Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David. But Jonathan, Saul’s son, greatly delighted in David. Jonathan told David, saying, “Saul my father seeks to kill you. Now therefore, please take care of yourself in the morning, and live in a secret place, and hide yourself. I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where you are, and I will talk with my father about you; and if I see anything, I will tell you.”
Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said to him, “Don’t let the king sin against his servant, against David; because he has not sinned against you, and because his works have been very good toward you; for he put his life in his hand, and struck the Philistine, and Yahweh worked a great victory for all Israel. You saw it, and rejoiced. Why then will you sin against innocent blood, to kill David without a cause?”
Saul listened to the voice of Jonathan: and Saul swore, “As Yahweh lives, he shall not be put to death.”
Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all those things. Then Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as before. There was war again. David went out, and fought with the Philistines, and killed them with a great slaughter; and they fled before him.
An evil spirit from Yahweh was on Saul, as he sat in his house with his spear in his hand; and David was playing with his hand. Saul sought to pin David to the wall with the spear; but he slipped away out of Saul’s presence, and he stuck the spear into the wall. David fled, and escaped that night. Saul sent messengers to David’s house, to watch him, and to kill him in the morning. Michal, David’s wife, told him, saying, “If you don’t save your life tonight, tomorrow you will be killed.” So Michal let David down through the window. He went away, fled, and escaped. Michal took the teraphim, and laid it in the bed, and put a pillow of goats’ hair at its head, and covered it with clothes. When Saul sent messengers to take David, she said, “He is sick.”
Saul sent the messengers to see David, saying, “Bring him up to me in the bed, that I may kill him.” When the messengers came in, behold, the teraphim was in the bed, with the pillow of goats’ hair at its head.
Saul said to Michal, “Why have you deceived me like this and let my enemy go, so that he has escaped?” Michal answered Saul, “He said to me, ‘Let me go! Why should I kill you?’ ”
Now David fled and escaped, and came to Samuel at Ramah, and told him all that Saul had done to him. He and Samuel went and lived in Naioth. Saul was told, saying, “Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah.”
Saul sent messengers to seize David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as head over them, God’s Spirit came on Saul’s messengers, and they also prophesied. When Saul was told, he sent other messengers, and they also prophesied. Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they also prophesied. Then he also went to Ramah, and came to the great well that is in Secu: and he asked, “Where are Samuel and David?” One said, “Behold, they are at Naioth in Ramah.”
He went there to Naioth in Ramah. Then God’s Spirit came on him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah. He also stripped off his clothes, and he also prophesied before Samuel, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Therefore they say, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 23, 24 Before Saul sought David’s life secretly, but now his…
Before Saul sought David’s life secretly, but now his hypocrisy bursteth to open cruelty.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–24 1Sa 19:1 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son,…
1Sa 19:1 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David.
Ver. 1. And Saul spake to Jonathan his son.] Detexit facinus fatuus et non implevit, saith Tacitus of one that was sent by the senate to kill another, but revealed it to one that disclosed and prevented it. Did Saul think that Jonathan would kill David whom he so dearly loved? How grossly mistaken was Saul! how shameless and impudent! This was in peius proficere: wicked men grow worse and worse, till wrath come upon them to the utmost.
Read full note →
And to all his servants.] Who were, while, great admirers of David, {1Sa 18:5} but now cold friends at best; not one of them speaks for him, and not a few of them are ready to act against him, according to the courtier’s motto, Quicquid regi placet, mihi placet; whatsoever pleaseth the king shall please me. Jonathan said nothing at present, lest he should seem publicly to oppose his father: whom also he now perceived to be in a rage, and so not in case to hear good counsel. Seedsmen sow not in a storm; physicians give not a potion in a fit.
That they should kill David.] But reason or cause he allegeth none. It was indeed the very same that Graecinus died for. Graecinum Iulium virum egregium Caesar occidit ob hoc unum, quod melior vir erat quam esse quenquam tyranno expedirer, saith Seneca: {a} that is, Graecinus Julius was by Caesar put to death for this only reason, because he was a better man than the tyrant could well away with.
{a} De Benef. lib. ii. cap. 21.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 Saul spake to Jonathan; whom, though lately engaged in…
Saul spake to Jonathan; whom, though lately engaged in a league of friendship with David, he thought to oblige to it by sense of his own interest, as being the next heir of the crown, and likely to suffer most by David’s advancement. And to all his servants: what before he secretly designed, now he openly and impudently avowed.
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 vv1, 8, 11, 18 Saul and Jonathan appear here in their different characters,…
Saul and Jonathan appear here in their different characters, with reference to David.
I. Never was enemy so unreasonably cruel as Saul. He spoke to his son and all his servants that they should kill David, Sa1 19:1. His projects to take him off had failed, and therefore he proclaims him an out-law, and charges all about him, upon their allegiance, to take the first opportunity to kill David. It is strange that he was not ashamed thus to avow his malice when he could give no reason for it, and that knowing all his servants loved David (for so he had said himself, Sa1 18:22), he was not afraid of provoking them to rebel by this bloody order. Either malice was not then so politic, or justice was not so corrupted as it has been since, or else Saul would have had him indicted, and have suborned witnesses to swear treason against him, and so have had him taken off, as Naboth was, by colour of law. But there is least danger from this undisguised malice. It was strange that he who knew how well Jonathan loved him should expect him to kill him; but he thought that because he was heir to the crown he must needs be as envious at David as himself was. And Providence ordered it thus that he might befriend David's safety.
Read full note →
II. Never was friend so surprisingly kind as Jonathan. A friend in need is a friend indeed. Such a one Jonathan was to David. He not only continued to delight much in him, though David's glory eclipsed his, but bravely appeared for him now that the stream ran so strongly against him.
1. He took care for his present security by letting him know his danger (Sa1 19:2): "Take heed to thyself, and keep out of harm's way." Jonathan knew not but that some of the servants might be either so obsequious to Saul or so envious at David as to put the orders in execution which Saul had given, if they could light on David.
2. He took pains to pacify his father and reconcile him to David. The next morning he ventured to commune with him concerning David (Sa1 19:3), not that night, perhaps because he observed Saul to be drunk and not fit to be spoken to, or because he hoped that, when he had slept upon it, he would himself revoke the order, or because he could not have an opportunity of speaking to him till morning.
(1.) His intercession for David was very prudent. It was managed with a great deal of the meekness of wisdom; and he showed himself faithful to his friends by speaking good of him, though he was in danger of incurring his father's displeasure by it - a rare instance of valuable friendship! He pleads, [1.] The good services David had done to the public, and particularly to Saul: His work has been to thee-ward very good, Sa1 19:4. Witness the relief he had given him against his distemper with his harp, and his bold encounter with Goliath, that memorable action, which did, in effect, save Saul's life and kingdom. He appeals to himself concerning his: Thou thyself sawest it, and didst rejoice. In that and other instances it appeared that David was a favourite of heaven and a friend to Israel, as well as a good servant to Saul, for by him the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel; so that to order him to be slain was not only base ingratitude to so good a servant, but a great affront to God and a great injury to the public. [2.] He pleads his innocency. Though he had formerly done many good offices, yet, if he had now been chargeable with any crimes, it would have been another matter; but he has not sinned against thee (Sa1 19:1), his blood is innocent (Sa1 19:5), and, if he be slain, it is without cause. And Jonathan had therefore reason to protest against it because he could not entail any thing upon his family more pernicious than the guilt of innocent blood.
(2.) His intercession, being thus prudent, was prevalent. God inclined the heart of Saul to hearken to the voice of Jonathan. Note, We must be willing to hear reason, and to take all reproofs and good advice even from our inferiors, parents from their own children. How forcible are right words! Saul was, for the present, so far convinced of the unreasonableness of his enmity to David that, [1.] He recalled the bloody warrant for his execution (Sa1 19:6): As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain. Whether Saul swore here with due solemnity or no does not appear; perhaps he did, and the matter was of such moment as to deserve it and of such uncertainty as to need it. But at other times Saul swore rashly and profanely, which made the sincerity of this oath justly questionable; for it may be feared that those who can so far jest with an oath as to make a by-word of it, and prostitute it to a trifle, have not such a due sense of the obligation of it but that, to serve a turn, they will prostitute it to a lie. Some suspect that Saul said and swore this with a malicious design to bring David within his reach again, intending to take the first opportunity to slay him. But, as bad as Saul was, we can scarcely think so ill of him; and therefore we suppose that he spoke as he thought for the present, but the convictions soon wore off and his corruptions prevailed and triumphed over them. [2.] He renewed the grant of his place at court. Jonathan brought him to Saul, and he was in his presence as in times past (Sa1 19:7), hoping that now the storm was over, and that his friend Jonathan would be instrumental to keep his father always in this good mind.
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 vv1–24 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son,.... Who was…
And Saul spake to Jonathan his son,.... Who was heir to his crown; and though he knew he loved David, and was in strict friendship with him, yet he might hope, that as his succession to the kingdom was in danger, as he thought, and that David was his rival in it, his mind would be alienated from him; and that he would listen rather to a father than a friend, and would see where his true interest lay, and abandon David, yea, seek his ruin, which Saul was intent upon
and to all his servants; who yet pretended to love David, and as he himself said they did, and some of them might; with these he might rather hope to succeed, as they were attached to him, and might be secretly enemies of David, and therefore to these, as well as to his son, he spake, and gave his orders:
Read full note →
that they should kill David; as if he was a traitor, and an usurper of his throne, and one that had a design upon that, and upon his life; finding he could do nothing by the schemes, and snares, and stratagems, he used in a private manner, he grew outrageous and furious, and openly declared his views, and laid his injunctions on his son and servants to take away David's life, as a very dangerous person to his crown and government.
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 vv1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 18, 20, 23, 24 Saul is pacified by Jonathan, ver. 1-7. Attempts again…
Saul is pacified by Jonathan, ver. 1-7. Attempts again to kill David, ver. 8-10. Is deceived by Michal, who sends David away, ver. 11-17. David flies to Ramah, and Saul prophesies, ver. 18-24.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24 Jonathan pleads for David before Saul, who is for…
CHAPTER XIX
Jonathan pleads for David before Saul, who is for the present
Read full note →
reconciled, 1-7.
David defeats the Philistines; and Saul becomes again envious,
and endeavours to slay him, but he escapes, 8-10.
Saul sends men to David's house, to lie in wait for him; but
Michal saves him by a stratagem, 11-17.
David flees to Samuel, at Ramah, 18.
Saul, hearing of it, sends messengers three several times to
take him; but the Spirit of coming upon them, they prophesy,
19-21.
Saul, hearing of this, goes after David himself, and falls under
the same influence, 22-24.
NOTES ON CHAP. XIX
Verse 1. That they should kill David.] Nothing less than the especial interposition of God could have saved David's life, when every officer about the king's person, and every soldier, had got positive orders to despatch him.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, 24 1Sa 19:1. Saul spake to Jonathan, and all his…
1Sa 19:1. Saul spake to Jonathan, and all his servants — When he could not destroy David by craft, he declares open enmity to him; and commands his son and his whole court to make him away; some of whom he thought would obey him. It is strange he should speak to Jonathan to murder David, if he knew the friendship he had for him; and he could not well be ignorant of it, since he had so publicly declared it, as we read chap. 1Sa 18:3-4. But he imagined his love to a father would overcome his love to a friend; and there was a great providence of God in his disclosing his mind so freely to Jonathan, as by that means David came to be certainly informed of his danger.
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 vv10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24 David fled - This was the beginning of David’s…
David fled - This was the beginning of David’s life as a fugitive and outcast, though for no “offence or fauIt” of his (Psa 59:3, Prayer Book Version).
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 vv1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 19, 20, 24 Jonathan. He was most interested, as David might be…
Jonathan. He was most interested, as David might be feared as a competitor; (Menochius) and, under the cloak of friendship, he might more easily destroy him. Saul was a stranger to the generous sentiments of his son, or he would never have made the proposal. (Haydock) --- Grotius compares him with Germanicus. (Calmet)
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).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 Open Deadly Persecution of David by Saul, and David’s…
THIRD SECTION
Open Deadly Persecution of David by Saul, and David’s Flight from Saul
Read full note →
1 Samuel 19-27
I. Jonathan proves his friendship for David in Saul’s open attempts on David’s life. David’s first flight from Saul’s murderous attempts, and his escape by Michal’s help
1Sa_19:1-24
1And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants that they should 2kill [about killing1] David. But Jonathan, Saul’s son, delighted much in David. And Jonathan told David, saying, Saul, my father, seeketh to kill thee; now, therefore, I pray thee [and now] take heed to thyself [ins. I pray thee] until the morning [to-morrow morning,2 om. until the], and abide in a secret place, and hide 3thyself.3 And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, and I will commune [speak] with [to] my father of thee; and what I see [I 4will see what he says] that [and] I [om. I] will tell thee. And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because [for] he hath not sinned against thee, and 5because [om. because] his works have been to thee-ward very good. For [And] he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord [Jehovah] wrought a great salvation for all Israel;4 thou sawest it and didst rejoice; wherefore, then, wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause? 6And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan, and Saul sware, As the Lord 7[Jehovah] liveth, he shall not be slain.5 And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all these things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence as in times past.
8And there was war again, and David went out6 and fought with the Philistines, 9and slew them with a great slaughter, and they fled from him. And the [an] evil spirit from the Lord [Jehovah7] was upon Saul; as he sat [and he was sitting] in his house, with [and] his javelin [ins. was] in his hand, and David played [was 10playing] with his hand. And Saul sought to smite David even [om. even] to the wall with the javelin, but he slipped away [got away] out of Saul’s presence, and he smote the javelin into the wall. And David fled, and escaped that night.8 11Saul also [And Saul] sent messengers unto David’s house to watch him, and9 to slay him in the morning; and Michal, David’s wife, told him, saying, If thou save 12not thy life to-night, to-morrow thou shalt be slain. So [And] Michal let David 13down through a [the] window, and he went and fled and escaped. And Michal took an image [the teraphim],10 and laid it in the bed, and put a pillow [the quilt] of goats’ hair for his bolster [at its head],11 and covered it with a cloth [the coverlet]. 14And when Saul sent messengers to take David, she12 said, He is sick. 15And Saul sent the messengers again [om. again] to see David, saying, Bring him 16up to me in the bed, that I may slay him. And when the messengers were come in [And the messengers came in and] behold, there was an image13 in the bed, with a pillow of goats’ hair for his bolster [behold the teraphim in the bed and the quilt 17of goats’ hair at its head14]. And Saul said unto Michal, Why hast thou deceived me so, and sent away mine enemy, that he is escaped? And Michal answered [said to] Saul, He said unto me, Let me go,15 why should I kill thee?
18And David fled and escaped and came to Samuel to Ramah, and told him all that Saul had done to him. And he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth.16 19, 20And it was told Saul, saying, Behold David is at Naioth in Ramah. And Saul sent messengers to take David; and when they saw the company17 of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed [as leader] over them, the Spirit of God was [came] upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied. 21And when [om. when] it was told Saul, [ins. and] he sent other messengers, and they [ins. also] prophesied likewise [om. likewise]. And Saul sent messengers 22again the third time, and they prophesied also [also prophesied]. Then [And] went he also [he also went] to Ramah, and came to a [the] great well [cistern]18 that is in Sechu.19 And he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And 23one said, Behold, they be [are] at Naioth in Ramah. And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah; and the Spirit of God was [came] upon him also, and he went 24on and prophesied until he came to Naioth in Ramah. And he [ins. too] stripped off his clothes also [om. also] and [ins. he too] prophesied before Samuel in like manner [om. in like manner], and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa_19:1-7. Warding off through Jonathan’s mediation of the first open outbreak of Saul’s deadly enmity to David.
1Sa_19:1. Saul advances so far in his deadly hate towards David that he speaks openly to his courtiers of his purpose to kill him. The “killing” [Eng. A. V. is wrong, see Text. and Gram.—Tr.] refers not to Jonathan and Saul’s servants, but to Saul himself.
1Sa_19:2. Jonathan shows his friendship for David 1) in informing him of Saul’s designs on his life, and counselling him to conceal himself, and 2) in interceding for him with Saul, and trying to turn away his anger (1Sa_19:3), in which he succeeds.—In thus attempting to restore friendly relations between his father and David, Jonathan’s aim was to keep David at court for the welfare of his father and the people, because he saw in David a specially chosen instrument of the Lord for the welfare of Israel, as he expressly declares in 1Sa_19:4. (דִּבֵּר with בְּ as in Psa_87:3; Deu_6:7 : “to speak concerning one.” Ew., § 217, 2.)—David is to hide in the field, as we infer from Jonathan’s saying that he will speak with his father in the field where David is. The place designated by Jonathan was perhaps one to which Saul used often to go, or where he was accustomed to hold confidential and private conversations. To “what” [see Text. and Gram.—Tr.] we must supply “he says” or “I hear” (Vulg.: et quodcunque videro tibi nuntiabo [so Eng. A. V.]). Against De Wette’s translation: “what it is,” Thenius properly urges that Jonathan already knew what Saul then had in mind. Against Thenius’ view that David was to hide near Saul in order to hear what he said is the fact that Jonathan himself says to David: “I will tell thee.” Rather we must suppose with Keil that Jonathan made this arrangement in order that he might tell David the result of the conversation immediately, without having to go far from his father, and thus awaken suspicion of an understanding with David.
1Sa_19:4-5. Jonathan’s statement to Saul is three-fold: 1) he spoke good of David, that is, he spoke favorably of him, pointing out his excellent qualities and his services to Saul and the nation; 2) on the ground of this he implored Saul not to sin against his servant. This designation of David as his servant accords with the foregoing reference to the good which David, as Saul’s faithful servant, had done; 3) to this he adds two reasons, a negative: “he hath not sinned against thee,” that is, he has done nothing to call forth thy vengeance; and a positive: “his works are very useful to thee,” that is, far from doing thee harm, he hath done thee only great service by his deeds.—The relation of 1Sa_19:5 to the latter part of 1Sa_19:4 is this, that Jonathan, continuing his mediation, here reminds his father of the deed which is specially to be taken into consideration, the slaying of the Philistine, and how he had therein ventured his life: “he put his life in his hand”20 (1Sa_28:21; Jdg_12:2), risked his life (perhaps alluding to David’s hand, which swung the sling against the giant, on the firmness and certainty of which his life depended).—Jonathan then proceeds to point out how serviceable to Saul this deed of David was: and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel; thou sawest it and didst rejoice. This reminder of Saul’s joy at David’s exploit (seen with his own eyes) and its grand results, this vivid presentation of the situation at that time is the psychological stepping-stone to the ethical change which is brought about in Saul’s attitude towards David by Jonathan’s pressing and yet modest supplication: Why wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without cause?—Saul was changeable and uncertain in his unstable inner life, because there was yet in him a noble germ whence good fruit might yet come.
1Sa_19:6. Saul swore, a characteristic indication of his to go to one extreme or another. David’s life was now saved. [Some think that Saul swore insincerely, to put Jonathan off his guard; but this is not so probable as that he was here sincere, but fell again under the power of jealousy (1Sa_19:10).—Tr.].
1Sa_19:7. Jonathan, having performed this friendly service for David, informs him of the result according to promise (1Sa_19:3), and David resumes his place at court. David was in Saul’s presence “as yesterday and the day before,” that is, as in times past.
1Sa_19:8-17. David’s first flight in consequence of another murderous attempt on Saul’s part, the result of envy and jealousy.
1Sa_19:8. The background of this narrative is formed by the military life which was connected with the continued wars with the Philistines. The “went out” is not to be changed into some other word (with Then. after Sept. κατίσχυσε), but to be retained (as in 1Sa_18:5; 1Sa_18:16) as expressing David’s marching forth to battle.
1Sa_19:9. The ethical ground of Saul’s new outburst of rage after David’s success is his envy and jealousy of David’s honor and glory, as is intimated by the preceding mention of the latter’s victory over the Philistines.—“We have two similar accounts of Saul’s outbreaks (1Sa_18:10 sq. and 1Sa_19:9 sq.) simply because such outbreaks were really frequent (comp. especially 1Sa_18:18) and like one another” (Nägelsbach in Herz. XIII. 403). An evil Spirit of Jehovah came upon Saul.—While this evil spirit is in 1Sa_16:15 and 1Sa_18:10 referred to Elohim, the Deity in general, Jehovah is here affirmed to be its sender, because Saul’s condition, which was there only ascribed in general to a higher divine causality in respect to his person, is here regarded as a judgment of the covenant-God of Israel on the reprobate king, who hardens his heart against God.—Along with his military calling, David here again takes his old place as harpist. He did not abandon the post assigned him by the Lord, so long as the Lord did not through events command him to leave it, as was afterwards the case, cf. 1 Samuel 20.—The Sept. took offence at the “evil spirit of Jehovah” and left out “Jehovah.”21 But the Genitive means nothing more than what is said in 1Sa_16:14, that the God of Israel sent an evil spirit on Saul, or gave him over to the power of the evil spirit.
1Sa_19:10. David escapes Saul’s spear, which penetrates the wall. He flees the same night. (The Art. of the Pron. is lacking from similarity of sound, Ew. § 392 a, and § 70 c). The Sept. reads: “and it came to pass that night that Saul sent” (inserting וִיְהִי and connecting with the following), looking to 1Sa_19:12, where the flight by night is first mentioned. Against this it is not necessary to insist that the narrator here in Hebrew fashion gives the result first by anticipation, and then details the immediate incidents; for Saul’s attempt may have occurred in the evening, or, if it happened in the day-time, David may first have hidden in Saul’s house, and then at night have fled to his own house. That David fled to his own dwelling and remained there till night, appears from 1Sa_19:11, according to which Saul sends messengers to his house to watch him and to kill him in the morning (that is, when he went out again). With this agrees exactly the fact that Michal, who acquainted him with the danger threatening him in his house, presses him to flee that night, because in the morning he would be slain. In the night of the same day on which the attempt on his life occurred, David fled from Saul’s house to his own, and the same night by Michal’s means he fled from his own house. [Kitto: “We may guess that only the fear of alarming the town, and of rousing the populace to rescue their favorite hero, prevented him from directing them to break into the house and slay David there.” Others suggest the fear of alarming or injuring Michal. She could easily get notice of Saul’s design from Jonathan or others.—Tr.]
1Sa_19:12. Through the window, because the door was watched (1Sa_19:11) by Saul’s men. For similar escapes through windows see Jos_2:15; Act_9:25; 2Co_11:33.—With this flight of David began his weary fleeing before Saul, and the great sufferings and dangers which he encountered in this unsettled life.
1Sa_19:13. By a trick with the Teraphim Michal deceives Saul’s catchpolls.—The teraphim were the images of domestic or private gods (Penates) which the Israelites retained as the remnant of the idolatry brought from the Aramæan or Chaldean home (Gen_31:19; Gen_31:34) in spite of their removal after the entry of Jacob’s family into Canaan (Gen_35:2 sq.) and of the absolute prohibition of idolatry in the Law, which reappear especially in the period of the Judges (Jdg_17:5; Jdg_18:14 sq.) and particularly meet us in the houses of Saul and David in spite of Samuel’s prophetic zeal against such idolatry (1Sa_15:23; comp. Hos_3:4; Zec_10:2). The Plu. here represents a single image, which it seems (1Sa_19:16) must have had the human form at least as to head and face, though the size may have varied, since (Gen_31:30 sq.) it was so small that Rachel could conceal it under the camel-saddle, while Michal here uses it to make Saul’s men believe that David was in the bed. The teraphim which Laban calls his “Elohim” were probably originally tutelar deities, dispensers of domestic and family good fortune. On the derivation and meaning of the name see Rödiger in Ges. Thes. III. 1520, Hävernick on Ezek. p. 347 sq., and Delitzsch Gen. II. p. 220 [and Art. “Teraphim” in Smith’s Bib. Dict.—Tr.].22 On the meaning see particularly the Arts. in Winer and Herzog. Whether it was a wooden image is uncertain, as also, whether Michal had such domestic gods on account of her barrenness (Michaelis, Thenius, Keil). כְּבִיר (which the Sept. read כָּבֵד “liver,” whence Joseph says that Michal put a palpitating goat-liver into the bed to represent a breathing sick man) is from כָּבַר [“to braid”] and means woven-work or net [rendered quilt or mattress, Eng. A. V. pillow.—Tr.]. The plural of “goat” (עֵז) here = goats’ hair. The Def. Art. points to something which belonged to the furnishing of a couch or bed.23 She put it at his head, which may mean either that she put a woven cover under his head, or a hairy cover on or around his head. In any case Michal’s purpose was to make the head of the teraphim look as much as possible like a human head. The בַּבָּֽגֶד [“with the coverlet”] must, on account of the article, be understood of some piece of household stuff, therefore of the bed-cover. The word (בֶּגֶד) means the upper garment of the Oriental, which is a wide cloth thrown around the person, and served also for bed-clothing.
1Sa_19:14. When Saul’s messengers come the first time, Michal says to them that David is sick. [On this untruth see “Histor. and Theolog.” to this chap. at end.—Tr.].
1Sa_19:15. Saul, determined to carry out his purpose orders David to be brought up to him on the bed, that is, to his house, which, therefore, was higher than David’s. “Saul must therefore have resided in Gibeah on the height” (Then.).
1Sa_19:16. The messengers come and discover the deceit. The express mention of the “goat-hair cover at his head” shows that this had materially contributed to the success of the deception. It appears from 1Sa_19:13 that to the words [of the Heb.]: “behold teraphim in the bed,” we must supply “laid” or “placed.”
1Sa_19:17. Saul demands an explanation of Michal. Why hast thou sent away my enemy?—In these words appears all Saul’s bitterness and blindness. It is a sort of “persecuting mania” that shows itself in David’s persecutor.—Michal’s defence does not agree with the statement in 1Sa_19:11-12, that she herself urged David to flight. From fear of her father she tells a “lie of necessity,” saying: “He said to me, send me away, why should I kill thee?” She pretends that she wished to prevent his flight, but he threatened to kill her if she stood in his way. [To this deliverance is referred Psalms 59 by its title and Psalms 7 by some critics.—Tr.]
1Sa_19:18-24. David’s flight to Ramah to Samuel.
1Sa_19:18. David told Samuel all that Saul had done to him.—That David takes refuge in Samuel’s quiet seat of the prophets is explained by the intimate connection which David already had with Samuel and the prophetic school presided over by him, and especially by the official-theocratic connection which David’s anointing had brought about between the two men. Samuel now becomes God’s instrument for saving and preserving David as the Lord’s Anointed from the attempts of Saul. David dwelt “at Naioth” with Samuel, who went thither with him. Naioth is to be distinguished from Ramah, Samuel’s dwelling-place, and to be regarded as a place where Samuel stayed as long as David, who had at first reported to him at Ramah, was with him (comp. 1Sa_19:22-23). The Kethib has everywhere Nevaioth, Vulg. (with Qeri) Naioth. The appellative, signifying “dwellings,” became the proper name of the place where dwelt the prophets who gathered about Samuel as their head (comp. 1Sa_19:20). The plu. form indicates a colony consisting of several dwellings, a prophetic cenobium.24
1Sa_19:19-20. Saul, having been informed of David’s stay in this cenobium, sent messengers to fetch him.25 The prophets26, here appear 1) in an assembly, 2) therein engaged in prophesying, and 3) under the lead of Samuel. It is to be noted that we have here prophets, who in inspired discourse give forth their inner life filled with the Holy Ghost, not sons of the prophets, as in 2Ki_4:38; 2Ki_6:1, who as scholars and learners sit at the feet of their master and teacher. The prophetic community here, therefore, under Samuel as head is not yet a prophetic school, to educate young men for the prophetic calling, but is a prophetic seminary, in which, under Samuel’s guidance in an externally strictly ordered yet internally free association, the prophetic powers are practiced and strengthened, mutually incite, nourish, and further one another, and the prophetic charisma finds ever new nourishment and new growth by this common holy discipline. And the Spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul; Spirit of God, not Spirit of Jehovah, because we here have not to do with the Spirit of the covenant-God, but with the supernatural principle of inspiration. And they too prophesied. Clericus: “They sang divine praises, being seized on by a sudden afflatus which they could not resist (as Saul, 1Sa_10:10), so that they no longer had control over themselves.” The condition of Saul’s messengers is that of ecstatic ravishment, into which they were brought by the overpowering might of the inspired song or word of the prophets.
1Sa_19:21. Saul’s second and third companies of messengers fall into a similar ravishment. [The repeated occurrence of this supernatural seizure adds greatly to the force and effectiveness of the narrative. The purpose of this in the divine providence, we may suppose, was to bring Saul himself.—Tr.]
1Sa_19:22. Then went he also to Ramah and came (on the way thither) to the great cistern (well known, as the Art. shows) that was in Sechu,—a now unknown region or locality near Ramah. The Sept. has “cistern of the threshing-floor” (גֹרֶן), instead of “great” cistern, and “on the hill” (שְׁפִי), instead of “Sechu.” But, though it is true that threshing-floors were usually on hills, there is no need here of a change of text.27 Saul, learning that David and Samuel were at Naioth in Ramah, went thither.
1Sa_19:23. While he was still in the way there happened to him what happened to his messengers. The Spirit of God came upon him also, and he went on and prophesied till he came to Naioth in Ramah. The difference between Saul and his messengers was simply that the inspiration came on him as he was approaching the residence of the prophet, and that it attained a higher grade and lasted longer, completely suppressing his self-consciousness.
1Sa_19:24, namely, relates: And he too stripped off his clothes, and he too prophesied before Samuel. The throwing off of the clothing was the effect of the heat of body produced by internal excitement. Abarbanel: “because of inward warmth, and to spread the garments out.” We may suppose that the messengers also cast away their garments (though it is not expressly so said), as the prophets in their times of excitement and heat may well have done. The “he also” is not found in the following sentence: he lay naked all day and all night. This does not necessarily mean complete nakedness (עָרֹם, 2Sa_6:20), because there was worn under the kethoneth or tunic a fine woven shirt of linen or cotton (מָדִין, Jdg_14:12 sq.; Isa_3:23), and over it a long sleeveless outer garment (מְעִיל, 1Sa_18:4; 1Sa_14:5-12). Comp. Keil, Bibl, Arch., II., 39.—Saul lay in his under-garment (a sort of shirt which was next to the body, but did not completely cover it) unconscious; so completely was he overcome by the ecstacy. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets? See 1Sa_10:11-12, where the origin of this saying is related. Here we have not the origin, but the application of the already existing proverb.
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. The picture of a true, faithful friend, already presented to us in Jonathan, is here completed in the account of his conduct towards Saul and David in individual significant traits and clear colors; but at the same time along with this picture of noble friendship we find one of an humble, reverent, childlike spirit towards the sinful purpose of his father. As soon as Jonathan has learned from his father the danger that threatened David’s life, he shows his faithful love for his friend by imparting to him the evil designs of his father, by enjoining on him to hide himself, by promising to soften if possible his father’s wrath, and by informing him how he (David) should soon learn the result of his effort at mediation and rescue. But Jonathan’s noble character appears in yet clearer light in his conduct towards his father. For his friend’s sake he dares, at the risk of his life, to oppose the rage and the sinister designs of his own father. Openly and frankly he represents to his father the great crime he would commit by slaying David. His heart is free from envy and jealousy while he sets before his father David’s great services to the royal house and the whole nation. His words and bearing show manly firmness and decision, and yet childlike piety, reverence, and obedience; no word not in keeping with the Fourth Commandment from his lips. And in addition to all this is his magnanimous self-denial, since he doubtless suspected that his friend would ascend the throne after his father. Though he himself possessed all the qualities which should adorn God’s Anointed on the throne, heroic courage, undisputed, universally acknowledged military renown, firm trust in the living God, and a noble disposition, he shows not the slightest trace of envy and unkindness towards David. “Notwithstanding all this he was not only nobly ready, if the Lord should so command, to give up his birthright, but strove wisely and vigorously to defeat all that was conceived and undertaken against God’s decree, even at the risk of falling by his own father’s hand, a sacrifice to his piety and friendship” (F. W. Krummacher). Jonathan is a character that rises on the platform of Old Testament-life in peculiarly noble, harmonious, ethical-sympathetic form, whether we regard him as the heroic warrior and leader, or as faithful, self-denying friend, or as humble, modest prince-royal, or as the frank, unshrinking denouncer of wrong and sin.
2. In David’s ethical-historical character, as presented to us in this section, we have to note in the first place his humble and obedient behaviour in the calling appointed him by the divine providence at the royal court, in spite of the quickly changing and fiercely outbreaking passionate moods of Saul, and in spite of the dangers which he saw threatened him. Every moment he put himself at the king’s disposition, and was at his side to help him whenever it was necessary. He went quietly on the way which the Lord had appointed him. And therefore he was under God’s protection, and experienced the preserving help of his God.—Yet this flight, in which his wife’s faithful love was the Lord’s means of saving him, began the unbroken series of severe sufferings and trials by which David was to be confirmed in his faith and trained in a hard school for his royal calling. In this long life of suffering he had uninterrupted experience as a confirmed servant of God of the help, the consolation, the strengthening from above to which his Psalms bear testimony. Roos: “Lay David’s good and bad fortune in the balances. A courtier and officer, who falls under the king’s displeasure, whom the king with implacable rage seeks to kill, whom the courtiers and many others, to please the king, despise and persecute, a man who is compelled to flee, who in need and affliction must always conceal himself, who can often find no place on earth where to lay his head, such a man may well talk of misfortune, and is in this view a miserable person. But if we remember that God in his deepest needs vouchsafes gracious visitations to the soul of this man, lifts it, as it were, above all mists and clouds, grants it clearest insight into truth, refreshes it by undeceptive addresses and friendly consolations, and through it points all men to happiness, we must admit that this man’s good fortune is greater than his bad fortune, that his honor is greater than his reproach, and that the good that he has super-abundantly makes up for all his outward want.”
2. The title of the 59th Psalm refers its origin to David’s dangerous situation in Gibeah, “when Saul sent and they watched the house to kill him.” And in fact the recurring verses 7 and 15 [6 and 14] of this very artistically arranged Psalm point to ambushments which begin in the evening. But it is repeated ambuscades that are there spoken of. Since now in our history only one night is mentioned, it seems more appropriate not to refer this Psalm to those dangerous days in Gibeah (Delitzsch, Moll), but with Hengstenberg to find its occasion in David’s remembrance of the deliverance wrought that night through Michal, which was the beginning of the weary flight, wherein he encountered such unspeakable dangers and sufferings. “Such being the importance of the fact, we should expect David to perpetuate its recollection by a Psalm” (Hengst.). The Psalm was sung when he looked back on the long line of enemies’ snares and divine deliverances, of which the events of that evening and night were the beginning and type. We must not, however, confine ourselves to that event alone, but must include all David’s similar experiences of Saul’s traps. “From the Psalm it appears only that it was called forth by an attempt on the singer’s life; in other respects the circumstances are those which belong in general to the Saul-period” (Hengst.).28
4. The teraphim-image, which Michal employs, shows that these Aramæan idols, these forms of “strange gods” which Rachel took secretly from her father’s house (Gen_31:19; Gen_31:34)—in spite of their burial by Jacob (Gen_35:2 sq.), and their ordered removal by Joshua (Jos_24:22) and Samuel’s zealous opposition to them (1Sa_15:23)—hid in the privacy of domestic life, whence in the time of the Judges they came openly forth (Judges 17 compared with 1Sa_18:14 sq.), still maintained themselves. As the teraphim were oracular deities in their old homes (so in Eze_21:21 Nebuchadnezzar inquires through them whether he shall march against Jerusalem or against Ammon), so also in Israel (Judg. 17:18; 1Sa_15:23; Hos_3:4; Eze_21:26; Zec_10:2) they were superstitiously used as oracles, counsel being asked through them concerning the future. Hävernick (on Eze_21:26): “The use of the teraphim as oracles came no doubt through their connection with the Ephod (comp. Hos_3:4; Zec_10:2), the ancient general notion of their magical power passing over into the more special one of prediction”. Under Josiah (2Ki_23:24) their removal was decreed in connection with other idolatrous abominations, but they kept their place till the Exile.
5. In respect to the history and theocratic significance of the so-called Schools of the prophets, we must distinguish the two periods in which, in point of fact, the only mention of them occurs. In the first place we meet with prophetic unions or prophetic communities in the age of Samuel, which are more exactly defined during his relations with Saul: first that band of prophets (1Sa_10:5; 1Sa_10:10), which in Gibeah descends from the sacrificial hill and meets Saul, prophesying with music and song. Perhaps this community resided in Gibeah, in support of which we may perhaps with Keil adduce the name “Gibeah of God.” In 1 Samuel 19 the prophetic community stands in a near relation to Samuel as the “president.” The members are called Nebiim (prophets]; they prophesy under Samuel’s lead; their inspiration (as in 1 Samuel 10) is so mighty that persons that do not belong to them, as Saul’s servants and Saul himself, are seized and overpowered by it, and fall into a like ecstacy. David is closely connected with them, as is shown by his flight to them and stay with them. He found there only temporary safety indeed from Saul’s persecutions, but abiding consolation and strength in the inspired prophetic word, in the blessings of the fraternal community, and in the consoling and elevating power of the holy poetic art, whereby he doubtless stood in peculiarly intimate connection with the community. The members of the body formed a Cenobium; their outward life of union symbolized their inward union under the mighty impulse of one and the same Spirit, the Holy Spirit, a union which they saw accomplished through this prophetic Spirit which informed them all. In point of fact we find certainly at this time such an organized prophetic community only in Ramah; whether Samuel, who was its president there in the latter part of his life, was also the establisher of the form of associated life, is doubtful; but in any case it may be confidently maintained that through the powerful influence which he exerted on his contemporaries by the prophetic Spirit which dwelt and worked in him, awakening and fashioning a new life, this Spirit, which in its essential nature tended to produce association, showed itself in such unions of prophetic men. The original power and vigor of this Spirit expresses itself in these extraordinary phenomena and overwhelming effects, just as in the Apostolic church they appear as the fruit of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2; 1 Corinthians 14). The theocratic significance of this association consisted in the fact that, along with Samuel’s lofty prophetical form, they were the centre and source of the reviving religious-moral life of the nation, after it had lost its theocratic centre in the national sanctuary, which was despoiled of the ark of the covenant. The prophetic men of this community, which is by no means to be regarded as an association of pupils, represent the manifold theocratic-prophetic influence on the people, which was first completely brought to bear by Samuel’s labors; they form, when Samuel’s life is approaching its end, the aftergrowth (nurtured by him) of the combined divinely-appointed theocratic office of prophet and judge (alongside of the royal office), as bearers of which we find the prophets in David’s time. In their midst originated and was cultivated the theocratic-prophetic writing of history, as representatives of which a Gad (comp. 1Sa_22:5) and a Nathan are mentioned along with Samuel (1Ch_29:29). Comp. Thenius on 1Sa_19:19; 1Sa_22:5—On the prophetic schools under Samuel see Oehler in Herz. R.-E., s. v. Prophetenthum des A. T., XII. 214–217.
The history is silent concerning the prophetic communities during the whole period from Samuel to the age of Elijah and Elisha. Not till the epoch in the development of the prophetic Order in Israel marked by the grand prophetic characters of Elijah and his successor Elisha do we again meet with these communities, and then only in the kingdom of the Ten Tribes at Gilgal, Bethel, and Jericho, in which places there was a numerous membership (2Ki_4:38; 2Ki_2:3; 2Ki_2:5; 2Ki_2:7; 2Ki_2:15-16; 2Ki_4:1; 2Ki_4:43; 2Ki_6:1; 2Ki_9:1); here, however, they are not called “prophets” as under Samuel’s lead, but sons of the prophets (1Ki_20:35), a name which indicates that they stood to the leaders and presidents of the communities in a dependent relation as scholars and disciples. They have their places of assembly and abode, designed for a large number, where they sit at the feet of their prophetic masters (comp. 2Ki_6:1 sq.), and receive prophetic instruction and cultivation. Only such can we properly call prophetic schools, whose prophetic presidents and leaders (as Elisha’s case shows) had to legitimate themselves by the power of the prophetic spirit dwelling in them. While under Samuel’s presidency the prophetic communities appear as freer associations of prophetic men for the exertion of united influence on the people, these later ones are distinct Unions, in which teachers and scholars, masters and disciples stand in a relation of mutual co-ordination [control and subordination]. The subject-matter of the instruction was the divine law and the history of the divine dealings with the covenant people; the aim of the instruction was the nurture and furtherance of the prophetic spirit by holy discipline in an organized God-serving life. The pupils were trained in unconditional obedience to the divine law, in living appropriation of the holy will of God as absolute norm for their own wills; from their Cenobia thus equipped they went forth among the people to testify of the living God, of His word and His righteous and gracious dealings, and with absolute obedience to perform the special tasks imposed on them by the masters with divine authority (comp. 1Ki_13:20 sq.). Besides this general theocratic significance these Unions had the special duty to form the centre of the service of God for the people in their separation from the sanctuary at Jerusalem (comp. 2Ki_4:23; 2Ki_4:42), and in the prophetical work of their members to oppose a solid power to the heathenism which pressed in on the people under an idolatrous government, and to maintain the honor of the living God. Comp. Oehler ubi supra, p. 220 sq.—In respect to the historical continuity of such prophetic associated life in the interval between the prophetic communities of Samuel and these later schools of the prophets, nothing can be certainly determined, although, as Oehler shows against Keil (as above, p. 215), the great number of prophets, which, according to 1Ki_18:13, must have existed when Elijah appeared, seems to favor such continuity. Comp, on the other side Keil’s remarks in his commentary on 1 Samuel 19. p. 147 sq. [Eng. Transl., pp. 199–205.]
[Michal’s deception in 1Sa_19:13) may be called a stratagem, her statement in 1Sa_19:14 is a falsehood carrying out the stratagem, and her answer to her father in 1Sa_19:17 is, as Erdmann terms it, a “lie of necessity;” that is, a lie held to be necessary, in order to save one from suffering or perplexity. Clearly this last is unjustifiable; when Saul demanded an explanation Michal ought to have answered that she thought it right to save her husband. Her stratagem (1Sa_19:13 may be defended on the ground that Saul, in assuming the position towards David of an open enemy (without legal warrant), having previously tried to kill him, had thus put himself out of ordinary relation with him, and was to be treated as a public enemy or a madman. Whether the statement in 1Sa_19:14 is then properly a part of the stratagem is not so easy to say. The decisive question is: Was it necessary to the success of the stratagem? was it based on Saul’s abnormal, unnatural, criminal attitude towards David?—Tr.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1Sa_19:1-4. Berl. Bible: So far is Saul carried by self-love, which often transforms itself into fury against the friends of God, and it is incredible how far it can go wrong. Jonathan acted as a true friend to David, and presents therein a picture of a faithful and upright friend, who not only warns David of danger and gives him good counsel, but also at his own peril speaks to his father for him, declares his innocence and praises his noble services, and thereby brings him again into his father’s favor.—Schlier: Even in grown persons there is nothing more beautiful than reverence for parents, and doubly beautiful is this ornament when one thing is understood, how to lead parents away from sin and yet in so doing always show modesty and respect, when one thing is understood, how to fulfil the Fourth Commandment in truth and love. [Taylor: Such a manifestation of prudence and principle combined. Prudence did not go so far as to make him silent about the sin which Saul was purposing to commit; principle was not so asserted as to arouse his father’s indignation.—Tr.].
1Sa_19:6 sqq. Berl. Bible: A kindly and hearty, an humble but also righteous opposition is suited to turn away the evil that has been resolved on and hinder it from coming to the birth.—Schlier: Open thy mouth for thy neighbor, and stand up for him, excuse him where thou canst, speak to his advantage wherever it is possible, let it be a joy to thee to bring to light his good side, be in earnest to promote peace wherever it is practicable.
1Sa_19:8. Berl. Bible: O my God, how wonderfully dost Thou lead Thy servants! Scarcely are they out of one trial when again Thou stirrest up for them another.
1Sa_19:9. Schlier: God the Lord allows the evil spirit no power over us, if we have not first called down punishment upon ourselves by our sins; he who is in the power of darkness and therefore does the works of darkness, has before given himself up to darkness.
1Sa_19:10. Berlenb. Bible: Temptation with men who are grudging and envious and cannot bear the righteousness of the child of God, does not last long, because such men condemn their unrighteousness.
1Sa_19:11. Krummacher: The Lord in every way takes care that His servant David, adorned with His laurels, shall not lift his head too high. In David, too, is richly verified the apostolical saying: Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
1Sa_19:13-14. Cramer: In cases of urgent need, where there is no time for long reflection, a woman can often more quickly devise a plan, surpassing therein the male sex (Ecc. 25:19; Gen_31:35; Jos_2:6). [Hall: Who can but wonder to see how … Saul’s own children are the only means to cross him in the sin, and to preserve his guiltless adversary.—Tr.].
1Sa_19:17. Schlier: A “lie of necessity” is never permissible, wrong can never become right; lying always remains wrong, and doubly wrong when the lie is spoken to a father. Truth is well-pleasing to God the Lord, and truth, spoken with an eye to the Lord, always finds the Lord’s protection.—Cramer: There are three sorts of lies: lies of necessity (Exo_1:19; Gen_20:2; Gen_26:7; Jos_2:6); lies of sport (Gen_42:9; Gen_27:15; Jdg_9:8); shameful and hurtful lies. Guard against all three, and speak and love the truth from thy heart.—[Taylor: Michal’s affection for David could not stand the strain of trial. It was not like that of Jonathan, because it had not, like Jonathan’s its root in devotion to the Lord. She could not and did not follow her husband through persecution, and exile, and danger, because she was not one with him in God. (An idolater perhaps without the cognizance of her husband). She could tell lies for David, but she had not the courage and the faith to go with him into suffering, or to tell the truth for him.—Tr.]
1Sa_19:18. Osiander: Those who are in trouble should betake themselves to the assembly where God’s word is taught, and there seek consolation.—Cramer: God always raises up for His people good friends and patrons, who must help them (1Ki_18:13).—Schlier: Instead of any further answer, Samuel led David to his Naioth, into his school of the prophets; amid the songs of praise of his prophet-scholars, amid their common prayers and studies of God’s word it was good to dwell; there was consolation and peace, there was help to be found even for such a troubled heart as David had. Let not such an example be presented you in vain. Are you troubled, then seek the word of the Lord and prayer, seek it especially there where men are gathered to attend to God’s word and to pray. [Hall: God intended to make David not a warrior and a king only, but a prophet too. As the field fitted him for the first, and the court for the second, so Naioth shall fit him for the third.—Tr.].
1Sa_19:20 sqq. Starke [from Hall]: It is good going up to Naioth, into the holy assemblies; who knows how we may be changed, beside our intention? Many a one hath come into God’s house to carp, or scoff, or sleep, or gaze, that hath returned a convert (1Co_14:24-25).—As one coal kindles another, so it happens that where good is taught and heard, hearts also do not remain unmoved (Act_16:13-14).—Berl. Bible: That is the blessing which God Often grants to devout assemblies, that many a one goes in with an evil, impure and hostile mind, and comes out again with quite another heart and mind.
1Sa_19:23-24. Wuert. Summ.: Saul’s prophesying was more an irresistible work of divine power, than an evidence of divine grace. We see also by his example, that not all who prophesy, who exhibit extraordinary movements of spirit, are thereby shown to have the Spirit of God, and to stand in favor with Him. Many of them, according to the saying of Jesus (Mat_7:22-23), will on that day be found out and condemned as evil-doers.—Schlier: In Saul we have an example how God follows a man till he either turns or hardens himself. How deep was Saul already sunken; yet God the Lord did not yet leave him, but again turned toward him. He felt the mighty hand of God, and yet he would not bow. Then God’s hand, which could not make him bow, must harden him more and more.—When the Lord’s hand comes upon us, we wish to bow, we wish to enter into ourselves, and to humble ourselves. Well for him who lets himself be reproved and chastised, but woe to us if we shut ourselves up against the Lord’s hand.—[Taylor: In reviewing this narrative, observe how diversified are the resources which Jehovah has at command for the protection of His people. Each time the means by which David was delivered are different. At first he is defended by God’s blessing on his own valor against the Philistines; then he is indebted for his safety to the mediation of Jonathan; then to the agency of Michal; and finally to the miraculous work of God’s own Holy Spirit, In the subsequent portion of the history we shall find that the same principle holds, and that in each new peril he is preserved by some new instrumentality.—Tr.]
1Sa_19:11-12. F. W. Krummacher: A new storm: 1) By what David is threatened; 2) How he is delivered from the danger.
1Sa_19:18. David at Ramah: 1) He breathes the atmosphere of the communion of the saints; 2) He sees a new plan to murder him wonderfully frustrated.
[1Sa_19:4-7. An attempt at Peacemaking: 1) The means employed. Jonathan appeals, with tact and delicacy, to justice, gratitude, piety, memories of the past, conscience. 2) The apparent effect. Saul’s better feelings revived, his conscience aroused. In his passionate way, he takes a solemn oath, no doubt with superficial sincerity. All seems restored “as in times past,” 3) The final result. David’s merits, at the call of Providence, shine forth with new lustre. Slumbering envy wakes, and the last enmity is worse than the first. (Comp. 1Sa_20:33-34). Lessons: (1) It is at any rate a consolation to have tried, and to have had even temporary success. (2) Peacemaking does not always fail. (3) We must fear for the results wherever the wrong-doer does not repent of the sin involved; the only sure peacemaking must begin in peace with God. (4) How deep-rooted and ruinous a sin is envy; it may swallow up the noblest feelings, break the most solemn promises, lead to madness and murder. And no wonder, for the envious man sins at once against himself, his neighbor, and his God.—Tr.]
II. Jonathan’s faithful friendship proved by his last vain attempt at a reconciliation of Saul and David. Chapter 1Sa_20:1 to 1Sa_21:1 [Eng. A. V., 1Sa_20:42]
1. Conference between David and Jonathan as to the discovery of Saul’s disposition towards the former and the mode of informing him thereof
Footnotes:
[1][1Sa_19:1. This is the literal rendering of the Heb., and so the ancient VSS., except Vulg., which makes “they” the subject of the killing (so Eng. A. V.), and Arab., which correctly makes “he” (Saul) the subject. The context shows that neither to Jonathan nor to the servants of Saul was charge given to slay David.—Tr.]
[2][1Sa_19:2. Literally: “in the morning.” Sept. αὔριον πρωί, which Thenius says is the rendering of Heb. מָחָר; but בַּבֶֹּקר, as Wellh. points out, includes the notion “early in the morning.”—Tr.]
[3][1Sa_19:2. Sept. reverses the order and reads: “hide thyself and remain in secret,” as if the hiding must precede the dwelling in secret; but the hiding may just as well be regarded as the consequence of dwelling in secret (against Wellh.).—Tr.]
[4][1Sa_19:5. Sept.: “all Israel saw and rejoiced,” other VSS. as Heb. It is here more fitting and politic in Jonathan to refer to Saul’s own knowledge of David.—Tr.]
[5][1Sa_19:6. Sept., Syr. and some MSS. have Qal.: “shall not die.”—Tr.]
[6][1Sa_19:8. Sept. κατίσχυσε, either an explanation (Schleusner), or they read וַיָּאֶץ (Wellh.); the Heb. is to be maintained.—Tr.]
[7][1Sa_19:9. In this divine name the VSS. vary. The Vat. MS. has θεοῦ, Alex. has κυρίου, text in Stier and Theile’s Polygl. (which is an eclectic text) omits it, as does Arab.; the others as Heb. That רָעָה is without the Art. is not decisive in favor of אֱלֹהִים, for an evil spirit could as well come from Jehovah as from Elohim (i.e. the deity), and may as well be called “a spirit of Jehovah.” Elsewhere the Heb. has מֵעִם י׳; but it is at least as probable that the Vat. would change the text to secure uniformity as that the Masorites would change for no reason at all. See note on 1Sa_16:14.—Tr.]
[8][1Sa_19:10. On this reading see Erdmann in the Exposition.—Tr.]
[9][1Sa_19:11. Wellhausen (following Sept.) objects to the “and” on the ground that the two actions (of watching and killing) are not here co-ordinated, the killing not being entrusted to the watchers. This is perhaps an unnecessary refinement, 1Sa_19:14 being possibly a repetition of this statement, not necessarily a sending of additional messengers. Yet, as Saul sends in 1Sa_19:14 apparently to take, not to kill David, the reference of the killing here to Saul and the omission of the ו (which may have been repeated from the preceding word) give a good sense.—Tr.]
[10][1Sa_19:13. “Teraphim” is a plu. word, but is here used in the Heb. as sing.—Tr.]
[11][1Sa_19:13. The Eng. A. V. renders “bolster” to correspond to its above rendering “pillow.” The Heb. means simply “at its head;” the exact use which Michal made of the quilt is not clear.—Tr.]
[12][1Sa_19:14. The Sept. has “they said,” that is, the people of the house, the servants, speaking with the messengers at the door. But the Heb. text is perfectly natural: either it means Michal sent word, that is, said through her servants, or, if she herself spoke with the messengers, she reported David sick to gain time, having meantime prepared the bed to deceive her own servants (whose fidelity she might doubt) or Saul’s messengers in case they should go to look for David.—The Vulg. has the indefinite responsum est.—Tr.]
[13][1Sa_19:16. תּרפים, teraphim. Chald., Syr., Arab., Vulg., render “image.” Sept. has κενοτάφια, “cenotaphs, empty tombs,” a contemptuous designation of the vanity of the idols, Aq. gives μορφώματα or προτομαί, the latter (meaning “half figures”) being important as bearing on the form of the teraphim.—Tr.]
[14][1Sa_19:16. מְרַאֲשֹׁתָיו, from ראשׁ or רֶאשֶׁת by the local preformative מְ. The plu. would be properly מַרְאֲשׁוֹת (see Jer_13:18) as from מַרְאֶשֶׁת. Comp. Ew., Gr. § 160 b, Fürst’s Concordance s. v.—Tr.]
[15][1Sa_19:17. Or: “send me away.” The verb is fem. in many MSS. and Edd.—Tr.]
[16]1Sa_19:18. So the Qeri, but the Kethib is Nevaioth.—Tr.]
[17][1Sa_19:20. So universally taken (=קהלת). Lud. de Dieu, however, refers to the Æth. stem להק = crescere, whence he thinks our word may mean magnum numerum, or, senatum, presbyterium Prophetarum. In Æth. the word represents only magistracy, superiority (Dillmann, Lex. Æth.), which does not suit here.—Tr.]
[18][1Sa_19:22. The word is anarthrous, and so far supports the Sept.: “the cistern of the threshing floor” (Wellh.), as this construction is unusual; but that it is not unexampled is shown by 2Sa_12:4; 1Ki_7:8; 1Ki_7:12, and would be not unnatural here in speaking of a well-known cistern, where בּוֹר might almost have the force of a proper name. The addition of Sept. at beginning of 1Sa_19:22 : “and Saul became very angry,” is suspicious because of its naturalness.—Tr.]
[19][1Sa_19:22. Sept. Σεφί, Ar. Ramah. The Heb. is to be preferred.—Tr.]
[20][The Heb. (כַּף) means the “palm or hollow of the hand,” as the proper place in which to put something, usually the hand as receptacle, not as instrument.—Tr.]
[21][See “Text. and Gram.”—Tr.]
[22][See other opinions in Poole’s Synopsis on Gen_31:19, and in Patrick’s Comm. here.—Tr.]
[23][On the character of the bed (here a separate couch, not the oriental divan) see Philippson in loco, and Works on Archæology.—Tr.]
[24][Chald. renders “house of instruction,” and in 1Sa_19:20 “scribes.” Smith’s Bib.-Dict., Art. Naioth.—Tr.]
[25]The Sing. וַיַּרְא is surprising. According to Ewald, § 316 a, 1, the Verb or Adj., when it stands as one half of the sentence before the yet unnamed (and not clearly conceived) subject, may remain in the most indefinite Pers., the masc. sing., as in 1Ki_22:16; Jos_8:20; Gen_1:14; Mic_6:16 etc.; but when the subject has been named, this indefiniteness cannot exist. The Sing, must therefore be here regarded as a corruption, and we must read (with Ew., Then., and all vss.) the Plu.—The word לַהֲקַת, which sounds remarkably like the preceding לָקַהַת here from the connection = assembly = קַהֲלָה. It appears here only, and is to be regarded as a transposition (so the Greek and several Rabbis) of the word meaning “assembly,” occasioned by the similar sound of the preceding לָקַהַת.
[26][Chald: “They saw the company of the scribes praising and Samuel standing over them teaching.”—Tr.]
[27][See “Text. and Gram.” The Vat. Sept. reads Sephi, not “on the hill.”—Tr.]
[28][The way in which this Ps. contrasts Israel and the heathen makes it difficult to refer it to this incident in David’s life; and it is the city, not the house that the enemy here surrounds. The title is not necessarily part of the inspired Psalm.—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv4, 8, 11, 13, 15, 18, 24 Jonathan spake good of David--He told his father he…
Jonathan spake good of David--He told his father he was committing a great sin to plot against the life of a man who had rendered the most invaluable services to his country and whose loyalty had been uniformly steady and devoted. The strong remonstrances of Jonathan produced an effect on the impulsive mind of his father. As he was still susceptible of good and honest impressions, he bound himself by an oath to relinquish his hostile purpose; and thus, through the intervention of the noble-minded prince, a temporary reconciliation was effected, in consequence of which David was again employed in the public service.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 JONATHAN’S INTERCESSION FOR DAVID, 1Sa_19:1-7.
JONATHAN’S INTERCESSION FOR DAVID, 1Sa_19:1-7.
Finding that the snares laid for David’s life all fail, Saul no longer conceals his dark designs. He instructs his servants, and, fortunately for David, he also instructs Jonathan, to destroy him — Jonathan, his covenant friend, who loved David as his own soul, and who would therefore take speedy measures to frustrate the cruel intentions of his father. In his intercession for David we have a most touching exhibition of Jonathan’s tender, true, and loving heart. By judicious appeals and earnest persuasion he effects a reconciliation, and David walks again in the royal presence as before. It is probable that upon this reconciliation Saul immediately countermanded the orders he had previously given his servants to kill David.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 Ch. 1Sa_19:1-7. Jonathan’s intercession with his father on David’s…
Ch. 1Sa_19:1-7. Jonathan’s intercession with his father on David’s behalf
1. Saul spake, &c.] Perhaps in some outburst of passion like Henry the Second’s against Thomas à Becket. No definite command seems to have been given.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24 (1) That they should kill David.—The literal translation of…
(1) That they should kill David.—The literal translation of the original gives a much better sense: “that he intended to kill David,” or “about killing David.” The latter is the rendering of the LXX. and the Syriac. The murderous impulse of the unhappy Saul gradually increased in intensity. First, it showed itself only in the paroxysms of insanity, when the half distraught king would grasp and poise his heavy spear, as though he would hurl it at the kindly musician as he tried to calm the troubled spirit. Then it would plot and scheme against the hated life, trying to involve this young soldier in some enterprise fraught with deadly peril. Now he speaks openly to his heir and his counsellors of the risk incurred by suffering so dangerous a man to live.
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 vv1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 JONATHAN"S LOVE FOR DAVID (vers. 1-7).
JONATHAN"S LOVE FOR DAVID (vers. 1-7).
Saul spake to Jonathan his son...that they should kill David. The translation of the last clause is untenable; it really means "about killing David," and so both the Septuagint and the Syriac render it. The descent of men once full of noble impulses, as was the case with Saul, into open crime is gradual, and with many halts on the way. Saul first gave way to envy, and instead of struggling against his bad feelings, nourished them. Then, when scarcely accountable for his actions, he threatened David"s life; and next, with growing malice, encouraged him in dangerous undertakings, in the hope that in one of them he might be slain. And now he goes one step farther. He talks to Jonathan and his officers concerning the many reasons there were for David"s death; argues that without it there will be no security for himself and his dynasty; represents David probably as a traitor, with secret purposes of usurping the throne; and reveals what hitherto had been but the half-formed wishes of his heart. But even now, probably, he still spoke of David"s death as a painful necessity, and had many misgivings in his own mind. But he was really encouraging himself in crime, and by cherishing thoughts of murder he was gradually descending towards the dark abyss into which he finally fell.
Read full note →
Vers. 1-7.
Open enmity and open friendship.
The facts are
1. Saul reveals his purpose to kill David.
2. This being made known to Jonathan, he arranges with David to let himlearn the result of an effort to turn Saul from his purpose.
3. He pleads with Saul David"s good services and personal risks, God"sapproval, and the king"s own joy therein.
4. Saul yields to persuasion, resolves not to shed "innocent blood," andrecalls David into his personal service. The historian traces the progress of Saul to ruin, and of David to royal honours, and here brings out the aroused hostility of Saul on the one side, and the open services of Jonathan"s friendship on the other. Father and son are at cross purposes concerning the life of one who in the providence of God is to supplant both. Each performs his part with perfect naturalness; and in the progress of the conflict between enmity and friendship there is a revelation not only of the individual characteristics of the men, but also of principles in constant operation. We have here an instance of
I THE INEVITABLE GROWTH OF SECRET SIN. Except in occasional seasons of moodiness, Saul"s conduct towards David had not found formal expression. His servants probably set down his violence (1Sa_18:11) to irritability, and we have seen how cleverly Saul had striven to throw on Providence the slaying of David while he was doing him honour. (1Sa_18:17-30) The frustration of these secret schemes brought out the fact that the sin so long cherished in the heart, and for very shame concealed, had, by that very nurture, gained such power over the entire man as to force its way into open day, regardless of all considerations of prudence and self-respect. The murder in intent became murder avowed. The ruling passion of the inner life now became the acknowledged master, and a public avowal of servitude to it is therefore voluntarily made. Saul"s experience is but an instance of the experience of multitudes. Progress in wickedness is from within outwards. Lust, when it hath conceived, brings forth sin. (Jam_1:15) Every deliberate murder, theft, deed of adultery, fraud, and rebellion against Christ"s authority was at first germinal in the heart. Each stage of internal growth lessened the power of the will over its progress, till at last it revealed its evil nature in open acts. This psychological genesis of sin is an awful fact, and may well cause those to tremble whose dalliance with secret evil becomes habitual. Truly he who committeth sin is "the servant of sin," and every consideration of duty and interest should urge us to cry daily for a "clean heart," and that sin may have "no more dominion" over us (Psa_139:23; Rom_6:14)
II THE STUPIDITY CONSEQUENT ON THE DOMINION OF SIN. Facts prove that all sin is a species of madness. Adam and Eve imagined that a thicket would hide them from God. Saul"s clearness of intellect suffered by his first public disobedience; and now that the evil passion had gained ascendancy, extreme stupidity appears in his soliciting the aid, in the execution of his cruel purpose, of Jonathan, David"s bosom friend. ((1Sa_18:1-4 1Sa_19:1) If he knew nothing of their friendship, which is very improbable, he ought to have known enough of so good and devout a son as to be sure that he would be no party to a base and villanous deed. If he imagined that Jonathan was likely to be actuated by jealousy of a rival, he performed the stupid act, common to base men, of thinking that reasons which have force with themselves have force with others. In proportion to the power of sin over the will is the effect of it on the intellect. Even the most clever sinners, when seeking to cover their sin from man, manifest some infatuation or folly which affords the clue to their crime. But it is especially in relation to God and the future issues of sin that this stupefying effect appears. It is only this blinded spirit that explains the ease with which men read of the coming "terrors of the Lord" (2Co_5:10, 11 4:3, 4; Heb_2:3)
III THE DOMESTIC SORROWS CREATED BY SIN. It was with a sad, heavy heart that Jonathan had witnessed the gradual decay of his father"s character, but the saddest blow was when the father sought to make the son partaker in his sin. The grief of the son would be proportionate to his piety. To be tempted by a father, to have filial obedience tested in deeds of evil, to see the utter ruin of a parent"s moral character, was a bitter trial; and, as a true son, Jonathan could not but bear these sorrows as a fearful secret. In how many families are there sorrows of this kind! How many a child has to watch the decay of a father"s reputation, to bear inducements to sin, and to hide deeds and intentions of evil! A parent is far gone when children are prompted to wrong. A child is indeed a "child of sorrow" when compelled to carry on a pure heart the secrets of a sinful home.
IV THE TRIUMPH OF RELIGIOUS FRIENDSHIP. It is scarcely likely that Saul would speak to Jonathan about killing David without pointing out how dangerous a rival he was to both father and son. It raised in Jonathan"s mind the conflict of worldly interest and fidelity to a friend. Not a few have yielded to such temptations. But Jonathan"s pure soul was equal to the occasion. His conduct was marked by exquisite delicacy of feeling and wisdom. He would not so degrade his father as to tell David that he had been asked to slay his friend, while be assured David of his real danger. While not assuming the tone of an advocate, he skilfully handled facts so as to achieve the end in view. The point of the temptation was to sacrifice friendship to private and public interests. There are persons still subject to the same trial. May we not also see something analogous to the common temptations of Christians to renounce the "anointed One" for reasons pertaining to earthly wealth and glory? Where there is real oneness of heart with Christ, no blandishments of sin, no prospect of greater worldly distinction, avail to break the sacred bond.
V THE FORCE OF TRUTH ON THE CONSCIENCE. Jonathan simply, in a kindly, gentle way, conversed with his father on the matter, and called his attention to a few facts, David"s risks, services, and evident approval by God, and Saul"s own joy in his victories, and then asks whether such innocent blood should be shed. The effect even on the impenitent Saul is to soften his hard heart and draw forth the declaration that he shall be spared. Happy the son who has such influence with an unhappy, wicked father! In dealing with hardened sinners three things are necessary.
1. Truth to present to the conscience. That David was innocent Saul knew; but ordinarily passion blinded him to the due recognition of it. If we can hold forth "the word of life," the actual truth concerning Christ, so that it shall shine straight in upon the conscience, men cannot but acknowledge its power, and it will exercise some restraint on their conduct.
2. A kindly, unaffected manner. It was the manner of Jonathan that secured an attentive hearing and disarmed Saul"s suspicion. Harsh language tends to arouse antagonism. The secret of success lies in so presenting the truth that it stands forth alone, unmixed with disturbing elements from our personality. "He that winneth souls is wise". (Pro_11:30)
3. Prayerfulness of spirit. We may be sure that Jonathan as well as David prayed in spirit on this occasion. The tone of our mind is wonderfully affected by prayerfulness. We then speak for God and man with a gentle force which guilty men cannot but feel.
General lessons:
1. More attention should be called to the importance of crushing out sinful feelings on their first appearance, and means suggested for so doing.
2. Parents and persons in positions of influence should be earnestly warnedof the fearful crime of seeking to induce young persons to violate their sense of right and truth.
3. The good that is in us may be much more utilised if we strive to act with the "wisdom of the serpent and the harmlessness of the dove.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE. Vers. 1-7. (GIBEAH.)
The proof of true friendship.
Adversity is the touchstone of friendship, as of many other things; and its experience, sooner or later, is certain. Notwithstanding the secret jealousy and plotting of Saul, the prosperity of David continued to increase; and at length, unable to endure the sight of it, he "spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, about killing David." Persons in high places are generally attended by some men who, like Doeg (1Sa_21:7 1Sa_22:22) and Cush (Psalm 7., inscription), are ready to carry out their evil wishes. The danger of David was now imminent. And with the revelation of it to him by Jonathan his troubles began. Whilst adversity shows the insincerity and worthlessness of false friends, it also shows the sincerity and worth of true. "In adverse hours the friendship of the good shines most." The proof of true friendship appears in
I THE STEADFASTNESS OF ITS ATTACHMENT. "Jonathan delighted much in David." Notwithstanding
1. Misrepresentation on the part of enemies. There can be no doubt that Saul spoke of David as treacherously aiming at the throne. The mouths of
2. others were full of detraction and calumny, by which they sought to destroy him as with sharp swords. (Psa_59:7)
3. Urgent claims on the part of friends and kindred. A father"s wishes are sometimes opposed to a friend"s welfare.
4. Self-interest. If David were spared Jonathan"s accession to the throne would be jeopardised. (1Sa_21:13) But true friendship stands the test. It "thinketh no evil" of a friend, will do him no wrong, nor admit the least feeling of jealousy or envy. The wintry storm only serves to strengthen its attachment. "Yet these two charges of inconstancy and of weakness condemn most men: either in their prosperity they despise a friend, or in his troubles they desert him" (Cicero).
II THE FAITHFULNESS OF ITS COMMUNICATIONS. "And Jonathan told David," etc. (vers. 2, 3).
1. It reveals the whole truth and conceals nothing. "If you think any one your friend in whom you do not put the same confidence as in yourself you know not the real power of friendship" (Seneca).
2. It gives the best counsel in its power.
3. It promises aid as it may be needed.
III THE SELF-DEVOTION OF ITS ENDEAVOURS. "And Jonathan spake good of David," etc. (vers. 4, 5).
1. It undergoes personal risk in undertaking the cause of a friend.
2. It makes earnest entreaty on behalf of the absent one; asserting his innocence, enumerating his services, setting forth his claims upon gratitude and esteem, and remonstrating against his being injured "without cause". (ver. 5; Joh_15:25)
3. It shows a prudent and respectful regard for those whom it wishes to influence. In Jonathan prudence and principle were combined. "Prudence did not go so far as to make him silent about the sin which Saul was purposing to commit; principle was not so asserted as to arouse his father"s indignation" (W.M. Taylor).
IV THE VALUE OF ITS ACHIEVEMENTS. "And Saul hearkened," etc. (vers. 6, 7). "How forcible are right words!" Even the heart of Saul is moved, and his better feelings gain the ascendancy. How often by a generous and prudent attempt at peace making is
1. A threatening evil averted.
2. A reconciliation, of the alienated effected.
3. Intercourse between friends renewed, "as in times past." "Blessed are the peacemakers," etc.. (Mat_5:9) "There are four, young man" (says an Eastern sage), "who, seeming to be friends, are enemies in disguise the rapacious friend, the man of much profession, the flatterer, and the dissolute companion These four, young man, are true friends the watchful friend, the friend who is the same in prosperity and adversity, the friend who gives good advice, and the sympathising friend". D. "Contem. Re:," 27:421
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 vv4, 12, 20, 24 And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his…
1Sa_19:4
And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father.
Read full note →
The blessed Peacemaker
I need not tell you how fast weeds grow; your own gardens show you every day: and if you have eyes to look within, your own hearts will show the same sad truth. Sauls evil eye had now grown into continual hatred--he cares not even to conceal from man the murderous desires of his heart; and being disappointed, both in his own skill and craft he now openly speaks to Jonathan and all his servants that they should kill David. Well doth the Holy Ghost testify, Evil men and seducers wax worse and worse. And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, etc. And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan, etc. Blessed are the peacemakers! why? They shall be called the children of God. And is this the grand family likeness? how should we covet ill? Ah! surely if there is one feature that shines more brightly than another in our adorable elder brother, it is that of peacemaker. Do angels see their God cradled in a manger? it is as Peacemaker, while flocking multitudes strike up the new anthem which unites forever the choir below with the choir above, Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good will towards men. Do they see their maker agonised? a stranger to peace? a man of sorrows? It is that He might make peace forever by the blood of His cross, and proclaim peace to those who were afar off. Does He now appear as a Lamb slain? forever making intercession? For some David He is pleading, for some afflicted one He is interceding. (Helen Plumptre.)
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 v1
CHAPTER X X V I.
SAULS FURTHER EFFORTS AGAINST DAVID.
Read full note →
1Sa_19:1-24.
ANEW Stage of his wicked passion is now reached by Saul; he communes with his servants, and even with his son, with a view to their killing David. Ordinary conspirators are prone to confine their evil designs to their own breasts; or if they do have confidants, to choose for that purpose persons as vile as themselves, whom they bind to secrecy and silence. Saul must have been sadly overpowered by his passion when he urged his very son to become a murderer, to become the assassin of his friend, of the man with whom God manifestly dwelt, and whom God delighted to honour. It is easy to understand what fine Saul would take with Jonathan. Heir to the throne, he was specially affected by the popularity of David; if David were disposed of, his seat would be in no danger. The generous prince did his utmost to turn his father from the horrid project: "He spake good of David unto Saul, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good. For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause? "For the moment the king was touched by the intercession of Jonathan. Possibly he was rebuked by the burst of generosity and affection, - a spirit so opposite to his own; possibly he was impressed by Jonathan's argument, and made to feel that David was entitled to very different treatment. For the time, the purpose of Saul was arrested, and ''David was in his presence as in times past." "Oft-times," says Bishop Hall, ''wicked men's judgments are forced to yield unto that truth against which their affections maintain a rebellion. Even the foulest hearts do sometimes retain good notions; like as, on the contrary, the holiest souls give way sometimes to the suggestions of evil. The flashes of lightning may be discerned in the darkest prison. But if good thoughts look into a wicked heart, they stay not there; as those that like not their lodging, they are soon gone; hardly anything distinguishes between good and evil but continuance. The light that shines into a holy heart is constant, like that of the sun, which keeps due times, and varies not his course for any of these sublunary occasions."
But, as the heathen poet said, ''You may expel nature with a thunderbolt, but it always returns." The evil spirit, the demon of jealousy, returned to Saul. And strange to say, his jealousy was such that nothing was more fitted to excite it than eminent service to his country on the part of David. A new campaign had opened against the Philistines. David had had a splendid victory. He slew them with a great slaughter, so that they fled before him. We may be sure that in these circumstances the songs of the women would swell out in heartier chorus than ever. And in Saul's breast the old jealousy burst out again, and sprang to power. A fit of his evil spirit was on him, and David was playing on his harp in order to beguile it away. He sees Saul seize a javelin, he instinctively knows the purpose, and springs aside just as the javelin flies past and lodges in the wall. The danger is too serious to be encountered any longer. David escapes to his house, but hardly before messengers from Saul have arrived to watch the door, and slay him in the morning. Knowing her father's plot, Michal warns David that if he does not make his escape that night his life is sure to go.
Michal lets him down through a window, and David makes his escape. Then, to give him a sufficient start, and prolong the time a little, she has recourse to one of those stratagems of which Rebecca, and Rahab, and Jeroboam's wife, and many another woman have shown themselves mistresses - she gets up a tale, and pretends to the messengers that David is sick. The men carry back the message to their master. There is a peculiar ferocity, an absolute brutality, in the king's next order, ''Bring him up to me in the bed that I may slay him." Evidently he was enraged, and he either felt that it would be a satisfaction to murder David with his own hand when unable to defend himself, or he saw that his servants could not be trusted with the dastardly business. The messengers enter the house, and instead of David they find an image in the bed, with a pillow of goat's hair for his bolster. When Michal is angrily reproached by her father for letting him escape, she parries the blow by a falsehood - ''He said unto me. Let me go; why should I kill thee?"
On this somewhat mean conduct of hers a light is incidentally shed by the mention of the image which she placed in the bed in order to personate David. What sort of image was it? The original shows that it was one of the class called "teraphim" - images which were kept and used by persons who in the main worshipped the one true God. They were not such idols as represented Baal or Ashtoreth or Moloch, but images designed to aid in the worship of the God of Israel. The use of them was not a breach of the first commandment, but it was a breach of the second. We see plainly that David and his wife were not one in religion; there was discord there. The use of the images implied an unspiritual or superstitious state of mind; or at least a mind more disposed to follow its own fancies as to the way of worshipping God than to have a severe and strict regard to the rule of God. It is impossible to suppose that David could have either used, or countenanced the use of these images. God was too much a spiritual reality to him to allow such material media of worship to be even thought of. He knew too much of worship inspired by the Spirit to dream of worship inspired by shapes of wood or stone. When we read of these images we are not surprised at the defects of character which we see in Michal. That she loved David and had pleasure in his company there is no room to doubt. But their union was not the union of hearts that were one in their deepest feelings. The sublimest exercises of David's soul Michal could have no sympathy with. Afterwards, when David brought the ark from Kirjath-jearim to Mount Zion, she mocked his enthusiasm. How sad when hearts, otherwise congenial and loving, are severed on the one point on which congeniality is of deepest moment! Agreement in earthly tastes and arrangements, but disagreement in the one thing needful - alas, how fatal is the drawback! Little blessing can they expect who disregard this point of difference when they agree to marry. If the one that is earnest does so in the expectation of doing good to the other, that good is far more likely to be done by a firm stand at the beginning than by a course which may be construed to mean that after all the difference is of no great moment.
If the title of the fifty-ninth Psalm can be accepted as authentic, it indicates the working of David's mind at this period of his history. It is called ''Michtam of David, when Saul sent, and they watched the house to kill him." It is not to be imagined that it was composed in the hurried interval between David reaching his house and Michal sending him away. That David had a short time of devotion then we may readily believe, and that the exercises of his heart corresponded generally to the words of the psalm, which might be committed afterwards to writing as a memorial of the occasion. From the words of the psalm it would appear that the messengers sent by Saul to apprehend him were men of base and cowardly spirit, and that they were actuated by the same personal hatred to him that marked Saul himself. No doubt the piety of David brought to him the enmity, and the success of David the rivalry, of many who would be emboldened by the king's avowed intention, to pour out their insults and calumnies against him in the most indecent fashion. Perhaps it is to show the estimate he formed of their spirit, rather than to denote literally their nationality, that the Psalmist calls on God to "awake to visit all the heathen." Prowling about the city under cloud of darkness coming and going and coming again to his house, "they return at evening; they make a noise like a dog, and go about the city. Behold, they belch out with their mouth; swords are in their lips; for who, say they, doth hear?" Thus showing his estimate of his enemies, the Psalmist manifests the most absolute reliance on the protection and grace of God. "But Thou, O Lord, shalt laugh at them; Thou shalt have all the heathen in derision. Because of his strength will I wait upon Thee; for God is my defence. The God of my mercy shall prevent me; God shall let me see my desire upon mine enemies." He does not ask that they may be slain, but he asks that they may be conspicuously dishonoured and humbled, and made to go about the city like dogs, in another sense - not like dogs seeking to tear upright men in pieces, but like those starved, repulsive, cowardly brutes, familiar in Eastern cities, that would do anything for a morsel of food. His own spirit is serene and confident - ''Unto Thee, O my strength, will I sing; for God is my defense, and the God of my mercy."
It may be that the superscription of this psalm is not authentic, and that the reference is either to some other passage in David's life, or in the life of some other psalmist, when he was especially exposed to the ravings of a murderous and calumnious spirit, and in the midst of unscrupulous enemies thirsting for his life. The psalm is eminently fitted to express the feelings and experiences of the Church of Christ in times of bitter persecution. For calumny has usually been the right-hand instrument of the persecutor. To justify himself, he has found it necessary to denounce his victim. Erroneous opinions, it is instinctively felt, are no such offence as to warrant the wholesale spoliation and murder which vehement persecution calls for. Crimes of a horrible description are laid to the charge of the persecuted And even where the sword of persecution in its naked form is not employed, but opposition and hatred vent themselves on the more active servants of God in venomous attacks and offensive letters, it is not counted enough to denounce their opinions. They must be charged with meanness, and double dealing, and vile plots and schemes to compass their ends. They are spoken of (as St. Paul and his companions were) as the offscourings of the earth, creatures only to be hunted out of sight and spoiled of all influence. Happy they who can bear all in the Psalmist's tranquil and truthful spirit; and can sum up their feelings like him - ''I will sing of Thy power; yea, I will sing aloud of Thy mercy in the morning; for Thou hast been my defense and refuge in the day of my trouble."
But let us return to David. Can we think of a more desolate condition than that in which he found himself after his wife let him down through a window? It is night and he is alone. Who could be unmoved when place' in such a position? Forced to fly from his home and his young wife, just after he had begun to. know their sweets, and no prospect of a happy return! Driven forth by the murderous fury of the king whom he had served with a loyalty and a devotion that could not have been surpassed! His home desolated and his life threatened by the father of his wife, the man whom even nature should have inspired with a kindly interest in his welfare! What good had it done him that he had slain that giant? What return had he got for his service in ever so often soothing the nerves of the irritable monarch with the gentle warblings of his harp? What good had come of all his perilous exploits against the Philistines, of the hundred foreskins of the king's enemies, of the last great victory which had brought so unprecedented advantage to Israel? Would it not have been better for him never to have touched a weapon, never to have encountered a foe, but kept feeding that flock of his father's, and caring for those irrational creatures, who had always returned his kindness with gratitude, and been far more like friends and companions than that terrible Saul? Such thoughts might perhaps hover about his bosom, but certainly they would receive no entertainment from him. They might knock at his door, but they would not be admitted. A man like David could never seriously regret that he had done his duty. He could never seriously wish that he had never responded to the call of God and of his country. But he might well feel how empty and unprofitable even the most successful worldly career may become, how maddening the changes of fortune, how intolerable the unjust retributions of men in power. His ill-treatment was so atrocious that, had he not had a refuge in God, it might have driven him to madness or to suicide. It drove him to the throne of grace, where he found grace to help him in his time of need.
It was no wonder that the fugitive thought of Samuel. If he could get shelter with him' Saul would surely let him alone, for Saul could have no mind to meddle with Samuel again. But more than that; in Samuel's company he would find congenial fellowship, and from Samuel's mature wisdom and devotion to God's law learn much that would be useful in after life. We can easily fancy what a cordial welcome the old prophet would give the youthful fugitive. Was not David in a sense his son, seeing that he had chosen him from among all the sons of Jesse, and poured on him the holy oil? If an old minister has a special interest in one whom he has baptized, how much more Samuel in one whom he had anointed! And there was another consideration that would have great effect with Samuel. Old Christians feel very tenderly for young believers who have had hard lines in serving God. It moves them much when those on whom they have very earnestly pressed God's ways have encountered great trials in following them. Gladly would they do any- thing in their power to soothe and encourage them. Samuel's words to David would certainly be words of exceeding tenderness. They must have fallen like the dew of Hermon on his fevered spirit. Doubtless they would tend to revive and strengthen his faith, and assure him that God would keep him amid all his trials, and at last set him on high, because he had known his name.
From Ramah, his ordinary dwelling-place, Samuel had gone with David to Naioth, perhaps under the idea that they would elude the eye of Saul. Not so, however. Word of David's place of abode was carried to the king. Saul was deeply in earnest in his effort to get rid of David, - surely a very daring thing when he must have known God's purpose regarding him. Messengers were accordingly sent to Naioth. It was the seat of one of the schools of the prophets, and David could not but be deeply interested in the work of the place, and charmed with its spirit. Here, under the wing of Samuel, he did dwell in safety; but his safety did not come in the way in which perhaps he expected. Saul's purpose was too deeply seated to be affected by the presence of Samuel. Nay, though Samuel in all likelihood had told him how God had caused him to anoint David as his successor, Saul determined to drag him even from the hands of Samuel. But Saul never counted on the form of opposition he was to encounter. The messengers went to Naioth, but their hearts were taken hold of by the Spirit who was then working in such power in the place, and from soldiers they were turned into prophets. A second batch of messengers was sent, and with the same result. A third batch followed, and still the same miraculous transformation. Determined not to be baffled, and having probably exhausted the servants whom he could trust, Saul went himself to Ramah. But Saul was proof no more than his servants against the marvelous spiritual force that swept all before it. When he came to Ramah, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he went on and prophesied all the way from Ramah to Naioth. And there, stripping himself of his royal robes and accoutrements, he prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down, just as one of the prophets, and continued so a whole day and night. It was a repetition of what had taken place at "the hill of God" when Saul returned from his search after the asses (1Sa_10:10-11), and it resuscitated the proverb that had been first used on that occasion, is Saul also among the prophets? Transformed and occupied as Saul was now, he was in no mood to carry out his murderous project against David, who in the view of this most unexpected form of deliverance might well sing, ''My safety cometh from the Lord, who made heaven and earth."
The question cannot but press itself on us, What was the character of the influence under which Saul was brought on this remarkable occasion? Observe the phenomena so far as they are recorded. In the first place, nothing is said of any appeal to Saul's reason and conscience. In the second place, no such conduct followed this experience as would have followed it, had his reason and conscience been impressed. He was precisely the same wicked man as before. In the third place, there is no evidence of anything else having taken place than a sort of contagious impression being produced on his physical nature, something corresponding to the effect of mesmerism or animal magnetism. In earnest religious movements of a very solid character, it has been often remarked that another unusual experience runs alongside of them; in some persons in contact with them a nervous susceptibility is developed, which sometimes causes prostration, and sometimes a state of trance; and it has been found that many persons are liable to the state of trance whose hearts and lives are in no way transformed by the religious impression. It seems to have been some such experience that befell Saul. He was entranced, but he was not changed. He was for the time another man, but there was no permanent change; after a time, his old spirit returned. Evidently he was a man of great nervous susceptibility, and it is plain from many things that his nerves had become weakened. He fell for the time under the strong influence of the prophetic company; but David did not trust him, for he fled from Naioth.
And yet, even if this was all that happened to Saul, there was something providential and merciful in it that might have led on to better results. Was it not in some sense a dealing of God with Saul? Was it not a reminder of that better way which Saul had forsaken, and in forsaking which he had come to so much guilt and trouble? Was it not a gracious indication that even yet, if he would return to God, though he could not get back the kingdom he might personally be blessed? Whatever of this kind there might be in it, it was trampled by Saul under foot. He had made his bed, and, thorny though it was, he was determined to lie on it. He would not change his life; he would not return to God.
Does not God, in His merciful providence, often deal with transgressors as he dealt with Saul, placing them in circumstances that make it comparatively easy for them to turn from their sins and change their life? Your marriage, a death in your circle, a change of residence, a change of fortune, forming a new acquaintance, coming under a new ministry, - oh! friends, if there be in you the faintest dissatisfaction with your past life, the faintest desire for a better, take advantage of the opportunity, and turn to God. Summon courage, break with your associates in sin (the loss will be marvelously small), give up your dissipated pleasures, betake yourselves to the great matters that concern your welfare evermore. Mark in the providence that gave you the opportunity, the kind hand of a gracious Father, sadly grieving over your erring life, and longing for your return. Harden not your heart as in the provocation in the day of temptation in the wilderness. Don't drive the angel out of your way, who stands in your path, as he stood in Balaam's, to stop your progress in the ways of sin. Who knows whether ever again you shall have the same opportunity? And even if you have, is it not certain that the disinclination you feel now will be stiffer and stronger then? Be a man, and face the irksome. Whatever you do, determine to do right. It is childish to stand shivering over a duty which you know ought to be done. "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest."
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.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv1, 8, 18, 20 1Sa_19:1. “And Saul spake … that they should kill…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES—
1Sa_19:1. “And Saul spake … that they should kill David.” Rather, “that he intended to kill David.”
Read full note →
1Sa_19:2. “Until the morning.” Rather, “in the morning.”
1Sa_19:3. “In the field.” “David was to conceal himself in the field, near to where Jonathan would converse with his father about him; not that he might hear the conversation in his hiding-place, but that Jonathan might immediately report to him the result of his conversation, without there being any necessity for his going far away from his father, so as to excite suspicion that he was in league with David.” (Keil.)
1Sa_19:5. “He did put his life in his hand.” “The Hebrew word means the palm or hollow of the hand—the hand as receptacle, not as instrument. Perhaps alluding to David’s hand which swung the sling against the giant, upon the firmness and certainty of which his life depended.” (Lange’s Commentary.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH—1Sa_19:1-7
JONATHAN’S INTERCESSION FOR DAVID
I. The man who is related both to the offended person and to the offender is specially qualified to be a mediator between them. If a man would be a successful intercessor he must be acquainted with the nature and disposition of him with whom he intercedes, and he must have sympathy with the person for whom he intercedes. If he is linked by the ties of blood or friendship to one or both parties, he will know much better than a stranger how to frame his petition—he will be acquainted with the arguments which will be most influential with the one on behalf of the other, and his own relationship to both and his consequent interest in both will of itself form a reason why his suit should be regarded. David was fortunate in having for his intercessor the man who, above all others in Israel, was most fitted to mediate between him and Saul. His love for David had brought him into such near fellowship with him that he was qualified to be a judge of the aims and motives which actuated him and to pronounce him innocent or guilty, and he was so near akin to Saul that he could approach him with freedom and without fear of being suspected of having any motive prejudicial to his father’s honour and welfare. Hence his appeal was listened to, and David was, at least for a time, restored to favour. The relation of Christ to men on the one hand, and to His Divine Father on the other, constitutes His special and peculiar qualification to be the Mediator between God and man. Having been made like unto His brethren, He can sympathise with human frailties and understand human needs, and as the only-begotten of the Father he can have access to Him as no finite creature can.
II. Those who truly love will find that in human life occasions of proving their love will not be wanting. So many and so great are human needs, and so varied the experiences through which most men are called to pass, that those who love us will often find opportunity of showing their unselfish regard, and of proving that they are friends indeed by being friends in need. And if the love is a reality it will be equal to the demand made upon it, and will rejoice in being able, by self-denial, to help its object in the day of adversity. Jonathan had made a covenant with David in the day when the young shepherd was the hero of the hour, and when Saul himself looked favourably upon him; but now the clouds are beginning to gather around him, and Jonathan finds an occasion to show his love in a manner which involves much more self-denial than the giving of “his garments even to his sword and his bow.” It needed much courage for even a son to face a man like Saul and to assert the innocence of him who had now begun to be an object of suspicion and jealousy. When men are so entirely governed by their passions and moods it is a dangerous thing to tell them that they are in the wrong, especially if they are in the possession of so much irresponsible power as an Eastern monarch is. Yet this Jonathan dared to do not only on this occasion but on others when his father’s temper was more implacable than even now, and he thereby proved that his love for his friend was real and very strong.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
How good it is to hear such words as these spoken by Jonathan, which, in their peaceful, gentle tone, their reverential utterance, contradicting in nothing the duty of a child, and in their noble purpose breathe already something of the spirit of New Testament times. And yet, as John at a later period testifies in his Gospel, “The Holy Ghost was not yet given,”—a truth which we ought particularly to keep in mind in all the opinions and estimates we form of the morals of the men of Old Testament times. The hereditary nature of man, fallen in Adam, had then allowed to it a much wider scope than in the post-pentecostal days of the New Covenant. The natural affections and passions shot forth, when once they broke through the barriers of the Divine commandments, into monstrous, gigantic manifestations and wild forms, which may be compared to the luxurious growth of the primeval forests. Saul, with his colossal hatred, and his jealousy breathing forth fire and flames, may be regarded as a witness of this fact.… Yet it is undoubtedly true that, even during the Mosaic economy, individual personages appeared like shining meteors, lovely and rich in promise, who present themselves before us as prophetic types of believers of a future age. To this class belonged Abraham, Moses, Joshua, and certainly now also our Jonathan. The example of disinterested friendship, rooting itself in love to God, which the latter presents to us, remains at least as a fitting model for Christian times, wherein even its equal is not frequently to be found.—Krummacher.
1Sa_19:6. How could Saul say, he should die, whom he could accuse of nothing but faithfulness? Why should he design him to death, which had given life to all Israel? Ofttimes wicked men’s judgments are forced to yield unto that truth against which their affections maintain a rebellion. Even the foulest hearts do sometimes entertain good motions: like as, on the contrary, the holiest souls give way sometimes to the suggestions of evil. The flashes of lightning may be discerned in the darkest prisons. But if good thoughts look into a wicked heart, they stay not there; as those that like not their lodging, they are soon gone: hardly anything distinguishes betwixt good and evil, but continuance. The light that shines into a holy heart is constant, like that of the sun, which keeps due times, and varies not his course for any of these sublunary occasions.—Bishop Hall.
Draw from this the extreme danger of trifling with the name and attributes of God—of using imprecations and oaths, as mere expletives in ordinary conversation, without either reverence or meaning … An irreverent familiarity with sacred things, as in all other instances, is but one step removed from contempt. Such, unhappily, was the case with Saul. “As the Lord liveth,” was an expression so frequently on his lips, that, it may be feared, its solemn import was soon but little felt or understood. Hence, we perceive in the chapter before us with what facility he disregarded the obligation of his oath, when exposed to temptation.… He who is not afraid thus solemnly to trifle with his Maker, will not fear to violate the most sacred obligations towards his neighbour … Beware, then, of destroying, or weakening in any degree, your reverence for God, which is the foundation of all religion and all morality. Be assured, there is no more certain way of effecting this, than a profane and inconsiderate use of His holy name.—Lindsay.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 1Sa 19:11-12
1Sa 19:11-12
In this passage there is a minute account of an appalling danger to which David was exposed.
Read full note →
I. God’s servants are frequently exposed to alarming dangers. (1) This danger came at an unexpected time. (2) This danger proceeded from a powerful enemy. (3) This danger assumed a most alarming aspect.
II. God’s servants are frequently warned of approaching danger. (1) David’s warning came from different sources. (2) David’s warning demanded immediate attention. (3) David’s warning led to decisive action.
III. God’s servants are frequently delivered from impending dangers. The context shows that God delivers His servants in four ways: (1) By friendly mediation. (2) By personal watchfulness. (3) By conjugal fidelity. (4) By Divine interposition.
Parker, City Temple, vol. i., p. 81.
References: 1Sa 19:11-12 and 1Sa 19:18.—F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, pp. 68, 86. 1Sa 19:18-20.—G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii. p. 285; Payne-Smith, Bampton Lectures, 1869, p. 128.
1Sa 19:20
Prophecy, according to the notions popularly entertained of it, might be defined to be a mere prediction of future events, and the prophet one who utters such prediction. This definition, however, does not embrace the essentials of the thing defined. The prophet of former days was, in all substantial points, identical with the preacher of these. The commission of both prophet and preacher is to set forth the Divine oracles; to speak to their fellow-sinners the word which proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord. Prediction and instruction are only different portions of the Divine word. Our text presents to us two great subjects for consideration. (1) A spiritual influence exerted upon certain persons. (2) The instrumentality employed in making this impression.
I. Both the messengers of Saul and Saul himself were constrained by a strange and irresistible influence to prophesy before Samuel. Saul stripping off his royal apparel and lying down in the dust before Samuel presents to us a picture of the sinner’s self-abasement, when the convicting and converting influences of the Holy Spirit first pour in upon his heart. It was marvellous that a hard and bad man should thus be absorbed into the vortex of a spiritual influence; that he should be turned aside from his purpose by the coming in upon him of a holy ecstasy, which rapt him into compliance with the suggestions of the Spirit.
II. It was the sight of the Church’s ministers uttering under the Spirit’s influences the mysteries of the Divine word, which made so great an impression on Saul and his messengers. It is not, however, by any mere power of moral persuasion that the alienated heart of man can be effectually turned to God. The Spirit must second the prophet’s testimony, putting life and energy into the preached word and causing it to penetrate into the springs of the character.
E. M. Goulburn, Occasional Sermons, p. 97.
Reference: 1Sa 19:22.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 72.
1Sa 19:24
We are not told any remarkable points in the character or early discipline of Saul; there were probably none to tell. As we have often had occasion to notice in the earlier Scripture narratives, a man not distinguished from his fellows by any peculiar gifts, merely a specimen of the ordinary human material, may nevertheless be brought most livingly before us; we may be compelled to feel that he is an individual man, one of ourselves, and as such to care for him.
I. There are moments in the mind of the dullest, most prosaic man, when unknown springs seem to be opened in him, when either some new and powerful affection, or quite as often the sense of a vocation, fills him with thoughts and causes him to utter words which are quite alien from his ordinary habits, and which have yet in them a pledge and savour of originality. It is a fact of this kind which the record discloses to us. "God gave him another heart—the Spirit of God came upon him"—these are the words which tell us what that prophetic impulse denoted. However unwonted might be the thoughts which stirred in him and the words which he poured forth, they could not have come from some irregular tumultuous excitement, they must have proceeded from the very spirit of calmness and order. Saul was among the prophets precisely because he confessed the presence of such a spirit of calmness and order.
II. Saul is no monster who has won power by false means and then plunges at once into a reckless abuse of it—no apostate who casts off the belief in God, and sets up some Ammonite or Phoenician idol. He merely forgets the Lord and the teacher who had imparted to him that new life and inspiration, he merely fails to remember that he is under a law and that he has a vocation. The calm spirit of trust and hope has been resisted and grieved, and there comes upon him an evil spirit from the Lord, an accusing conscience warning him of what he had been, throwing its dark shadow upon the present, making the future look dim and gloomy.
III. There are glimpses of light in the later life of Saul, which we refer at once to a Divine source, which it would be sinful to refer to any other. The love and loyalty of David, in sparing his life, were not unrewarded. They struck out sparks of love in him, they made it evident that there was something deeper and healthier beneath all his strangest distortions of mind. And that sacred inspiration, of which our text speaks, which recalled the almost forgotten question: "Is Saul among the prophets?" though it came mixed with a wild kind of insanity, yet proclaimed that God’s Spirit, which bloweth where it listeth, had not left this building to be a mere possession for the birds of night.
F. D. Maurice, Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament, p. 17.
References: 1Sa 19:24.—J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 1st series, p. 90. 1Sa 20:3.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1870; J. Sherman, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. v., p. 337. 1Sam 20-22.—W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 65.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 Saul's Hatred of David. David escapes to Samuel
Saul's Hatred of David. David escapes to Samuel
2. Until the morning] RV 'in the morning.'
Read full note →
6. It was difficult for David to estimate correctly Saul's feelings towards him, because the king's repentance was real while it lasted, and because much might be ascribed to his madness.
10. That night] David would probably flee at once: hence LXX may be right in joining these words to 1Sa_19:11, 'And it came to pass that night that Saul sent.'
13. An image] RV 'the teraphim.' 'Teraphim,' like 'Elohim,' is a plural of dignity and denotes a single image, but the origin of the word is unknown. Such images, derived from Canaanite paganism, appear to have been in human form and to have varied in size; for, while Michal's could pass for a man, Rachel's could be hidden under the camel's furniture (Gen_31:34). Usually, perhaps, the teraphim was a half-length image, or a head only. Teraphim were used for the purpose of divination (Eze_21:21; Zec_10:2), and Rachel probably stole her father's teraphim, lest he should discover which way she had fled. Pillow of goats' hair] A word from this root occurs in 2Ki_8:15, so that it appears to have been some covering made of goats' hair, which was placed over the face of a sleeping person, probably to keep off the mosquitoes. In this case it served as a disguise. For his bolster] RV 'at the head thereof.' With a cloth] Heb. 'with the garment,' i.e. the mantle, which was regarded as the most indispensable article of dress (1Sa_19:24) by day and was used as a covering by night. So Saul's messengers would easily recognise it.
14. Apparently Michal allowed the messengers to get some view of the recumbent figure.
15. Bring him up to me in the bed] As an Eastern bed is merely a mattress, this could be easily done: cp. Mar_2:4.
17. Michal pretends that David coerced her into contriving his escape.
18. Came to Samuel] David naturally turned to him for advice and direction. Naioth] Evidently the name of some locality in Ramah, but whether a building or a district it is impossible to determine.
23. Once more the influence of the Spirit fell on Saul for his good.
24. Naked] i.e. without his outer garment: cp. Isa_20:2. Is Saul also among the prophets?] see on Isa_10:11. Observe that the religious frenzy is contagious: cp. Intro. § 4.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 4. Saul’s Renewed Attempt and David’s Escape
4. Saul’s Renewed Attempt and David’s Escape
CHAPTER 19
Read full note →
1. Saul and Jonathan (1Sa 19:1-7)
2. Saul’s new attempt to kill David (1Sa 19:8-10)
3. David’s escape (1Sa 19:11-18)
4. Saul’s pursuit and his helplessness (1Sa 19:19-24)
The lost King goes from bad to worse. First he tried to spear David; then he attempted to take his life through having him killed by the Philistines, and now he speaks openly to his own son and to all his servants that David must be killed. Therefore loving Jonathan warned David and he hid himself Then Jonathan persuades his father to desist and Saul uttered a meaningless oath “As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain.” And Jonathan brought David to Saul.
Thus Jonathan is seen as a peacemaker.
But David’s great victory (verse 8) starts the king’s hatred again and the javelin flies once more, but only strikes the wall from where he had slipped away. Then David fled and when he comes to his house his faithful wife tells him of the great danger and let him down through a window. They watched the house to kill him. The fifty-ninth Psalm throws interesting light upon this part of David’s history and has of course prophetically a wider application.
And Michal practised a deception. Like Rachel she possessed teraphim, the idol-images in so much use among the Chaldeans and other nations. These were forbidden by Jehovah and yet they were secretly used (Jdg 17:5; Jdg 18:14). Michal’s image must have been of considerable size; she arranged it in the bed and then said to messengers “he is sick.” When the deception is discovered she lies again and said that David threatened her life. That the Scriptures record these misdeeds is but an evidence of their genuineness, however the Holy Scriptures never sanction these things. In all these attempts on David we see a foreshadowing also of the attempts which were made on the life of our Lord.
And David fled to Samuel, who had a kind of a school for prophets at Naioth in Ramah. Saul’s pursuit is in vain and he is helpless to touch the Lord’s anointed. Divine power was engaged in behalf of David, and Saul himself, stripped and naked, lying down all night and all day has to bear witness to it.
“The ‘schools of the prophets,’ which were placed under the direction of experienced and approved prophets, afforded to younger men an opportunity of becoming qualified to perform the duties of the prophetic calling. The selection and the admission of individuals who were suited for the prophetic office by their personal character, and who had a divine call, undoubtedly depended on the prophetic judgment of those who presided over these institutions. As prophecy was a gift and not an art, the instructions which were imparted probably referred merely to the study of the law, and were intended to awaken and cultivate theocratical sentiments, as well as promote a growth in spiritual life, for herein a suitable preparation for the prophetic office necessarily consisted. There are also indications found which authorize us to conclude that the revival of sacred poetry, as an art, and that theocratico-historical composition also, are to be ascribed to these religious communities as their source. Such schools existed in Ramah, Jericho, Beth-el, and Gilgal (1Sa 19:18; 2Ki 2:3; 2Ki 2:5; 2Ki 4:38)” (J.H. Kurtz)
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv1, 8, 18 Jonathan Proves his Friendship for David. —
Jonathan Proves his Friendship for David. —
v. 1. And Saul spake to Jonathan, his son, and to all his servants that they should kill David; he openly announced his intention of putting David out of the way, for he could no longer control his deadly hate.
Read full note →
v. 2. But Jonathan, Saul’s son, delighted much in David, his great love for his friend was unchanged; and Jonathan told David, saying, Saul, my father, seeketh to kill thee, his loyalty for his friend urged him to warn David, even at the risk of offending his father. Now, therefore, I pray thee, take heed to thyself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, and hide thyself;
v. 3. and I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, probably a place where Saul often talked over private matters with his son, and I will commune with my father of thee; and what I see, that I will tell thee; he would immediately make known to David just what he would find out from his father, and it was for this reason that he had David hide nearby, lest his going to some distant place after the conversation with his father awaken suspicion of an understanding with David.
v. 4. And Jonathan, in the interview which he obtained, spake good of David unto Saul, his father, pointing out all his excellent qualities and his fine services to the entire nation, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, for David had always occupied this position with great cheerfulness, against David, because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good; far from doing the king any harm, he had always and in all things done him great service by his feats of arms and by his attendance at court.
v. 5. For he did put his life in his hand, risking his most precious possession, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel, in delivering the people from the danger threatened by the Philistines; thou sawest it and didst rejoice. Wherefore, then, wilt thou sin against innocent blood to slay David without a cause? It was an urgent, yet modest appeal to whatever nobility was still left in Saul’s character; a fine example to all men of how to speak the best of their neighbors.
v. 6. And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan, he was persuaded by his son’s noble intercession. And Saul sware, going to the other extreme, as usual, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain.
v. 7. And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all those things, giving him the joyful information that he was reinstated in Saul’s favor. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, resumed his place at court, as in times past. True love and friendship to our neighbor demands of us that we defend him against all evil suspicions, put the best construction on everything, and calm down the anger of the jealous.
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 vv1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, 23 to all his servants
to all his servants
Here "his" refers to Saul.
Read full note →
took great pleasure in David
Jonathan greatly enjoyed being with David.
translationWords
Saul (OT)
Jonathan
servant
David
seek
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 vv4, 6, 10, 11, 13, 18, 20, 21, 24 19:4 Jonathan addressed his father as the king out…
19:4 Jonathan addressed his father as the king out of reverence.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.