, “Your father directly commanded the people with an oath, saying, ‘Cursed is the man who eats food today.’ ” So the people were faint.
Then Jonathan said, “My father has troubled the land. Please look how my eyes have brightened, because I tasted a little of this honey. How much more, if perhaps the people had eaten freely today of the plunder of their enemies which they found? For now there has been no great slaughter among the Philistines.”
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv24, 26, 27, 28, 29 Hebrew, bread.
Hebrew, bread.
Such was his hypocrisy and arrogancy, that he thought to attribute to his policy that which God had given by the hand of Jonathan.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv24–30 1Sa 14:24 And the men of Israel were distressed…
1Sa 14:24 And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people, saying, Cursed [be] the man that eateth [any] food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies. So none of the people tasted [any] food.
Ver. 24. And the men of Israel were distressed that day.] Saved they were that day, and yet distressed: usque adeo nihil est ex omni porte beatum. Men must ever have somewhat to complain of, for an allay of their enjoyments. Miscentur tristia laetis.
Read full note →
For Saul had adjured the people.] Some Popish commentators do highly commend Saul for this fast enjoined the people. But Josephus and others better say, that Saul used this victory too insolently and immodestly, to fill bimself with the slaughter of his enemies, without any regard had to the weak and faint bodies of his subjects that pursued them: whereas a good magistrate more regardeth the life of one good citizen, than the death of many enemies. Comestor, to salve the matter, saith that in war they used not to eat till the time of the evening sacrifice: but in Homer, Nestor and his soldiers went forth to battle, δορπον ελοντες, taking their breakfast first.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv24–29 Were distressed, with hunger, and weakness, and faintness, thence…
Were distressed, with hunger, and weakness, and faintness, thence arising; and all by reason of the following oath. As Saul’s intention was good, namely, to execute vengeance upon God’s and his enemies; so the matter of the obligation was not simply and in itself unlawful, if it had not been so rigorous in excluding all food, without any exception of cases of necessity; and in obliging the people to it under pain of a curse, and an accursed death, 1Sa 14:38,39,44, which was a punishment far exceeding the fault. None of the people tasted any food; partly in obedience to the king’s command; and partly for fear of the curse.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v24 We have here an account of the distress of…
We have here an account of the distress of the children of Israel, even in the day of their triumphs. Such alloys are all present joys subject to. And such obstructions does many a good cause meet with, even when it seems most prosperous, through the mismanagement of instruments.
I. Saul forbade the people, under the penalty of a curse, to taste any food that day, Sa1 14:24. Here we will suppose, 1. That as king he had power to put his soldiers under this interdict, and to bind it on with a curse; and therefore they submitted to it, and God so far owned it as to discover, by the lot, that Jonathan was the delinquent that had meddled with the accursed thing (though ignorantly), on which account God would not be at that time enquired of by them. 2. That he did it with a good intention, lest the people, who perhaps had been kept for some time at short allowance, when they found plenty of victuals in the deserted camp of the Philistines, should fall greedily upon that, and so lose time in pursing the enemy, and some of them, it may be, glut themselves to such a degree as not to be fit for any more service that day. To prevent this, he forbade them to taste any food, and laid himself, it is likely, under the same restraint. And yet his making this severe order was, (1.) Impolitic and very unwise; for, if it gained time, it lost strength, for the pursuit. (2.) It was imperious, and disobliging to the people, and worse than muzzling the mouth of the ox when he treads out the corn. To forbid them to feast would have been commendable, but to forbid them so much as to taste, though ever so hungry, was barbarous. (3.) It was impious to enforce the prohibition with a curse and an oath. Had he no penalty less than an anathema wherewith to support his military discipline? Death for such a crime would have been too much, but especially death with a curse. Though superiors may chide and correct, they may not curse their inferiors; our rule is, Bless, and curse not. When David speaks of an enemy he had that loved cursing perhaps he meant Saul, Psa 109:17, Psa 109:18.
Read full note →
II. The people observed his order, but it had many inconveniences attending it. 1. The soldiers were tantalized; for, in their pursuit of the enemy, it happened that they went through a wood so full of wild honey that it dropped from the trees upon the ground, the Philistines having perhaps, in their flight, broken in upon the honeycombs, for their own refreshment, and left them running. Canaan flowed with honey, and here is an instance of it. They sucked honey out of the rock, the flinty rock (Deu 32:13); yet, for fear of the curse, they did not so much as taste the honey, Sa1 14:25, Sa1 14:26. Those are worthy of the name of Israelites that can deny themselves and their own appetites even when they are most craving, and the delights of sense most tempting, for fear of guilt and a curse, and the table becoming a snare. Let us never feed ourselves, much less feast ourselves, without fear. 2. Jonathan fell under the curse through ignorance. He heard not of the charge his father had given; for, having bravely forced the lines, he was then following the chase, and therefore might justly be looked upon as exempted from the charge and intended in it. But it seems it was taken for granted, and he himself did not object against it afterwards, that it extended to him, though absent upon so good an occasion. He, not knowing any peril in it, took up a piece of a honey-comb, upon the end of his staff, and sucked it (Sa1 14:27), and was sensibly refreshed by it: His eyes were enlightened, which began to grow dim through hunger and faintness; it made his countenance look pleasant and cheerful, for it was such as a stander-by might discern (Sa1 14:29): See how my eyes have been enlightened. He thought no harm, nor feared any, till one of the people acquainted him with the order, and then he found himself in a snare. Many a good son has been thus entangled and distressed, in more ways than one, by the rashness of an inconsiderate father. Jonathan, for his part, lost the crown he was heir to by his father's folly, which, it may be, this was an ill omen of. 3. The soldiers were faint, and grew feeble, in the pursuit of the Philistines. Jonathan foresaw this would be the effect of it; their spirits would flag, and their strength would fail, for want of sustenance. Such is the nature of our bodies that they soon grow unfit for service if they be not supplied with fresh recruits. Daily work cannot be done without daily bread, which our Father in heaven graciously gives us. It is bread that strengthens man's heart; therefore Jonathan reasoned very well, If the people had eaten freely, there would have been a much greater slaughter (Sa1 14:30); but, as it was, they were very faint, too much fatigued (so the Chaldee), and began to think more of their meat than of their work. 4. The worst effect of all was that at evening, when the restraint was taken off and they returned to their food again, they were so greedy and eager upon it that they ate the flesh with the blood, expressly contrary to the law of God, Sa1 14:32. Two hungry meals, we say, make the third a glutton; it was so here. They would not stay to have their meat either duly killed (for they slew the cattle upon the ground, and did not hang them up, as they used to do, that the blood might all run out of them) or duly dressed, but fell greedily upon it before it was half boiled or half roasted, Sa1 14:32. Saul, being informed of it, reproved them for the sin (Sa1 14:33): You have transgressed; but did not, as he should have done, reflect upon himself as having been accessory to it, and having made the Lord's people to transgress. To put a stop to this irregularity, Saul ordered them to set up a great stone before him, and let all that had cattle to kill, for their present use, bring them thither, and kill them under his eye upon that stone (Sa1 14:33), and the people did so (Sa1 14:34), so easily were they restrained and reformed when their prince took care to do his part. If magistrates would but use their power as they might, people would be made better than they are with more ease than is imagined.
III. On this occasion Saul built an altar (Sa1 14:35), that he might offer sacrifice, either by way of acknowledgment of the victory they had obtained or by the way of atonement for the sin they had been guilty of. The same was the first altar that he built, and perhaps the rolling of the great stone to kill the beasts on reminded him of converting it into an altar, else he would not have thought of it. Saul was turning aside from God, and yet now he began to build altars, being most zealous (as many are) for the form of godliness when he was denying the power of it. See Hos 8:14, Israel has forgotten his Maker, and buildeth temples. Some read it, He began to build that altar; he laid the first stone, but was so hasty to pursue his victory that he could not stay to finish it.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv24–30 And the men of Israel were distressed that day,....…
And the men of Israel were distressed that day,.... By reason of the following order Saul gave with an oath, forbidding any to taste meat till evening, when the people were faint and weary, which is the common sense of interpreters; but Jarchi interprets it, the men of Israel were ready, forward, and hasty, and drew nigh to fight with the Philistines, and so refers it to the persons before mentioned, who came out of their lurking places; and this sense is approved of by Abarbinel: "for", or "and Saul had adjured", or "did adjure the people"; or willed them, signified to them his will and pleasure, which would not have been so much amiss, had he not annexed a curse to it, as follows:
saying, cursed be the man that eateth any food until the evening: or "bread", which comprehends all food, and among the rest honey; the design of which was, that no time might be lost, and that he might make the victory over the Philistines, and their destruction, as complete as possible; though it may seem a little too hard and severe upon the people, and too imperious in him, as well as imprudent; since a little refreshment would have animated and enabled them to have pursued their enemies with more ardour and rigour; and yet by the lot afterwards made, it seems to have been countenanced by the Lord:
Read full note →
that I may be avenged on mine enemies; who long tyrannised over the people of Israel, more or less for many years, and lately had sadly spoiled and plundered them:
so none of the people tasted any food; so observant were they of, and so obedient to the order of their king, and so much awed by the oath or imprecation annexed to it; though they were faint and hungry, and had an opportunity of refreshing themselves as follows, which was no small temptation to disobedience.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv24, 26, 27, 28 Distressed - With hunger, and weakness, and faintness, and…
Distressed - With hunger, and weakness, and faintness, and all by reason of the following oath. Avenged - As Saul's intention was good, so the matter of the obligation was not simply unlawful, if it had not been so rigorous in excluding all food, and in obliging the people to it under pain of an accursed death, which was a punishment far exceeding the fault.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv24–27 Verse 24. Saul had adjured the people] He was…
Verse 24. Saul had adjured the people] He was afraid, if they waited to refresh themselves, the Philistines would escape out of their hands, and therefore he made the taking any food till sunset a capital crime. This was the very means of defeating his own intention; for as the people were exhausted for want of food, they could not continue the pursuit of their enemies: had it not been for this foolish adjuration, there had been a greater slaughter of the Philistines, 1Sa 14:30.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv24, 25, 27, 30 1Sa 14:24. The men of Israel were distressed that…
1Sa 14:24. The men of Israel were distressed that day — With hunger, and weakness, and faintness, and all by reason of the following rash and inconsiderate oath, whereby Saul had foolishly adjured them, and to which, it is probable, they had consented. Saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening — Saul’s intention in putting this oath was undoubtedly to save time, lest the Philistines should gain ground of them in their flight. But the event showed it was a false policy; for the people were so faint and weak for want of food, that they were less able to follow and slay the Philistines than if they had stopped to take a moderate refreshment. That I may be avenged of mine enemies — As Saul’s intention was good, so the matter of the obligation was not simply unlawful, if it had not been so rigorous in excluding all food, and in obliging the people to it under pain of an accursed death, which was a punishment far exceeding the fault.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv25–29 All they of the land - literally, all the…
All they of the land - literally, all the land, probably meaning all those named in 1Sa 14:21-22, who now flocked to the wood as a rendezvous.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv24, 25, 27, 29 Together. Which interpretation is more natural (Calmet) than the…
Together. Which interpretation is more natural (Calmet) than the Protestants "where distressed,...for Saul had adjured," &c. (Haydock) --- Septuagint, "And all the people was with Saul, about 10,000, and the war was spread through all the city in Mount Ephraim, and Saul was guilty of great ignorance that day, and he adjures (Haydock; or cursed) the people," &c. He saw not that he was acting against his own interest. The sequel does not evince that God approved of his conduct. But the people were to be taught not to make light of oaths, nor to neglect the curses which their rulers should denounce. (Calmet) --- Food. Literally, "bread," which comprises all sorts of food, honey, &c., (ver. 25.; Haydock) but not drink, which might lawfully have been taken, as thirst is more difficult to bear. (Menochius) --- Salien (the year of the world 2964) defends the conduct of Saul, and condemns Jonathan.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv24–25 Saul had adjured the people--Afraid lest so precious an…
Saul had adjured the people--Afraid lest so precious an opportunity of effectually humbling the Philistine power might be lost, the impetuous king laid an anathema on any one who should taste food until the evening. This rash and foolish denunciation distressed the people, by preventing them taking such refreshments as they might get on the march, and materially hindered the successful attainment of his own patriotic object.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv24, 26, 27, 29 SAUL’S HASTY ADJURATION, 1Sa_14:24-46.
SAUL’S HASTY ADJURATION, 1Sa_14:24-46.
Here again we meet with a display of the rash and impetuous spirit of Saul. He wished to make the most of his opportunity, and inflict the greatest possible disasters on his enemy; but his oath not only failed to accomplish this object, but even led to his own confusion when the people interfered and rescued Jonathan from his curse. Had the victors been permitted to eat freely of the spoil, they would in all probability have been able to have made the defeat of these dreaded enemies tenfold more deadly and disastrous.
Read full note →
24. Were distressed — Fatigued; tired out by the arduous fighting. For
Saul had adjured the people — This rendering implies that Saul had made his adjuration before the battle; but in the Hebrew the letter translated for is the conjunction and, (ו) and indicates that Saul made the adjuration after he saw the distress of the people. He perceived that his men were faint, but feared that any delay might turn the tide of battle.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv24, 26, 27, 28, 29 24–30. Jonathan’s breach of Saul’s rash oath
24–30. Jonathan’s breach of Saul’s rash oath
24. were distressed that day: for Saul, &c.] Render, And the men of Israel were distressed that day. And Saul caused the people to swear, &c. Seeing the fatigued condition of the army, and fearing lest they should relinquish the pursuit to get food, Saul rashly exacted from them an oath, which led to three evil results. (1) It hindered instead of facilitating the pursuit of the enemy. (2) It involved Jonathan in an involuntary trespass. (3) It indirectly occasioned the sin of the people (1Sa_14:32). The Sept. however appears to have had a different text as follows: “And all the people that were with Saul were about ten thousand men. And the battle was scattered throughout the whole wood [city is a mistranslation of the Heb. word for wood in 1Sa_14:25] in mount Ephraim. And Saul did very foolishly on that day, and adjured the people, saying, &c.”
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv24–29 (24) And the men of Israel were distressed that…
(24) And the men of Israel were distressed that day.—The LXX., between the 23rd and 24th verses, has a somewhat long addition: “And the whole people was with Saul, about ten thousand men; and the battle spread in the whole city, in the mountains of Ephraim; and Saul committed a great error.” The number 10,000 is not an improbable one, as the original small force which had kept with Saul and Jonathan had been joined by the Hebrew auxiliaries in the Philistine camp, and also by many of the fugitives from the villages around. They were, we read, “distressed,” that is, were wearied out by the long pursuit on the Ephraim hills.
For Saul had adjured the people.—Better, And Saul, &c.; that is, the king was so intent upon his vengeance—so bent upon pursuing to the uttermost these Philistines who so long had defied his power, and who had brought him so low—that he grudged his soldiers the necessary rest and refreshment, and, with a terrible vow, devoted to death any one who should on that day of blood slack his hand for a moment, even to take food.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv24–30 SAUL"S RASH COMMAND (vers. 24-35).
SAUL"S RASH COMMAND (vers. 24-35).
The men of Israel were distressed that day. The word is that used in 1Sa_13:6 of the state of terror and alarm to which the Israelites were reduced by the Philistine invasion; here it refers to their weariness and faintness for want of food. For Saul had adjured the people. Hebrew, "had made the people swear." He had recited before them the words of the curse, and made them shout their consent. His object was to prevent any delay in the pursuit; but in his eagerness he forgot that the strength of his men would fail if their bodily wants were not supplied. But though worn out and fainting, the people faithfully keep the oath put to them.
Read full note →
Vers. 24-35.
Unwise zeal and moral obtuseness.
The facts are
1. Saul by a rash vow causes great distress among the people anddiminishes the fruits of victory.
2. Jonathan, unawares, takes food contrary to his father"s prohibition, andon being informed of the truth, deplores the unwisdom of the vow.
3. As a consequence of the enforced exhaustion, the people at the close ofthe day violate the ceremonial law by a voracious meal of flesh unduly prepared.
4. Saul, professing to be shocked at their sin, provides means by which theoffence may be avoided, and raises an altar unto the Lord. The turn in affairs brought on by Jonathan"s heroism was most welcome to Saul, as it seemed to be the return of the prosperity which had received a check in his own sin at Gilgal. There had been no expressions of sincere penitence, nor, as far as the narrative gives light, any effort to regain former relationships to Samuel. The impulsive rush from the inquiring priest to join in the pursuit revealed a state of mind which at once accounts for the curse pronounced on any one who should dare to take food. The facts included in the section before us furnish a conspicuous instance of unwise zeal and moral obtuseness.
I UNWISE ZEAL. The zeal of Saul was conspicuous enough. As in the case of Joshua, (Jos_8:8-13) there was an intense desire to put into a single day all the exertion possible in order to make the victory over God"s enemies more complete. There was clearly in his mind an idea that he was doing God service (ver. 33). But the unwisdom of the zeal is equally conspicuous; for it prevented, by the physical weakness induced, the very end designed (vers. 29, 30): it caused pain and annoyance to an obedient people, who, while submissive, must have lost some respect for their monarch"s judgment; it exposed the best man of the day to a great peril, and the people to a strong temptation to commit excess. Unwise zeal may be considered variously.
1. As reform. It assumes diverse forms according to the circumstances of the case.
(1) Sometimes the aim may be wrong, as when the Jews in apostolic times, in their zeal, not according to knowledge sought most energetically to perpetuate a decaying ceremonial. The same is true of all who compass sea and land to make mere proselytes to their order or sect, or to bring modern feeling and usage back, in matters of minor significance, to the style of the past.
(2) Often the method is wrong, as in the case of Saul. Men have not always the wisdom to conserve or develop, as the occasion may demand, their energy suitably to the end in view. There is an enormous waste in the world from this cause. Perhaps no man, in his daily calling, is free from this form of unwise zeal. We see illustrations of this in the untiring effort of some to be justified before God by their own deeds of righteousness; in the constant and painful flow of penitential tears and self-inflicted sorrows as means of the forgiveness which comes only by calm trust in Christ; and in the wild and ill considered agencies sometimes used to win careless men to Christ.
(3) Sometimes the end is good and the method, but the time is unsuited. It might be good for Israel to chase the foe with full energy, and also good to fast, but the time was not suitable for the conjunction of the two. It is mistaken zeal to concentrate all strength on the edification of a Church when multitudes are living outside the fold of Christ. Wisdom lies much in doing work at the right season.
1. As to origin. Saul"s unwise zeal arose from his impulsive temperament not being chastened and regulated by a diligent use of the counsel which was always available to him as king from God. This radical error accounts for the ill-balanced judgment which could not see the effect of a long fast on physical energy, for the rash utterance, for the eager springing at the first chance to escape from the helpless position consequent, on recent transgression, and for the egotistical reference to avenging his own enemies. The origin of unwise zeal in most instances is connected with deficient waiting upon God. The knowledge of men may be defective, their temperament may be impulsive, their prevision of a low grade, their self-regulation a matter of emotional pressure rather than of reason; and yet if such men would, remembering their obvious imperfections, devoutly wait on God for his guidance, and seek daily grace to govern themselves, they would avoid many blunders in practice. Imperfectly balanced men will never do work in life perfectly. We must lay to our account a large
2. proportion of foolish deeds in Christian and secular enterprise. The calming, enlightening power of devotion is not fully recognised.
3. As to consequences. In Saul"s case, as already indicated, it induced trouble and pain to his people, interfered with the most perfect success of Jonathan"s effort (vers. 29, 30), lowered himself in the eyes of his subjects as a king deficient in judgment, and, by exercise, intensified the defective qualities which gave rise to it. We have here a summary of what always attends unwise zeal. Every foolish display of energy, even in a good cause, brings distress to those who have the interests of religion and humanity at heart. Being a waste of power, and therefore a violation of the moral and social laws by which God brings the highest results to pass, it impedes the subjugation of evil to good. and the final triumph of God"s kingdom. The world is suffering still from erratic courses, destitute of sound judgment, pursued in the name of religion; from a concentration of energy on superficial instead of on radical evils; and from an undue application of resources to the curative methods, in frequent oversight of the preventive.
II MORAL OBTUSENESS. The moral obtuseness of Saul"s character had manifested itself in his evident inability to see at Gilgal. (1Sa_13:8-10) the stupidity of seeking to please God by an act of worship which itself was a violation of his explicit commands. Character becomes more fixed as time passes on; and here we see Saul so morally obtuse as not to perceive that, while condemning a ceremonial offence on the part of the people (ver. 33), he was unconscious of the folly of his own conduct, and of the moral offence both of laying on the people a serious hindrance to victory and of preferring his own wild impulse to the counsel of Jehovah. Moral obtuseness may be regarded in reference to
1. Its causes e.g. inherited dulness of conscience, imperfectly formed moral discrimination in early years, growing habituation to formal religious acts, the influence of a low state of public morality, and postponement of sincere repentance after known transgressions.
2. Its manifestation e.g. in rigid external observances to the neglect of spiritual culture, combination of religious zeal with positive indulgence in immoral feelings, ease in detecting palpable offences in others with self-complacent views of one"s own condition, insensibility to the truth which awakens the finer spiritual feelings of other men, and coarse treatment of the sensitive.
3. Its danger e.g. in being inaccessible to many of the most elevating influences, rendered more dense by every repeated exercise, and productive of a delusive self-righteousness which becomes more self-assertive in proportion as inward unholiness prevails.
4. Its treatment e.g. by distinct personal teaching of the most discriminating and pungent character, placing the individuals in close association with persons of fine spiritual discernment and delicacy of character as a striking foil, prompting to acts that will tend to reveal the inward incompetency, and special prayer for the quickening of the life giving Spirit.
General lessons:
1. Cultivate a refined moral sensibility in youth as a basis for life.
2. Men in office need prayer for special spiritual wisdom.
3. When sin has been committed it should be repented of at once, andspecial prayer made lest its inward influence be to lower the tone of feeling.
Vers. 24-46. (MICHMASH, AJALON.)
Rashness.
be the man that eateth any food until evening," etc. (ver. 24). Rashness is often a cause of trouble; and some persons might profitably ponder the advice once given by the town clerk of Ephesus, "Do nothing rashly". (Act_19:36) It is also, sometimes, very sinful, as it was in Saul. Whilst pursuing the Philistines, and wishing to exterminate them, he imposed a solemn oath upon the people not to take food until the evening under penalty of death. This rash oath was followed by two others of a similar nature (vers. 39, 44), all indicating the recklessness and wilfulness of his course. His concern for the law (vers. 33, 34), his erection of an altar (ver. 35), his asking counsel of God before going to spoil the enemy by night (ver. 37), his eagerness to ascertain by lot the cause of the silence of the oracle (ver. 41), were not an exhibition of genuine piety; they were rather a substitute for it, and the fruits of an unsanctified, blind, and passionate zeal; and the death of the noble Jonathan, if it had taken place, would have completed his folly and sin. Consider his rashness as
I REVEALING A WRONG STATE OF MIND.
1. Inconsideration. His oath was uttered without deliberation. (Ecc_5:2) He did not consider whether it was according" to the will of God, nor what its consequences might be. He did not afterwards reflect how far the transgressions of others and the silence of Heaven might be due to his own fault, and he did not apparently recognise his fault when plainly set before him.
1. Insincerity. "It did not proceed from a proper attitude toward God, but was an act of false zeal in which he had more regard to himself and his own kingly power than to the cause of the kingdom of Jehovah" (Keil).
2. Vainglory. "That I may be avenged on mine enemies." "In this prohibition there was a secret pride and misuse of power, for he desired to force, as it were a complete victory, and then appropriate the glory of it to himself.
II IMPOSING A NEEDLESS BURDEN upon others. Once and again it is said "the people were faint" (vers. 28, 31). They were exhausted with severe and prolonged exertion, famished with hunger, and unable to continue the pursuit. Their suffering was great, their power diminished, their temptation strong. But Saul had thought only of himself. Rulers should seek the welfare of their subjects rather than their own glory; and all men should consider the effect of their resolutions, promises, and commands on other people, and use their influence over them for their good.
III OCCASIONING GRIEVOUS SIN in them (vers. 32-35). They avoided one offence only to commit another with a rashness equal to that of Saul himself (Gen_9:4; Deu_12:16; Lev_3:17 Lev_7:27) He censured and checked them. Would that he had also censured and checked himself! But men who severely condemn the faults of others are often blind to their own, even when the former reflect and are occasioned by the latter. (Psa_19:12, Psa_19:13) The altar, erected doubtless with a view to the presentation upon it of thank offerings for the victory, was still more needed for the sin offerings (expiatory) which ought to have been offered on behalf both of ruler and people. (Lev_4:13, Lev_4:22)
IV IMPERILLING INNOCENT LIFE. Not having heard the oath, Jonathan, in unconsciously violating it (ver. 27), was morally blameless. Yet his act could not be passed by with due regard to the great name in which the people had been adjured. It interrupted Divine communications (ver. 37), and resulted in his being chosen by the lot (ver. 42). Again Saul should have been led to consider his own error as its cause, and a trespass or guilt offering might have sufficed. (Lev_5:4) To inflict the "curse" would be wholly unjust, as is implied in Jonathan"s simple, mild, and submissive remonstrance (ver. 43). But Saul"s last oath was more reckless than his first; it was ignorant and wilful, showed more concern about the literal fulfilment of his word than humble and faithful obedience to a higher will, and brought him to the brink of a great crime.
Take then no vow at random: ta"en in faith Preserve it; yet not bent, as Jephthah once, Blindly to execute a rash resolve, Whom better it had suited to exclaim, "I have done ill," than to redeem his pledge By doing worse (Dante, "Par." 5. ).
V BRINGING DEEP HUMILIATION (ver. 45). The ominous silence of the people (ver. 39) is followed by their unanimous and resolute voice, in which reason and justice, conscience and God, speak with irresistible might. They set their will in opposition to his, and he is compelled to submit. His purpose is frustrated. "The son is raised above the father, and the people above the king." But although his sin is now forced home upon him, of voluntary submission there is no sign. Rashness and self-will are sure to meet with a check, and happy is he who lays to heart the lesson which it teaches.
VI DEFEATING ITS OWN AIMS. (ver. 46). "My father hath brought disaster on the land," etc. (vers. 29, 30; Jos_7:25) The completeness of the overthrow of the enemy is marred. The opportunity of inflicting a fatal blow upon them is lost. "And there was sore war against the Philistines all the days of Saul" (ver. 52). That which begins in rashness ends in disappointment and grief. D.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v24 And the men of Israel were distressed that day:…
1Sa_14:24-52
And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people.
Read full note →
Great issues hang on a Kings rash word
One little sentence, spoken in a moment of passion by King Henry the Second, brought a lifetime of remorse and penance and humiliation, and made him responsible for a murder which his calmer soul abhorred. He had been hearing of repetitions of troubles brought about by his great Chancellor, a Becket, and in a moment of exasperated temper exclaimed, Of the cowards that eat my bread, is there none will rid me of this turbulent priest? Too soon, and toe eagerly, the hasty words were acted upon. The anger of the moment was responsible for a deed which the lifetime of remorse and humiliation could nor undo. (Footsteps of Truth.)
Sauls wilfulness
That Saul was now suffering in character under the influence of the high position and great power to which he had been raised, is only too apparent from what is recorded in these verses. No doubt he pays more respect that he has been used to pay to the forms of religion. But how are we to explain his increase of religiousness side by side with the advance of moral obliquity and recklessness? Why should he be more careful in the service of God while he becomes more imperious in temper, more stubborn in will, and more regardless of the obligations alike of king and father? The explanation is not difficult to find. The expostulation of Samuel had given him a fright. The announcement that the kingdom would not be continued in his line, and that God had found a worthier man to set over His people Israel, had moved him to the quick. There could be no doubt that Samuel was speaking the truth. Saul had begun to disregard Gods will in his public acts, and was now beginning to reap the penalty. He felt that he must pay more attention to Gods will. If he was not to lose everything, he must try to be more religious. There is no sign of his feeling penitent in heart. He is not concerned in spirit for his unworthy behaviour toward God. He feels only that his own interests as king are imperilled. It is this selfish motive that makes him determine to be more religious. Alas, how common has this spirit been in the history of the world! Louis XIV has led a most wicked and profligate life, and he has ever and anon qualms that threaten him with the wrath of God. To avert that wrath, he must be more attentive to his religious duties. He must show more favour to the Church, exalt her dignitaries to greaser honour, endow her orders and foundations with greater wealth. But that is not all. He must use all the arms and resources of his kingdom for ridding the Church of her enemies. For twenty years he must harass the Protestants. What the magnificent monarch did on a large scale, millions of obscurer men have done on a small. It is a sad truth that terror and selfishness have been at the foundation of a great deal of that which passes current as religion. But it is all because what he calls religion is no religion; it is the selfish bargain-making spirit, which aims no higher than deliverance from pain; it is not the noble exercise of the soul, prostrated by the sense of guilt, and helpless through consciousness of weakness, lifting up its eyes to the hills whence cometh its help, and rejoicing in the grace that freely pardons all its sin through the blood of Christ, and in the gift of the Holy Spirit that renews and sanctifies the soul. The first thing that Saul does, in the exercise of this selfish spirit, is to impose on the people an obligation to fast until the day be overse Jonathan was a true man of God. He was in far nearer fellowship with God than his father, and yet so far from approving of the religious order to fast which his father had given, he regards it with displeasure and distrust. Godly men will sometimes be found less outwardly religious than some other men, and will greatly shock them by being so. God had given a wonderful deliverance that day through Jonathan. Jonathan was as remarkable for the power of faith as Saul for the want of it. At worst, it was but a ceremonial offence, but to Jonathan it was not even that. But Saul was too obstinate to admit the plea. By a new oath, he devoted his son to death. Nothing could show more clearly the deplorable state of his mind. In the eye of reason and of justice, Jonathan had committed no offence. He had given signal evidence of the possession in a remarkable degree of the favour of God. He had laid the nation under inconceivable obligations. All these pleas were for him; and surely in the kings breast a voice might have been heard pleading, Your son, your firstborn, the beginning of your strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power! Is it possible that this voice was silenced by jealousy, jealousy of his own son, like his after-jealousy of David? What kind of heart could this Saul have had when in such circumstances he could deliberately say, God do so, and more also, for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan? But, the Divine right of kings to govern wrong is not altogether without check. A temporary revolution saved Jonathan It was one good effect of excitement. In calmer circumstances, the people might have been too terrified to interfere. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not. Evidently the military spirit ruled in Saul, but it did not bring peace nor blessing to the kingdom. Once off the right rail, Saul never got on it again; rash and restless, he doubtless involved his people in many a disaster, fulfilling all that Samuel had said about taking from the people, fulfilling but little that the people had hoped concerning deliverance from the hand of the Philistines. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
Acting from mere impulse
We have to propose the question, What, in recording this passage, did the Holy Spirit mean that we should learn from it? We shall not be long in perceiving that there is brought before us, chiefly, one more painful defect, in Sauls general conduct, and that the consequences associated with that defect are very distinctly described: it is one, too, which is fat from being uncommon. In codes of laws drawn up by man this defect is not indeed set down by name, and signalised as a sin, though humanity bleeds under its effects, but it is condemned, and justly so, by that commandment which is exceeding broad. We refer to the habit of inconsiderateness--the habit of acting from mere impulse, of allowing merely momentary feeling to sway, without pausing to ask whither the act which we perform, or the step on which we decide, will lead us, and how it will affect other persons besides ourselves. It, is truly a melancholy instance which this chapter describes. To pronounce a curse at, all was presumptuous, where there was no direct command of God to be infringed; and more, what personal pain it inflicted--what actual disadvantages it involved--what further mischief it would have done, if the matter had been left in the King of Israels hand! How different all would have been, if, instead of following the mere impulse of an excited mind, he had thought for a moment, and, when prompted to issue his decree, had paused to ask. How will this affect my people? how will it operate in the end? But where, in this imperfect world, can we turn our eyes without meeting scenes and circumstances which cause us, involuntarily, to say within ourselves, What a difference there would have been here if there had been more of reflection and less of mere impulse.
I. We may gather a suggestion or two from this part of Sauls history, for our own caution and admonition.
1. Let us remember that this inconsiderateness, this acting from mere impulse, is commonly the result of an overweening regard to self. It was not Saul who commenced this engagement, but he could not bear not to have the most prominent place in the affair, and he must do something to make himself both seen and felt--he must make his authority evident, though the result of his decree would inevitably be the misery of his people all that day. His love for his own dear self, and the manner in which all his thoughts centred around that favourite object, are discernible in the very words of the imprecation, Cursed be the man that, eateth any food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies. Let us make the interests of others the object of our regard in all we undertake. Never let us think of ourselves without, at the same time, thinking of others too. The habit of attaching importance to others convenience, to others comforts, to others feelings, will, under God, prove a great preservative against acting from mere impulse.
2. This habit, which we condemn, even though it may involve no serious consequences to others, is manifestly wrong, because it is decidedly atheistic. It affords no room for God; it makes no reference to Him. In all thy ways acknowledge Him is a command which needs no other basis than the simple fact that there is a God, and that we are His feeble and dependent creatures. Nehemiah was in the habit of associating God with everything, of putting Him in His proper place: Saul allowed Him perpetually to be out of sight. Hence the difference between the practice of the two men. The one acted deliberately, because he acted prayerfully; the other acted from impulse, because it was no part of his habit to recognise his dependence upon God.
3. Acting from impulse, while it often results in the infliction of mischief on others, is not less to be deprecated on account of the injury which hasty and intemperate men occasion to themselves, and chiefly in this respect--the bitter and enduring bondage into which their thoughtlessness often brings them. Think, then, before you act; pray, before you put your purpose into practice. Consider others as well as yourselves. Direct design to do wrong has slain its thousands; but the inconsiderateness of mere impulse has slain its tens of thousands. None of us liveth to himself.
II. The narrative allows us to draw some few general inferences as to the character of Sauls personal religion at this time.
1. It leads us to perceive how strangely partial his religion was in its operation. Sauls religion was not of a very deep character; it was of that order which allows its professor to be vastly more affected by the neglect of something outward and formal than by the indulgence, within himself, of a wrong and impious state of mind. It puts us in mind of that most thorough manifestation of hypocrisy, of which the New Testament contains the record, when the accusers and betrayers of Jesus shrunk back with sanctimonious step from the threshold of the judgment hall and would not set foot within it, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. And yet, though their consciences would not allow them to do this, the very same consciences, when Pilate came out to them, and declared that Jesus was innocent, presented no obstacle to their murderous cry, Crucify him:--not this man, but Barabbas.
2. Even in the discharge of properly religious duties Saul was tardy and dilatory; and when, at last he was found doing that which was right he appeared to act, quite as much as when he did wrong, from mere impulse. That it should never have entered his mind to build an altar to God before, this was the point on which the Spirit of God directed that the sacred historian should pronounce emphatically. How keenly significant is that parenthetical sentence--The same was the first altar which he built to the Lord! It seems to say to us, God notices when you build the first altar, when you first set it up, whether it be in the secret chamber or in the family. He knows the date of each secret religious transaction, keeps account when it was done, add how long an interval transpired before it was entered upon.
3. It was of a kind which allowed him to put God on one side, when he was too busy to attend to Him. Real, religion will ever put God first--first, as the Object whose glory is sought; and first, as the Being on whose aid we must, in the spirit of humble dependence, rely. The multiplication of duties and engagements in this busy world may sometimes press heavily upon the religious professor; but at such seasons they really serve as tests of character. If he be truly what he professes to be, his sincerity will be seen in this, that he will not allow his busiest cares to interfere with fellowship with God.
4. It does not appear to have been characterised by the slightest self-suspicion, end there is constantly to be detected throughout a singular want of humility. It never seems to have entered his thoughts that he could, by any possibility, have been in the wrong; but he was most ready to suppose that anyone else might be to blame. In the right direction of the lots as they were cast, it was the evident design of God to bring out to view the evil of Saul inconsiderateness. He was the only culpable person, and God made that fact evident. Now, one would have thought; that if anything could have brought him to a sense of his error, it would have been the discovery that his rash decree and oath had implicated his own son, Jonathan, in liability to suffering and death. But, no! he did not see it; he would not see it. Our indignation rises when we hear him say, God do so and more also: for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan; and we are ready to exclaim, What! another oath? Has not one done mischief enough? cannot you see it? do you not feel it? Nothing can exceed the hardening influence of that professed religion which leaves a man unsuspicious and ignorant of himself. (J. A. Muller.)
The rash oath
Though Samuel could not spare time to seek the mind and will of God, he would follow the devices of his own heart, and lean to his own understanding. He made a rash vow. He stands here as a warning to me and you When we have been very much pressed with business or hurried with distress, how short have we been in prayer! how remiss in seeking the Lord! And then, when our conscience was a little uneasy, we have tried to quiet it with some foolish resolutions, thereby bringing ourselves into bondage and sin. As if the more to expose the folly of Sauls vow, the wearied and worn Israelites come to a wood where delicious food was ready to drop into their mouths; they might almost have eaten as they ran. Ah, Israel! how kindly would your heavenly, your rejected King, have supplied and refreshed you, while the king whom you have chosen does but distress and oppress you. A soldier of Jesus knows what it is after climbing some craggy rock, and after many a hard struggle with his enemies, to get a taste of that precious word which is sweeter than honey to his mouth (Psa_119:103). His downcast eyes are lightened--he again sees him who is invisible--he is satisfied with marrow and fatness, and praises his God with joyful lips. The poor people became extremely faint for want of food; and as soon as ever the set time was expired, they flew upon the spoil, and, ravenous as they were, did eat, with the blood, thus breaking a direct command of God, while they had so scrupulously kept the commandment of a man God had commanded them not to eat the blood of the sacrifices: probably this command was given to keep up a lively remembrance that it was blood, even the blood of Jesus only, that could atone for sin. Saul puts a stop to this, and, with a further show of devotion,--builds an altar unto the Lord Alas, poor Saul! thou art not the only one of whom it will be said, He did many things, but left undone the one thing needful. Though this oath of Saul was so rash and foolish, yet how sacred is an oath with our God. Though only one, and he the well beloved Jonathan, had broken it and that too ignorantly, still God must avenge a broken oath. Oh, righteous Father! what a warning, what a word of comfort is here! Poor swearer! it has a dark side for thee. Will God thus remember, thus take notice of a curse? And wilt thou dare to curse thyself, thy wife, thy children, thy neighbour, thy cattle, thine eyes, thy limbs, and then say, Tush, God hath forgotten? Instead of profiting by the trouble that his rash oath had already brought, upon the people, Saul adds yet another, saying, As the Lord liveth, which sayeth Israel, though it be in Jonathan, my son he shall surely die. The people, wiser than the headstrong king, rescue the well-beloved Jonathan, giving him, in a few words, as high a character as can be given of a worm. He hath wrought with God. To walk with God, and to work with God, should just form the summary of a believers life and occupation. It is not confined to one or two of his children, but this honour have all his saints. (Helen Plumptre.)
Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening.
A bad saving of time
It is plain enough, this refusing the people time for eating that they might swiftly pursue, was really a pernicious saving of time; was really a hindrance rather than a help. For, through lack of food, the people became so exhausted that they could not pursue. This bad saving of time is but an illustration of the sort of time-saving many of us are frequently at in these last years of the nineteenth century! How frequently young people make such bad saving of time when they refuse themselves the food of preparation for future service, by using the time of their youth in too great devotion to other things. The young man in business whose attention is on the simple getting through anyhow with his duty, is making this bad saving of time. The young woman whose chief care is society rather than thoroughness and deftness in the knowledges and services that specially belong to women, is making such bad saving of her time. They set Michael Angelo at carving a statue in snow. Lost time for the great sculptor, for the statue being finished could only melt. Such as these are carving statues out of snow, and poor ones at that.
2. How frequently people make such bad saving of time when, like Saul refusing to let the people take time for eating, they refuse to take time for the duty next them, and use that time in dreaming about or dreading the duty.
3. How frequently people make bad saving of time by refusing to seize the present time for becoming Christians, using the time meanwhile for the pursuit of other things. (Wayland Hoyt, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v24
CHAPTER X X
SAULS WILFULNESS.
Read full note →
1Sa_14:24-51.
THAT Saul was now suffering in character under the influence of the high position and great power to which he had been raised, is only too apparent from what is recorded in these verses. No doubt he pays more respect than he has been used to pay to the forms of religion. He enjoins a fast on his people at a very inconvenient time, under the idea that fasting is a proper religious act. He is concerned for the trespass of the people in eating their food with the blood. He builds the first altar he ever built to God. He consults the oracle before he will commit himself to the enterprise of pursuing the retreating enemy by night. He is concerned to find the oracle dumb, and tries to discover through whose sin it is so. For a ceremonial offence, committed by Jonathan in ignorance, he fancies that God's displeasure has come down on the people, and he not only insists that Jonathan shall die for this offence, but confirms his decision by a solemn oath, sworn in the name of God. All this shows Saul plunging and floundering from one mistake to another, and crowning his blunders by a proposal so outrageous that the indignation of the people arrests his purpose. The idea that the work of the day shall be wound up by the execution of the youth through whom all the wonderful deliverance has come, and that youth Saul's own son, is one that could never have entered into any but a distempered brain. Reason seems to have begun to stagger on her throne; the sad process has begun which in a more advanced stage left Saul the prey of an evil spirit, and in its last and most humiliating stage drove him to consult with the witch of Endor.
But how are we to explain his increase of religiousness side by side with the advance of moral obliquity and recklessness? Why should he be more careful in the service of God while he becomes more imperious in temper, more stubborn in will, and more regardless of the obligations alike of king and father? The explanation is not difficult to find. The expostulation of Samuel had given him a fright. The announcement that the kingdom would not be continued in his line, and that God had found a worthier man to set over His people Israel, had moved him to the quick. There could be no doubt that Samuel was speaking the truth. Saul had begun to disregard God's will in his public acts, and was now beginning to reap the penalty He felt that he must pay more attention to God's will. If he was not to lose everything, he must try to be more religious. There is no sign of his feeling penitent in heart. He is not concerned in spirit for his unworthy behaviour toward God. He feels only that his own interests as king are imperiled. It is this selfish motive that makes him determine to be more religious. The fast, and the consultation of the oracle, and the altar, and the oath that Jonathan shall die, have all their origin in this frightened, selfish feeling. And hence, in their very nature and circumstances, his religious acts are unsuitable and unseemly. In place of making things better by such services, he makes them worse; no peace of God falls like dew on his soul; no joy is diffused throughout his army; discontent reaches a climax when the death of Jonathan is called for; and tranquility is restored only by the rebellion of the people, rescuing their youthful prince and hero.
Alas, how common has this spirit been in the history of the world 1 What awful tragedies has it led to, what slaughter of heretics, what frightful excesses disgraceful to kings, what outrages on the common feelings of humanity! Louis XIV. has led a most wicked and profligate life, and he has ever and anon qualms that threaten him with the wrath of God. To avert that wrath, he must be more attentive to his religious duties. He must show more favour to the Church, exalt her dignitaries to greater honour, endow her orders and foundations with greater wealth. But that is not all. He must use all the arms and resources of his kingdom for ridding the Church of her enemies. For twenty years he must harass the Protestants with every kind of vexatious interference, shutting up their churches on frivolous pretexts, compelling them to bury their dead by night, forbidding the singing of psalms in worship, subjecting them to great injustice in their civil rapacity, and at last, by the revocation of the edict that gave them toleration, sweeping them from the kingdom in hundreds of thousands, till hardly a Protestant is left behind. What the magnificent monarch did on a large scale, millions of obscurer men have done on a small. It is a sad truth that terror and selfishness have been at the foundation of a great deal of that which passes current as religion. Prayers and penances and vows and charities in cases without number have been little better than premiums of insurance, designed to save the soul from punishment and pain. Nor have these acts been confined to that Church which, more than any other, has encouraged men to lock for saving benefit to the merit of their own works. Many a Protestant, roused by his conscience into a state of fright, has resolved to be more attentive to the duties of religion. He will read his Bible more; he will pray more; he will give more; he will go to church more. Alas, the spring of all this is found in no humiliation for sin before God, no grief at having offended the Father, no humble desire to be renewed in heart and conformed to the image of the First-born! And the consequence is, as in the case of Saul, that things go, not from bad to better, but from bad to worse. There is no peace of God that passeth all understanding; there is no general rectification of the disordered faculties of the soul; there is no token of heavenly blessing, blessing to the man himself and blessing to those about him. A more fiery element seems to come into his temper; a more bitter tone pervades his life. To himself it feels as if there were no good in trying to be better; to the world it appears as if religion put more of the devil into him. But it is all because what he calls religion is no religion; it is the selfish bargain-making spirit, which aims no higher than deliverance from pain; it is not the noble exercise of the soul, prostrated by the sense of guilt, and helpless through consciousness of weakness, lifting up its eyes to the hills whence cometh its help, and rejoicing in the grace that freely pardons all its sin through the blood of Christ, and in the gift of the Holy Spirit that renews and sanctifies the soul.
The first thing that Saul does, in the exercise of this selfish spirit, is to impose on the people an obligation to fast until the day be over. Any one may see that to compel fasting under such circumstances was alike cruel and unwise. To fast in the solitude of one's chamber, where there is no extra wear and tear of the bodily organs, and therefore no special need for recruiting them, is comparatively safe and easy. But to fast amid the struggles of battle or the hurry of a pursuit; to fast under the burning sun and that strain of the system which brings the keenest thirst; to fast under exertions that rapidly exhaust the thews and sinews, and call for a renewal of their tissues - to fast in circumstances like these involves an amount of suffering which it is not easy to estimate. It was cruel in Saul to impose a fast at such a time, all the more that, being commander-in-chief of the army, it was his duty to do his utmost for the comfort of his soldiers. But it was unwise as well as cruel; with energies impaired by fasting, they could not continue the pursuit nor make the victory so telling. Perhaps he was under the influence of the delusion that the more painful a religious service is, the more is it acceptable to God. That idea of penance does find a place in our natural notions of religion. Saul, as we have seen, grew up with little acquaintance with religious persons and little knowledge of Divine things; and now that perforce he is constrained to attend to them, it is no wonder if he falls into many a serious error. For he probably had no idea of that great rule of God's kingdom, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice."
The folly of Saul's order became apparent when the army came to a wood, where, as is common enough in the country, a stream of wild honey poured out, probably from the trunk of a hollow tree. Stretching out his rod or spear, Jonathan fixed it in a piece of the comb, which he transferred with his hand to his mouth. Immediately "his eyes were enlightened;" the dull feeling which settles on the eyes amid fatigue and hunger disappeared; and with the return of clear vision to his eyes, there would come a restoration of vigour to his whole frame. When told for the first time of the order which his father had given, he showed no regret at having broken it, but openly expressed his displeasure at its having ever been imposed. "Then said Jonathan, My father hath troubled the land. See, I pray you, how mine eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a little of this honey. How much more if haply the people had eaten freely to-day of the spoil of their enemies which they found I for had there not been a much greater slaughter among the Philistines?" We must bear in mind that Jonathan was a true man of God. He had set out that morning in his wonderful exploit in the true spirit of faith and full consecration to God. He was in far nearer fellowship with God than his father, and yet so far from approving of the religious order to fast which his father had given, he regards it with displeasure and distrust. Godly men will sometimes be found less outwardly religious than some other men, and will greatly shock them by being so. The godly man has an unction from the Holy One to understand His will; he goes straight to the Lord's business; like our blessed Lord, he finishes the work given him to do while the merely religious man is often so occupied with his forms, that, like the Pharisees, he neglects the structure for which forms are but the scaffolding; in paying his tithes of mint, anise, and cumin, he omits the weightier matters - justice, mercy, and truth.
But the evil caused by Saul's injudicious fast was not yet over. The obligation to fast lasted only till sunset, and when the day was ended, the people, faint and ravenous, flew upon the spoil - sheep, oxen, and calves - and devoured them on the spot, without taking time or pains to sever the blood from the flesh. To remedy this, Saul had a great stone placed beside him, and ordered the people to bring every man his ox or his sheep, and slay them on that stone, that he might see that the blood was properly drained from the flesh. Then we gather from the marginal reading of 1Sa_14:35 that he was proceeding to erect with the stone an altar to God, but that he did not carry this purpose completely into effect, because he determined to continue the pursuit of the Philistines. He saw how much recruited his troops were by their food, and he therefore determined to make a new assault. If it had not been for the unwise order to fast given early in the day, if the people had been at liberty to help themselves to the honey as they passed it, or to such other refreshments as they found in their way, they would have been some hours earlier in this pursuit, and it would have been so much the more effectual.
It would seem, however, that the priest who was in attendance on Saul was somewhat alarmed at the abrupt and rather reckless way in which the king was making his plans and giving his orders. "Let us draw near hither unto God," said he. Counsel was accordingly asked of God whether Saul should go down after the Philistines and whether God would deliver them into the hand of Israel. But to this inquiry no answer was given. It was natural to infer that some sin had separated between God and Saul, some iniquity had caused God to hide His face from him. Here was a State of things that might well make Saul pause and examine himself. Had he done so in an honest spirit, he could hardly have failed to find out what was wrong. God had given a wonderful deliverance that day through Jonathan. Jonathan was as remarkable for the power of faith as Saul for the want of it. Jonathan had been wonderfully blessed that day, but now that Saul, through the priest, sought to have a communication with God, none was given. Might he not have seen that the real cause of this was that Saul wanted what Jonathan possessed? Besides, was Saul doing justice to Jonathan in taking the enterprise out of his hands? If Jonathan began it, was he not entitled to finish it? Would not Saul have been doing a thing alike generous and just had he stood aside at this time, and called on Jonathan to complete the work of the day? If the king of England was justified in not going to the help of the Black Prince, serious though his danger was, but leaving him to extricate himself, and thus enjoy the whole credit of his valour, might not Saul have let his son end the enterprise which he had so auspiciously begun? In these two facts, in the difference between him and Jonathan as to the spirit of faith, and in the way in which Saul displaced the man whom God so signally' countenanced in the morning, the king of Israel might have found the cause of the silence of the oracle. And the right thing for him would have been to confess his error, stand aside, and call on Jonathan to continue the pursuit and, if possible, exterminate the foe.
But Saul took a different course. He had recourse to the lot, to determine the guilty party. Now, it does not appear that even the king of Israel, with the priest at his side, was entitled to resort to the lot to ascertain the mind of God except in cases where all natural means of discovering it confessedly failed. But we have just seen that in this case the natural means had not failed. Therefore there was no obligation on God to order the lot supernaturally so as to bring out the truth. In point of fact, the process ended so as to point to the very last man in all the army to whom blame was due. It was, as mathematicians say, a reductio ad absurdum. It is a proof that an instrument is out of order if it brings out a result positively ludicrous. If near the equator an instrument gives the latitude of the polar circle, it is a proof that it is not working rightly. When the lot pointed to Jonathan, it was a proof that it was not working rightly. Any man might have seen this. And Saul ought to have seen it. And he ought to have confessed that he was entirely out of his reckoning. Frankly and cordially he should have taken the blame on himself, and at once exonerated his noble son.
But Saul was in no mood to take the blame on himself. Nor had he moral sagacity enough to see what an outrage it would be to lay the blame on Jonathan. Assuming that he was guilty, he asked him what he had done. He had done nothing but eat a little honey, not having heard the king's order to abstain. The justification was complete. At worst, it was but a ceremonial offence, but to Jonathan it was not even that. But Saul was too obstinate to admit the plea. By a new oath, he devoted his son to death. Nothing could show more clearly the deplorable state of his mind. In the eye of reason and of justice, Jonathan had committed no offence. He had given signal evidence of the possession in a remarkable degree of the favour of God. He had laid the nation under inconceivable obligations. All these pleas were for him; and surely in the king's breast a voice might have been heard pleading, Your son, your first-born, ''the beginning of your strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power"! Is it possible that this voice was silenced by jealousy, jealousy of his own son, like his after-jealousy of David? What kind of heart could this Saul have had when in such circumstances he could deliberately say, "God do so, and more also, for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan"?
But "the Divine right of kings to govern wrong" is not altogether without check. A temporary revolution saved Jonathan. It was one good effect of excitement. In calmer circumstances, the people might have been too terrified to interfere. But now they were excited - excited by their victory, excited by their fast followed by their meal, and excited by the terror of harm befalling Jonathan. They had far clearer and more correct apprehension of the whole circumstances than the king had. It is especially to be noted that they laid great emphasis on the fact that that day God had worked by Jonathan, and Jonathan had worked with God. This made the great difference between him and Saul. "As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath wrought with God this day. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not."
The opportunity of inflicting further damage on the Philistines at this time was thus lost through the moral obtuseness, recklessness, and obstinacy of Saul. But in many a future campaign Saul as a warrior rendered great service to the kingdom. He fought against all his enemies on every side. On the east, the Moabites, the Ammonites, and the Edomites had to be dealt with; on the north, the kings of Zobah; on the south, the Amalekites; and on the west, the Philistines. These campaigns are briefly stated, but we may easily see how much of hard military work is implied in connection with each. We may understand, too, with what honesty David, in his elegy over Saul and Jonathan, might commemorate their warlike prowess: ''From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not empty." Whether these military expeditions were conducted in a better spirit than Saul shows in this chapter we cannot tell. Whether further proofs were given of God's presence with Jonathan as contrasted with his absence from Saul we do not know. It does not appear that there was any essential improvement in Saul. But when Jonathan again emerges from the obscurity of history, and is seen in a clear and definite light, his character is singularly attractive - one of the purest and brightest in the whole field of Scripture.
Evidently the military spirit ruled in Saul, but it did not bring peace nor blessing to the kingdom. ''He gathered an host," surrounded himself with a standing army, so as to be ready and have an excuse for any expedition that he wished to undertake. After a brief notice of Saul's family, the chapter ends by telling us that "there was sore war against the Philistines all the days of Saul; and when Saul saw any strong man or any valiant man, he took him unto him.'' The Philistines were far from being permanently subdued; there were not even intervals of peace between the two countries. There was bitter war, an open sore, perpetually bleeding, a terror on every side, never removed. How different it might have been had that one day been better spent! how different it would certainly have been had Saul been a man after God's own heart! One day's misdeeds may bring a whole generation of sorrow, for "one sinner destroyeth much good." Once off the right rail, Saul never got on it again; rash and restless, he doubtless involved his people in many a disaster, fulfilling all that Samuel had said about taking from the people, fulfilling but little that the people had hoped concerning deliverance from the hand of the Philistines.
Who does not see what a fearful thing it is to leave Cod and His ways, and give one's self up to the impulses of one's own heart? Fearful for even the humblest of us, but infinitely fearful for one of great resources and influence, with a whole people under him! How beautiful some prayers in the Psalms sound after we have been contemplating the wild career of Saul! "Show me Thy ways, O Lord; teach me in Thy paths. Lead me in Thy truth and teach me, for Thou art the God of my salvation; on Thee do I wait all the day." "Oh that my ways were directed to keep Thy statutes! Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all Thy commandments."
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v24 Saul’s Unwise Adjuration
Saul’s Unwise Adjuration
v. 24. And the men of Israel were distressed that day, harassed, thoroughly wearied; for Saul had adjured the people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening that I may be avenged on mine enemies. This was an act of false zeal, unauthorized by the Lord, Saul having more regard to his royal power than to the honor of Jehovah. So none of the people tasted any food, although they were jaded to the point of exhaustion.
Read full note →
v. 25. And all they of the land, namely, those who had now joined the forces of Saul, came to a wood, into a forested section of the hills; and there was honey upon the ground, flowing down in streams from the overloaded hives of wild bees.
v. 26. And when the people were come into the wood, behold, the honey dropped, running down from the trees where the bees had stored it; but no man put his hand to his mouth, to eat any of the honey; for the people feared the oath.
v. 27. But Jonathan heard not when his father charged the people with the oath, he was not aware of the curse; wherefore he put forth, while hastily passing by, the end of the rod that was in his hand and dipped it in an honeycomb, one visible in the structure of the bees, and put his hand, with which he had removed the honey from the rod, to his mouth; and his eyes were enlightened, the slight refreshment revived his strength, and this showed in the glow of his eyes.
v. 28. Then answered one of the people and said, Thy father straitly charged the people with an oath, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food this day; and the people were, rather, are, faint. It was a timid protest against Saul’s rash order.
v. 29. Then said Jonathan, My father hath troubled the land, brought disaster to the army of Israel and to all whom they represented; see, I pray you, how mine eyes have been enlightened because I tasted a little of this honey.
v. 30. How much more, if haply, by any means, the people had eaten freely today of the spoil of their enemies which they found? For had there not been now a much greater slaughter among the Philistines? Had the soldiers had nourishing food, they would have been in condition to inflict a much more severe defeat upon the Philistines.
v. 31. And they smote the Philistines that day, those who had not fled toward Beth-aven, from Michmash to Aijalon, far in the western foothills; and the people were very faint, weary to the point of utter exhaustion.
v. 32. And the people, as soon as it was evening, flew upon the spoil, in a ravenous desire for food, and took sheep and oxen and calves, and slew them on the ground; and the people did eat them with the blood, too impatient to let the blood drain out according to God’s command, Lev 19:26. This was the result of Saul’s unwise adjuration.
v. 33. Then they told Saul, saying, Behold the people sin against the Lord, in that they eat with the blood. And he said, Ye have transgressed, their conduct being faithlessness to the covenant of Jehovah; roll a great stone unto me this day, right now.
v. 34. And Saul said, Disperse yourselves among the people and say unto them, Bring me hither every man his ox and every man his sheep, and slay them here, where the blood could drain off properly, and eat; and sin not against the Lord in eating with the blood. And all the people brought every man his ox with him that night and slew them there.
v. 35. And Saul built an altar unto the Lord, apparently as a monument of the great victory; the same was the first altar that he built unto the Lord.
v. 36. And Saul said, after the people had once more been strengthened through the food which they ate, Let us go down after the Philistines by night and spoil them, take more booty, until the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them. Saul seems to have been aware of the fact that his rash order had been foolish, and therefore wanted to make up for lost time. And they, his counselors, or the people, said, Do whatsoever seemeth good unto thee. Then said the priest, Ahiah, Let us draw near hither unto God, to consult Him by means of the Urim and Thummim and thus to get His decision.
v. 37. And Saul asked counsel of God, Shall I go down after the Philistines? Wilt Thou deliver them into the hand of Israel? But He answered him not that day, at that time, this being an indication that the Lord had turned from the people and withdrawn His assistance.
v. 38. And Saul said, pursuing the hint given him by the silence of Jehovah, Draw ye near hither, all the chief of the people, the representatives, probably the elders, Num 11:30; and know and see wherein this sin, indicated by the silence of Jehovah, hath been this day.
v. 39. For, as the Lord liveth, which saveth Israel, though it be in Jonathan, my son, he shall surely die. This was another rash oath, and just as foolish as the first. But there was not a man among all the people that answered him, evidently from terror regarding the consequences.
v. 40. Then said he unto all Israel, Be ye on one side, and I and Jonathan, my son, will be on the other side, namely, in the casting of lots to determine the guilty one. And the people said unto Saul, Do what seemeth good unto thee.
v. 41. Therefore Saul said unto the Lord God of Israel, Give a perfect lot, exemption from punishment, establish the truth. And Saul and Jonathan were taken; but the people escaped, they went out free, the lot did not accuse them.
v. 42. And Saul said, Cast lots between me and Jonathan, my son. And Jonathan was taken, discovered as the one on whom, in Saul’s opinion, rested the fault.
v. 43. Then Saul said to Jonathan, Tell me what thou hast done. And Jonathan told him and said, I did but taste a little honey with the end of the rod that was in mine hand, and, lo, I must die; he was ready to pay the penalty, although in this case, since the mere command of a man was concerned, the guilt really fell on him who gave the foolish order.
v. 44. And Saul answered, with another unwarranted oath, God do so and more also; for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan.
v. 45. And the people, rousing themselves from their attitude of apparent indifference and silent submission at last, said unto Saul, Shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this great salvation in Israel? They regarded his great victory as a direct evidence of God’s favor and assistance. God forbid! As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath wrought with God this day, he was obviously a tool in the hand of God. So the people rescued Jonathan, from the fate which was threatening him, that he died not.
v. 46. Then Saul went up from following the Philistines, he did not continue the pursuit; and the Philistines, by no means permanently disabled, went to their own place, to their own country. The cause of the Lord’s silence was evidently not Jonathan’s conduct, but Saul’s own arbitrary and rash act. If men profess to seek God’s glory and honor, but at the same time take His name in vain time and again, the Lord often punishes them by letting them continue in their foolishness.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv24, 27, 29 So none of the troops tasted food
So none of the troops tasted food
It was understood by the troops that no refreshment was permitted under Saul's oath.
Read full note →
the people entered the forest
The Philistine soldiers fled through the forests and the Israelite soldiers followed them there.
the honey flowed
This is an exaggeration to emphasize how much honey there was in the forest. AT: "there was a lot of honey everywhere" (See: Hyperbole and Generalization)
no one put his hand to his mouth
Here putting one's "hand to his mouth" is a metonym that means to eat. AT: "no one ate any" (See: Metonymy)
the people feared the oath
The people were not afraid of the oath, but of the punishment that was associated with breaking the oath. AT: "the people were afraid of what Saul would do to them if they broke his oath" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
Saul (OT)
oath
curse
avenge
fear
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv24, 29 14:24 With his oath, Saul forced abstinence from food…
14:24 With his oath, Saul forced abstinence from food on men who were already hungry and exhausted from battle. This oath was probably a pagan-like attempt to manipulate God into giving them a favorable result (cp. notes on Exod 23:26; 25:22; 32:4). • That Saul said my enemies rather than “our enemies” reflects his self-centered pride.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.