Outline of Chapter 10:

       vv.    1–3        The Philistines Defeat Saul’s Army in Battle

       vv.    4–6        Saul and his Armor-bearer Commit Suicide During this Battle

       vv.    7–10      The Philistines Defeat the Israelites and Display the Dead Bodies of Saul and his Sons

       vv.   11–12      Brave Men from Jabesh-gilead Retrieve and Bury the Bodies of Saul and his Sons

       vv.   13–14      Why God Removed Saul as King over Israel

Charts, Short Doctrines and Maps:

Introduction

       v.      4           Various Options Concerning the Death of Saul

       v.      6           The Sins of King Saul

       v.      6           The Failings of King Saul

I ntroduction: With this chapter, we leave genealogies behind, and begin studying portions of the history of Israel. If I were teaching this, I might include this chapter immediately after 1Samuel 31, as these chapters are almost identical. In fact, I have kept most of the exegesis which I did for 1Sam. 31 here, with an attempt to keep from being too repetitious. However, you may be reading or studying this separately from 1Sam. 31, so, even though I have removed a great deal from the 1Sam. 31 exegesis, I have kept enough for this to be a reasonable examination of 1Chron. 10; that is, if you examine this chapter on its own merits, you will not feel as though you have been shorted.

When it comes to placing this chapter, there are several approaches. The events of this chapter coincide with 1Sam. 31, so some may teach it along side that chapter. However, Chronicles was composed at a much later date (a half a millennium later), so one might teach it near the end of the Old Testament (which it is placed, incidentally, in the Hebrew Bible).

The book of Chronicles appears to be God’s viewpoint of history, whereas, the book of Samuel seems to be man’s vew of history. Therefore, we find a great deal of history about Saul, good and bad, in the book of Samuel. However, in the book of Chronicles, we have but this one chapter on the history of Saul, and it is not about the outstanding things which Saul did, but his death, as well as a list of his greatest failures. He will be replaced by a man after God’s own heart, David. Now, this may seem unfair to you, as Saul had some things in his past which were good and honorable; while David did some things which were pretty lowdown. How do we reconcile these things? Saul did not advance to spiritual maturity. In fact, Saul died the sin unto death, spending that greatest part of his kingship out of fellowship and in direct opposition to God. David, on the other hand, made several mistakes, but he always confessed his sins and his shortcomings to God, and he continued to grow in grace and the knowledge of Jesus Christ. I don’t care who you are, you are going to sin; you are going to fail; God is going to test you, and you are going to do a crappy job. Don’t worry about it. Just get up, dust yourself off, rebound, and go back to taking in the Word of God. You do not need to try to justify your sins or shortcomings to God or to those in your periphery. You simply need to name your sin or sins to God and then return to growing spiritually. If you want to spend your life out of fellowship and justifying your sins to God and anyone else who might listen, your life will be just like Saul’s. If, no matter what you do, you name your sins to God and return to growing spiritually, your life will be more akin to David’s.

It is almost humorous that some commentators are confused about the brevity of Saul’s place in the book of Chronicles. From the vantage point of human opinion, Saul’s life played an important part in the history of Israel. Therefore, a great deal of time is given to his life in the book of Samuel. However, from the divine perspective, Saul’s life was relatively meaningless. He spend most of his life out of fellowship. Therefore, we would expect Saul’s kingship to occupy a great deal of space in the book of Samuel—the human perspective of history, and very little in the book of Chronicles, which is the divine perspective of history.

Application: What you do when out of fellowship is completely meaningless with regards to eternity. You may sell a million CD’s; you may produce a blockbuster hit movie; you may rule over a large country for half of your lifetime; however, if this is done in the power of the flesh, while you are out of fellowship, then it is meaningless. I have had dreams where I have accumulated wealth or possessions in my dreams; and where were these things when I woke up? For a very short time, I had a vague and clouded memory of these things; and, after a few hours, I barely even recall the gist of my dream. This is the production of the flesh. It will be like a dream; we will wake up in eternity, and what we produced in the flesh will be as if it never happened. There may be people in this life whom you admire; there may be people whose lives fill history books—but, from the divine perspective, their lives will be like Saul: a footnote, an introduction to someone whose life is meaningful in the light of eternity.

A reasonable question is, if Saul is going to be mentioned, why this? Why tout his failure in war? Saul was the choice of men; David is the choice of God. Saul failed miserably; David was successful in all of his endeavors. We are going to find specific incidents and comments in this chapter which contrast Saul and David. Once we get to 1Chron. 14, it is going to be clear that the writer of Chronicles was thinking about David as he wrote this chapter on Saul, and in his mind, he is going to include enough material in these chapters to contrast these two men. We will cover this in greater detail when we get to 1Chron. 14.

It is difficult to know where to begin with this chapter, but, if you are studying the book of Chronicles in order, you have suddenly come out of the genealogies (1Chron. 1–9) and have stumbled onto a narrative. There is very little relationship between the previous nine chapters and 1Chron. 10. Saul’s genealogy has been mentioned twice (1Chron. 8:33–40 9:35–44); but, apart from that, there is no straight line from chapter 9 to chapter 10. To give you the big picture of what is to come, 1Chron. 10 deals with the fall of Saul and his dynasty; 1Chron. 11–21 is a summary of the important events in the life of King David; and 1Chron. 22–29 is the transition of power from King David to his son, King Solomon, with an emphasis upon the construction of the Temple and all that is related to it.

1Chron. 10 deals with the final battle of Saul, which is probably coterminous with David’s defeat of the Amalekites of the previous chapter. As we have previously studied, Saul had gone to a psychic necromancer (1Sam. 28), who, surprising herself, brought up Samuel from the dead. Saul had several questions for Samuel, but these questions had already been answered. All that was left for Saul to do was to go meet his fate—he had no other choice. In the context of the book of Samuel, this chapter is the fate of Saul, a result of his bad decisions. In the context of the book of Chronicles, this is the first lengthy narrative, and it more or less sets us up for the reign of David, more than telling us that this is the fate of Saul (even though the chapters are almost identical).

The chronicler (who is possibly Ezra) so far has just covered the various genealogies, and, if we were reading only the book of Chronicles, we would know little about Saul, apart from his lineage. We do not know about his mental illness, his obsession with killing David, or anything else—not in the book of Chronicles. Therefore, at the very end of this chapter, we are given a summary as to why God takes Saul out of this life.

A point must be made about the book of Chronicles: this is a book written from several document sources centuries (in some cases) after the facts. The writer gives us almost a divine perspective, as opposed to the book of Samuel, where we get a much more detailed, more human approach to Samuel, Saul and David.

There would be two reasonable theories to the writing of the book of Chronicles and the writing of the book of Samuel: (1) they either had similar source material (possibly the same source material in some cases); or (2) the writer of the book of Chronicles used Samuel as his source material, and did some editorializing at the same time. That is, the very few differences between 1Sam. 31 and 1Chron. 10 is not a matter of the manuscripts changing over the centuries due to hard-to-read manuscripts, or some mistakes on the part of copyists; I think 90% of the differences can be attributed to the writer of Chronicles making some intentional changes in the Samuel narrative (although, very, very few, as we will see). Not only do I believe that the second option is what happened, but I believe that we see just how faithfully these manuscripts were maintained over the centuries. The book of Samuel was probably written by Samuel and David circa 1000 b.c. The book of Chronicles was written in the 5^th century b.c., near the dispersion of Israel by Assyria. Although these books would have been recognized as being of divine origin throughout most of their history, a copyist working on Samuel would not simultaneously be working on Chronicles—in fact, in many cases, a copyist would be working on one book, but not have access to the other book (this would have been particularly true 400–100 b.c.). We do not have a completed Bible at that time, and we do not have a universal agreement as to which books are inspired and which are not (well, we do, sort of). In any case, what we do not have is, all of these manuscripts always traveling together in one nice, neat bundle as we do with our Bibles today. When you carry around a Bible today with the book of Samuel, you flip a few pages and you are in the book of Chronicles. The Jews did not have that; even those who copied Scripture. They had two separate scrolls, if both books were in the same room at the same time. Some groups of copyists may theoretically have had one book, but not the other. Essentially what we have with these two chapters is an indication that the copyists took their job copying Scripture so seriously, that these two chapters remained almost identical over a period of 300+ years during the time when we have little information about the maintenance of the Hebrew Scriptures. Now, once the Septuagint project had been sanctioned, then one had to determine just which books should be included in the Septuagint, and, at that point, a person who had access to the book of Samuel also had access to the book of Chronicles. For copyists after that point in time, they could do some cross-checking to make sure that they had things right (in fact, I think there are indications in some manuscripts where 1Sam. 31 was brought into line with 1Chron. 10—not by every copyist and not in every instance; however, a few manuscripts and manuscript traditions indicate that this may have happened).

Now, because this chapter of Chronicles is almost word-for-word, tense-for-tense in agreement with 1Sam. 31, I will, and since there is a lot of commentary that I will repeat; I will also point out every single differences between the two texts, and, also, I will show you how certain translators may have rendered it this way in 1Sam. 31 and that way in 1Chron. 10, even though they could be working from identical texts.

We begin this chapter with the Philistines warring against the Israelites and winning. The Israelites had positioned themselves at the foot of Mount Gilboa, had tentatively gone out to fight against the Philistines in the Valley of Jezreel, and were apparently retreating back into Mount Gilboa (1Chron. 10:1). Saul and his sons were unable to get away from the Philistine onslaught, and the Philistines kill Saul’s three sons (1Chron. 10:2). Furthermore, their archers had struck Saul (1Chron. 10:3). Saul knew that it was only a matter of minutes before the Philistines would kill him, so he commits suicide, his aide being unwilling to kill him (1Chron. 10:4). His armor bearer, seeing that Saul was dead, kills himself (1Chron. 10:5). Israelite armies continued to retreat, and those who were living in cities in this general area abandoned those cities; and the Philistines came and took over the cities in central Israel (1Chron. 10:7). The day after this momentous battle, the Philistine army began to examine the bodies of the slain, looking specifically for Saul and his sons. When their bodies were found, they cut off Saul’s head and apparently carry it into Philistia to celebrate their victory (1Chron. 10:9). Saul’s armor is sent to the house of their gods and his head was mounted in the house of Dagon (1Chron. 10:10—this is completely different from what we find in 1Sam. 31:10). Some brave Israelites from the other side of the Jordan, in Jabesh-Gilead, come at night and take the bodies of Saul and his sons, and bury them properly (1Chron. 10:11–12). In the final two verses, the writer of Chronicles tells us what Saul died the sin unto death (1Chron. 10:13–14). It is in these final two verses where the book of Chronicles sharply diverges from the book of Samuel.

You will note that my commentary is quite brief for this chapter—this is because most of this material was already covered back in 1Sam. 31. Therefore, that is where you would go for more details on the verse by verse commentary.

There are two things in this chapter which we do not find in 1Sam. 31: we are told here that Saul’s head was put on display in the temple of Dagon and the reason for Saul’s removal as king is clearly given at the end of this chapter.

The Philistines Defeat Saul's Army in Battle

1Samuel 31:1–3

I have stayed with the exact same translations as I used in 1Sam. 31, and, in the first few verses, I have shown, on occasion, how differently one translation can translate the exact same Hebrew words (particularly The Message). In general, I was surprised as to how consistent the CEV was (which can be very imaginative in its rendering of text); and it is almost shocking as to how freely the Message renders nearly the exact same text.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:                       Note: I compare the Hebrew text to English translations of the Latin, Syriac and Greek texts (using the Douay-Rheims translation; George Lamsa’s translation, and Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton’s translation, respectively). When there are serious disparities between my translation and Brenton’s, I look at the Greek text of the Septuagint (the LXX) to see if a substantive difference actually exists (and I reflect these changes in the English rendering of the Greek text). Now and again, I update these texts with non-substantive changes (e.g., you for thou, etc.).

Masoretic Text                       And Philistines fought in Israel and so flees a man of Israel from faces of Philistines. And so fall slain [men] in a mountain of Gilboa.

Septuagint                             Now the Philistines warred against Israel; and they fled from before the Philistines, and fell down slain in mount Gelbue.

Significant differences:          None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The Philistines fought against Israel in a battle at Mount Gilboa. Israel's soldiers ran from the Philistines, and many of them were killed.

The Message                         The Philistines went to war against Israel; the Israelites ran for their lives from the Philistines but fell, slaughtered on Mount Gilboa. [1Sam. 31:1: The Philistines made war on Israel. The men of Israel were in full retreat from the Philistines, falling left and right, wounded on Mount Gilboa]. In the Hebrew, there are two minor differences in the text; note how differently the Message translates almost the exactly same text. Not even the CEV showed that much variation.

NLT                                        Now the Philistines attacked Israel, forcing the Israelites to flee. Many were slaughtered on the slopes of Mount Gilboa. There is no difference in the NLT between this verse and 1Sam. 31:1.

REB                                       The Philistines engaged Israel in battle, and the Israelites were routed, leaving their dead on Mount Gilboa. There is no difference in the REB between this verse and 1Sam. 31:1.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When the Philistines fought against Israel, the men of Israel fled from the Philistines and were killed in battle on Mount Gilboa.

JPS (Tanakh)                        The Philistines attacked Israel, and the men of Israel fled before the Philistines and [many] fell on Mount Gilboa. There is no difference in the JPS between this verse and 1Sam. 31:1.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                    The Philistines fought against Israel, and Israel's men fled from them and were killed on Mount Gilboa.

Young's Literal Translation    And the Philistines fought with Israel, and the men of Israel flee from the face of the Philistines, and fall wounded in mount Gilboa.

What is the gist of this verse? The Israelites retreat back into Mount Gilboa in the face of the Philistines.

This chapter essentially picks up where 1Sam. 29:1–11 left off; however, in the context of the book of Chronicles, this is really a preface for the kingship of David.

Translation: Now the Philistines fought against Israel:... We have suddenly stopped dealing with the genealogies and have gone into narrative at this point. Instead of expressing this thought in the Qal active participle, as we find in 1Sam. 31:1, this is expressed in the perfect tense, referring to a completed action. The Philistines were at war with Israel for centuries; however, by the time Chronicles was assembled and edited, the Israeli-Philistine wars were history.

By the way, I have put this in bold print, as this statement could be taken as a chapter heading.

Translation: ...and the soldiers of Israel fled from before the Philistines. The war got so intense, that the Israelite soldiers were unable to withstand the force of the Philistines, and they began to retreat. Although Israel covered a much greater territory than did the Philistines, the Philistines appear to be much more fierce in battle. As the battle raged, the Israeli soldiers retreated. This, by the way, was the first time during the reign of Saul where the Philistines dominated Israel on the battlefield (they almost dominated Israel when Goliath challenged any Israelite to fight him).

Translation: The slain [men of Israel] fell [dead] on Mount Gilboa. Israel had camped on Mount Gilboa and the Philistines were camped opposite them, across the Valley of Jezreel. When the Philistine army came on strong, the Israelites retreated back toward Mount Gilboa. Of course, during the retreat, Israel took a great many casualties. Although the slain here are not specifically identified as being Israeli, they probably are.

We will see in this chapter, Matthew Henry’s true observation, When princes sin, the people suffer.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so follow hard Philistines Saul and his sons. And so strike down Philistines Jonathan, Abinadab and Malchishua, sons of Saul.

Peshitta                                 And the Philistines overtook Saul and his sons; and the Philistines struck down Jonathan and Jeshui and Melchishua, the sons of Saul.

Septuagint                             And the Philistines press closely on Saul and his sons, and the Philistines strike down Jonathan, and Aminadab, and Melchisue son of Saul.

Significant differences:          There is the minor difference of spelling of Saul’s second son. You have no doubt noticed some difference in the spelling of certain names previously. This is because, for instance, the Greek does not have an equivalent to the letter h so, whenever such a letter might be found in the Hebrew, it must be changed when bringing it into the Greek (the Greeks did have a rough breathing at the beginning of some words which began with vowels and that rough breathing sounded like an h). In the Peshitta, you will note a big difference in the name of Saul’s second son. The Latin, by the way, is in complete agreement with the Hebrew.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The Philistines closed in on Saul and his sons and killed three of them: Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua. The CEV version of 1Sam. 31:2 is: The Philistines closed in on Saul and his sons, and they killed his sons Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua.

The Message                         The Philistines zeroed in on Saul and his sons and killed his sons Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malki-Shua..

NLT                                        The Philistines closed in on Saul and his sons, and they killed three of his sons—Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malkishua.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         The Philistines caught up to Saul and his sons. They killed Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua, Saul's sons.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NRSV                                    The Philistines overtook Saul and his sons; and the Philistines killed Jonathan and Abinadab and Malchishua, sons of Saul.

WEB                                      The Philistines followed hard after Saul and after his sons; and the Philistines killed Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua, the sons of Saul.

Young's Updated LT              And the Philistines pursue after Saul and after his sons, and the Philistines strike down Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua, sons of Saul.

What is the gist of this verse? The Philistines advance against the Israelites and kill Saul’s three sons, Jonathan, Abinadab and Malchishua.

Translation: The Philistines followed closely after Saul and his sons. Saul is the leader of Israel and his sons are all potential leaders.

Translation: The Philistines struck down Jonathan,... Jonathan is the only son of Saul’s that we know anything about. He was a great and humble man, and we have observed in the book of Samuel that he understood that he would be subservient to David at some point in time. We know very little about Saul’s other sons, and we may not assume the same spiritual greatness on their part—no more than we could assume that David’s brothers were great men like David.

Translation: ...Abinadab and Malchishua, the sons of Saul. We know much less about Abinadab and Malchishua, Saul’s other two sons. Saul had at least four sons (Jonathan, Abinadab, Malchishua and Ishbosheth—who is probably equivalent to Eshbaal) and two daughters, Merib and Michal (1Sam. 14:49 1Chron. 8:33). We also know that Jonathan has a son, Mephibosheth, who is still alive, as we will meet up with him in 2Sam. 9. Furthermore, one of Saul’s sons is still alive—Ishbosheth (2Sam. 2:8). We briefly covered these other three sons of Saul back in 1Sam. 31:2.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                         And the battle grew hard against Saul and the archers reached him, and wounded him with arrows. [1Sam. 31:3: And the whole weight of the battle was turned upon Saul: and the archers overtook him, and he was grievously wounded by the archers].

Masoretic Text                       And so great is the battle upon Saul and so find him the archers—men in the bow. And so he twists greatly from the archers.

Peshitta                                 And the battle went sore against Saul, and the archers who were skilled in shooting with bows found him; and when Saul saw them, he was sore afraid of them.

Septuagint                             And the battle prevailed against Saul, and the archers with bows found him and with pain [or stress] they caused him pain [or, stress] from the bows. [1Sam. 31:3: And the battle prevails against Saul, and the shooters with arrows, even the archers find him, and he was wounded under the ribs]. Lancelot’s translation at this point was rather difficult to match completely with the Greek, so I redid parts of it.

Significant differences:          The translations all vary somewhat as to the final sentence (or phrase). There is not a great deal of difference in the meaning, however. Only the Peshitta suggests fear in Saul’s heart, although the Hebrew may be so interpreted. The Latin tells us that we was wounded; the Greek tells us he was wounded, but it could refer to great mental anguish.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The fighting was fierce around Saul, and he was badly wounded by enemy arrows. [Identical to their translation of 1Sam. 31:3].

The Message                         The battle went hard against Saul—the archers found him and wounded him. [1Sam. 31:3: The battle was hot and heavy around Saul. The archers got his range and wounded him badly]. Even though the Hebrew of these two verses is virtually identical, note how different the Message translates it.

NAB                                       ...the whole fury of the battle descended upon Saul. Then the archers found him, and wounded him with their arrows. [1Sam. 31:3: The battle raged around Saul, and the archers hit him; he was pierced through the abdomen]. Note again how different these translations are—however, to be fair, the Septuagint of 1Sam. 31:3 has Saul being pierced through the ribs by an arrow.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         The heaviest fighting was against Saul. When the archers got him in their range, he was badly wounded by them. [Identical to their translation of 1Sam. 31:3].

JPS (1917)                            And the battle went sore against Saul, an the archers overtook him; and he was in anguish by reason of the archers. [Almost identical to their translation of 1Sam. 31:3, where Saul was in great anguish].

JPS (Tanakh)                        The battle raged around Saul, and the archers hit him, and he was wound by the archers [the meaning of was wounded in the Hebrew is uncertain. [1Sam. 31:3: The fighting grew fiercer around Saul; the archers came upon him, and he was severely wounded by the archers].

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Updated Emphasized Bible   And the battle clearly went against Saul, and the archers discovered him with the bow, —and he was terrified at the archers.

HCSB                                    When the battle intensified against Saul, the archers found him and severely wounded him.

WEB                                      The battle went sore against Saul, and the archers overtook him; and he was greatly distressed by reason of the archers.

Young’s Updated LT             And the battle is heavy on Saul, and those shooting with the bow find him, and he is wounded by those shooting. [1Sam. 31:3: And the battle is hard against Saul, and the archers find him—men with bow—and he is pained greatly by the archers; although some of the changes are in keeping with the minor changes in the Hebrew text, this varies more than I expected it to].

What is the gist of this verse? The battle goes against Saul and Philistine archers find him; however, it is unclear as to whether Saul is caused great fear by these archers or whether they shoot him, causing him great pain.

Translation: The battle was heavy against Saul... If you recall 1Sam. 28, Saul left Endor a beaten man. He knew that this was his last battle. Even though he still had enough integrity to show up and lead Israel in war, one might reasonably assume that his heart was not in it. Now, it is never stated one way or the other whether his attitude was a contributing factor to Israel’s loss; all we know here is, Saul went to war against the Philistines and he was losing badly.

Translation: ...and the archers with bows came upon him. The Philistine archers found him—they discovered him. We do not know if these archers knew that this was Saul. We actually do not even know if they shot him. However, it is clear that one company of archers were closing in on Saul; his position became known to them, and, as they drew closer, they probably recognized his rank as well.

Translation: He trembled [or, writhes in pain] on account of the archers. I have studied this narrative in the original languages in both passages and cannot determine whether Saul was actually hit with an arrow or not. The verb used here can refer to writhing in pain; but it can also refer to someone who is trembling from fear as well. In the Aramaic, Saul is in great fear because of these archers closing in on him. The Latin sees Saul as being mortally wounded by the arrows of the archers. The Greek actually indicates where Saul was hit in 1Sam. 31:3. I do not have the definitive answer, myself. As you see from the English translations, there are those who are on both sides of the fence.

Saul and his Armor-bearer Commit Suicide During this Battle

1Samuel 31:4–6

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so says Saul to [the one] bearing his articles “Draw out your sword and pierce me in her, lest come the foreskinned ones the these and pierce me and satisfy [their desire] in me.” And would not [the one] bearing his articles for he feared greatly. And so takes Saul the sword and so he falls upon her.

Peshitta                                 Then Saul said to his armorbearer, “Draw your sword and thrust me through with it, before these uncircumcised come and slay me and torment me.” But his armorbearer would not; for he was exceedingly afraid. So Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.

Septuagint                             And Saul said to his armour–bearer, “Draw your sword and pierce me through with it; lest these uncircumcised come and mock me.” But his armour–bearer would not, for he greatly afraid; so Saul took a sword and fell upon it.

Significant differences:          None; except it is difficult to determine what Saul is worried about in the Hebrew, as the word allows for a couple of interpretations (which will be explained in the exegesis). In the Latin, his fear is that they would mock him.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Saul told the soldier who carried his weapons, "Kill me with your sword! I don't want those godless Philistines to torture and make fun of me." But the soldier was afraid to kill him. Then Saul stuck himself in the stomach with his own sword and fell on the blade. [1Sam. 31:4: Saul told the soldier who carried his weapons, "Kill me with your sword! I don't want those worthless Philistines to torture me and make fun." But the soldier was afraid to kill him. Saul then took out his own sword; he stuck the blade into his stomach, and fell on it; why the CEV translators chose to make that one minor change is a mystery to me].

The Message                         Saul said to his armor bearer, "Draw your sword and finish me off before these pagan pigs get to me and make a sport of my body." But his armor bearer, restrained by both reverence and fear, wouldn't do it. So Saul took his own sword and killed himself. [1Sam. 31:4: Saul said to his weapon bearer, "Draw your sword and put me out of my misery, lest these pagan pigs come and make a game out of killing me." But his weapon bearer wouldn't do it. He was terrified. So Saul took the sword himself and fell on it].

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Saul told his armorbearer, "Draw your sword! Stab me, or these godless men will come, and make fun of me." But his armorbearer refused because he was terrified. So Saul took the sword and fell on it.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                    Then Saul said to his armor-bearer, "Draw your sword and run me through with it, or these uncircumcised men will come and torture me." But his armor-bearer wouldn’t do it because he was terrified. Then Saul took his sword and fell on it.

Young’s Updated LT             And Saul says to the bearer of his weapons, “Draw your sword, and pierce me with it, lest these uncircumcised come—and have abused me.” And the bearer of his weapons has not been willing, for he is greatly afraid, and Saul takes the sword, and falls upon it.

What is the gist of this verse? Saul asks his armor bearer to kill him before the uncircumcised Philistines come and do whatever their lust moves them to do. Saul’s armor bearer is unwilling to do this, so Saul takes the sword falls upon it himself.

Translation: Then said Saul to the one carrying his weapons,... Because Saul is the king, he has an abundance of weapons and armor which were carried by his assistant, his armor bearer, or weapons carrier. It would seem unlikely that this weapons bearer would have but one sword.

Translation: ...“Take out your sword and thrust me through with it,... Saul does not carry his own weapons. The weapon bearer has a sword and Saul orders the weapons bearer to take out his sword (Saul says your sword) and orders him to pierce Saul with this sword.

Translation: ...so that these uncircumcised [men] do not come and delight themselves because of me [or, make sport of me].” This is Saul’s reasoning. At first, it seems illogical—kill them so these uncircumcised Philistines do not kill me. However, there is more to Saul’s request than just this.

What Saul is concerned about is being taken a prison and being made sport of by the Philistines. As you may recall, in the book of Judges, when Samson was captured by the Philistines, they brought him out from time to time to amuse themselves.

Translation: But his weapon carrier would not, because he was greatly afraid. What is taking place here occurs over the space of just a few seconds. The Philistine archers are moving in on them; it is clear that both Saul and this weapons bearer will die. And, knowing that he is about to die, this man, who is essentially entrusted with Saul’s life, does not want to kill the king of Israel as his final act on this earth.

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment: [The weapons bearer] was, of course, placed in the same perilous condition as Saul. But it is probable that the feelings that restrained him from complying with Saul's wish were a profound respect for royalty, mingled with apprehension of the shock which such a catastrophe would give to the national feelings and interests.

Translation: So Saul then grabbed the sword and fell on it. Saul does not have a sword himself; he grabs the sword out of the sheath of his weapons bearer. I should mention that both Dr. Delaney and Clarke agree that Saul grabbing his armor bearer’s sword. However, they further state that the weapon bearer also killed himself with the same sword. That is a reasonable explanation; but it assumes that there is only one sword available to them. The sword in the next verse could refer to the sword which Saul will use on himself.

Saul holds up the sword and falls down upon it, killing himself. At least, that appears to be what is happening here. The verb means to fall on, to die a violent death; so the meaning appears to be unequivocal here. We’ve argued both sides of the arrow wounding in the previous verse; however, I don’t think we can argue two sides of this. However, just so you know, Josephus claimed that Saul was unsuccessful in his suicide attempt. One might even argue that Saul seemed dead to his armor bearer, who then killed himself.

I have mentioned 2Sam. 1 already, and implied that there is a slightly different story about Saul’s death in that chapter. There is. When we exegete that passage, I will smooth out any problems which you might have. Also, at the point, we will discuss David’s authorship, as well as how he knew the details of this particular chapter.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so sees [one] bearing his articles that was dead Saul and so falls also he upon the sword and so he dies.

Septuagint                             And his armour–bearer saw that Saul was dead, and he also fell upon his sword.

Significant differences:          None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       When the soldier realized that Saul was dead, he killed himself in the same way.

The Message                         The armor bearer, panicked because Saul was dead, then killed himself. [1Sam. 31:5: When the weapon bearer saw that Saul was dead, he too fell on his sword and died with him].

NLT                                        When his armor bearer realized that Saul was dead, he fell on his own sword and died.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When the armorbearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell on the sword and died.

JPS (Tanakh)                        When his arms-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he too fell on his sword and died.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                    When his armor-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell on his own sword and died.

Young’s Updated LT             And the bearer of his weapons sees that Saul is dead, and he falls—he also—on the sword, and dies.

What is the gist of this verse? The armor bearer observes that Saul is dead, falls on the sword, and dies.

Translation: So his weapons carrier saw that Saul was dead... The weapons bearer was in a panic like Saul, but seeing Saul dead caused him to quickly reevaluate his options. His actions are almost reflex, more than the result of careful consideration.

Those who claim that Saul did not die, say that the armor bearer thought that Saul was dead.

Translation: ...so he also fell upon the sword... I frankly do not know the culture well enough to know the number of swords Saul’s armor bearer carried. I would have assumed two; one for himself and one for Saul during the most intense times of battle. However, even with the slight difference in the original text, we really don’t know for certain. The use of the definite article here suggests that this is the same sword that Saul used. If there was only one sword, and Saul’s aide was bent on killing himself, he would have to remove it from Saul—which would entail turning Saul over and pulling the sword out and then falling on it himself. This suggests that at least a minute or two has passed from the time Saul had determined that there was no hope. On the other hand, no great doctrine rests upon this point of how many swords Saul’s armor bearer carried.

Translation: ...and died. Probably within 2–3 minutes, both Saul and his armor bearer had died. If there were two swords, probably within 1–2 minutes transpired.

We already examined the Doctrine of Suicide in 1Sam. 31:5.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Peshitta                                 So Saul died, and his three sons and his armorbearer and all his mighty men died on that day together.

Septuagint                             So Saul died, and his three sons, on that day, and all his family died at the same time.

Significant differences:          In the LXX, only Saul, his three sons and his armor carrier die (only they are mentioned). In the Peshitta, all his servants are part of those who die. The Latin and MT are identical.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       So Saul, his three sons, and his dynasty died together.

The Message                         So Saul and his three sons--all four the same day--died.

NLT                                        So Saul and his three sons died there together, bringing his dynasty to an end.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So Saul, his three sons, and his dynasty died together.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Thus Saul and his three sons and his entire house died together.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Thus Saul died; he and his three sons and all his house died together.

Young’s Updated LT             And Saul dies, and his three of his sons, and all his house—together they died.

What is the gist of this verse? Saul, three of his four sons, and those of his household all died together.

Translation: So Saul died, along with [lit., and] three of his sons,... This verse summarizes what has just happened. Saul and his soldiers were obviously losing and retreating. His sons probably each commanded a large number of soldiers, and, in every case, the Philistine soldiers were able to penetrate their defenses well enough to take out all three sons (a fourth son is apparently not in battle).

There are three possible reasons that Saul’s 4^th son, Ishbosheth, is not there: (1) He is too young to go to battle. (2) Saul kept this man out so that not all members of his family could be killed. (3) Saul kept both his youngest son and Abner out of this battle, in order to continue his dynasty after his death. The latter reason makes the most sense to me. Saul may have even required Abner to see to it that his youngest was kept away from this battle, which would indicate that Saul had a great deal of trust in Abner and that Saul wanted someone of high rank to keep his youngest son from the fray. This is all conjecture, but a reasonable, educated guess.

There will be greater differences in the latter half of this verse and 1Sam. 31, than anywhere else so far.

Translation: ...and all of his household together died. This is very different from 1Sam. 31:5; in that verse, Saul, his three sons and his armor bearer all died together. Here, it is Saul, his three sons, and his household. This would refer to Saul’s honor guard, who would double as his body guard during times of peace; this would refer to his male servants. There were probably older relatives of Saul who lived in or near the palace (whatever that happened to be at that time). All of these men, who accompanied Saul in battle, died.

Keil and Delitzsch suggest: Not all the warriors who went out with him [Saul] to battle [died in battle], but all the king's servants, or all the members of his house, who had taken part in the battle. Neither Abner nor his son Ishbosheth was included, for the latter was not in the battle; and although the former was Saul's cousin and commander-in-chief he did not belong to his house or servants. Possibly, the thrust of this portion of this verse is that, any possible heir to Saul was killed in battle (apart from his youngest son and Abner).

I should mention that Saul has a grandson, Mephibosheth, who is the son of Jonathan, and he is still alive (2Sam. 4:4). Furthermore, we know from 1Chron. 8–9 that there will be descendants of Saul. Therefore, when this says that all of Saul’s house died, it refers to all who were with him.

The Philistines Defeat the Israelites and Display the Dead Bodies of Saul and his Sons

1Samuel 31:7–10

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so see all of men of Israel that in the valley that they fled and that died Saul and his sons, and so they let go of their cities and so they flee and so come Philistines and so they stay in them.

Septuagint                             And all the men of Israel that were in the valley saw that Israel fled, and that Saul and his sons were dead, and they left their cities, and fled: and the Philistines came and dwelt in them.

Significant differences:          None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The Israelites who lived in Jezreel Valley learned that their army had run away and that Saul and his sons were dead. They ran away too, and the Philistines moved into the towns the Israelites left behind.

The Message                         When all the Israelites in the valley saw that the army had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they abandoned their cities and ran off; the Philistines came and moved in.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When all the people of Israel in the valley saw that their army had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they abandoned their cities. So the Philistines came to live in these cities.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

WEB                                      When all the men of Israel who were in the valley saw that they fled, and that Saul and his sons were dead, they forsook their cities, and fled; and the Philistines came and lived in them.

Young’s Updated LT             And all the men of Israel who are in the valley see that they have fled, and that Saul and his sons have died, and they forsake the cities and flee, and the Philistines come in, and dwell in them.

What is the gist of this verse? The men nearby, but outside of the battle, observed that Saul and his sons died, and that the soldiers retreated; therefore, they left their cites and the Philistines came and lived in those cities.

Interestingly enough, while the sentence structure of 1Sam. 31:7 is unwieldy and moderately difficult here, 1Chron. 10:7 is quite clear and straight forward. It would make sense that an editor of the original would simplify and clear up any difficulties in the text, which is exactly what has happened. The shortened verse is much easier to deal with. In 1Sam. 31:7, we have the phrase men of Israel twice, and yet referring to different sets of men; it only occurs on in 1Chron. 10:7. Also, a long phrase which modifies men of Israel in 1Sam. 31:7 is shortened in this verse and is right next to that which it is supposed to modify. So, we were able to struggle and put things together in 1Sam. 31:7; but the later author simplified things for us considerably in 1Chron. 10:7.

Translation: And [when] saw all the men of Israel who [were] in the valley... This refers to civilians. There are civilians who monitor this war. They are men who need to know the outcome of the war—more accurately, the cities which they are from need to know the outcome of this war. So these men observe the war from afar, so that they can warn the people of their cities. I did suggest two possibilities in 1Sam. 31:7: (1) as the soldiers retreat, men of other cities see them retreating, running past their cities. (2) The other possibility is, the men in these verses are like modern-day reporters. The valley is where this battle takes place; just as a reporter might record the events of a war and then broadcast those events via one medium or another, there were men who had a similar function (or, who took on to themselves this particular function). From the sidelines, hidden from those at war, they observed the battle, and then they ran and reported to their particular city what they had observed. Although I believe what we have here is actually the second option (as the people of the cities would be quite concerned about the outcome of this war). And, it is possible that what is actually happening is a combination of the two.

These are not soldiers and we cannot condemn them for not fighting. They have a responsibility to entire cites of men, women and children. Charlie Brown might be there from Gilgal by the Jordan; and all the residents of Gilgal are anxiously waiting his report to find out how the battle is going. Everyone in that city are dependent upon his report. If he does not return to them, the Philistines could march into Gilgal, which has little or no defenses, and take the city out, and kill, torture and rape those living there. When Charlie Brown returns to his city with the bad news that Israel’s army has been clearly defeated, that gives those in the city the option to flee from their city. This, of course, assumes that the men mentioned in this verse are runners—the ancient version of news reporters.

Translation: ...[saw] that they l had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead,... These men in the valley observe two things: the Israelite soldiers retreat and Saul and his sons have died in battle. It is unlikely that each person in the valley can observe each and every son of Saul being killed; but they might observe two of them killed or surrounded; and the retreat of Israel is obvious.

Jonathan also died in battle. Although we are never told how he was perceived publically, I suspect that Jonathan had a large support base from which he could have become king of Israel. Now, you may look back in previous chapters and say, “But Jonathan was clearly in favor of David ruling over Israel.” Yes, and at that time, Jonathan was sincere and he meant that. For the recorded life of Jonathan, we know that he was a great man—one of the greatest and most grace-oriented in all of Israel. But recall, Saul started off as a very good king; and then his mental illness took over. Even though it seems as though Saul went bad almost immediately, that is not necessarily the case. There is no reason to assume that we were able to observe the entirety of Saul’s career as king. It is possible that as much as a decade was not recorded in Scripture. In any case, no matter what the time frame is, Saul went from good to bad. Jonathan is Saul’s son. We do not know what may have happened to him later in his life. Maybe God removed Jonathan at this point because his future was not going to be as great as his past. This is God’s time for Jonathan. We remember him as one of the greatest men of Israel. We know what happened to his father. No one looks back at Saul and thinks, “What a great king!” But Saul was a very good king for the first part of his rule. And then, he went downhill; and he slid down to a point to where he had become God’s enemy. Jonathan has been removed and this is part of God’s plan. We do not know why, although we can certainly speculate. However, we know that it was God’s time and God’s timing is perfect.

Translation: ...they forsook their cities and they fled... Any city near the battle left; in fact, this tells us that even some of those on the other side of the Jordan left their cities. Israel had quite a bit of land compared to the Philistines; and now the Philistines, having defeated Israel’s army, could pick and choose at will where they wanted to live. Here, they pick up and leave this land, retreating further south or east. They had no recourse. Saul had, throughout his life, saw men he determined were good for soldiers, and drafted them on the spot. There were not many left behind who had these capabilities. There was no staying behind to fight, as those who were trained to fight are clearly routed. The men left at the very best could evacuate their families. Those to whom these reporters reported back to, left their cities and fled. We are not told where they went to; but they left their Israeli cities and towns—at least any of those near the battle site and the lines of retreat.

Translation: Then the Philistines came and lived in them. The Philistines had carte blanc at this time. They could move in whatever direction they wanted to. Now, bear in mind, even the Philistines had an army which is a virtual killing machine, they are still limited with regards to their population. The Philistines no doubt set up posts in a dozen or two dozen cities. The soldiers no doubt took over whatever house they chose, and gathered whatever possessions that they found in their new home. Realize that these Philistines soldiers will be spread out throughout Israel at this point. Instead of being concentrated in Philistine territory, at this point, bits and pieces of the army will be either all over, or concentrated in specific cities. We are not told here, except that they came and occupied the cities which the Israelites fled. Which cities these were are unknown to us. Which direction the Philistines went in, is unknown to us. It is implied that they even took over cities on the other side of the Jordan; but I don’t believe that is confirmed elsewhere. On a map, if you drew a 15 mile radius around Mount Gilboa, that would give you an idea as to which cities the Philistines took control of. Jabesh-gilead, as we will see, is outside of this controlled area, and on the other side of the Jordan.

Matthew Henry makes an interesting observation: nowhere are the Israelites said to be guilty of being idolatrous. As you may recall from the book of Judges, there was a cycle that these Israelis would be in: first, the would fall into idolatry; second, they would fall under the control of a foreign power; third, there would be a spiritual revival; fourth, a deliverer would be raised up who would throw off the shackles of this foreign power. Then they would repeat this cycle. Nothing like that is said to have occurred; and there is no indication that Saul, despite his negative volition, was ever idolatrous. However, Saul’s negative volition is legend, and we recorded his sins earlier in this study. The people supported Saul, even over and above David; even though Saul was wasting the military resources of Israel in pursuit of David. We might suppose that much of Israel had Saul’s same negative volition.

In the United States, as I write this, we have a lot of believers; but very, very little interest in the Word of God. I don’t doubt that a similar situation existed during this time. Bearing mind that the Ark of God is being kept at some home in Kiriath-Jearim (1Sam. 7:1–2); Saul has wiped out the priesthood (1Sam. 22); the Ephod is in David’s possession now (1Sam. 23:1–4, 9–14 30:7–8). We have no idea as to what has happened to the Tabernacle (semi-permanent Tent) of God. We have no idea whether there are sacrifices being offered anywhere on behalf of anyone. Israel appears to be without a spiritual life; therefore, we should not be too confused that Israel is under discipline as a nation. We do not have any indication that the people are concerned about these losses with regard to their spiritual life.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so he is from [the] morrow and so come Philistines to strip the slain [ones]. And so they find Saul and three of his sons fallen in a mountain of Gilboa.

Septuagint                             And it came to pass on the morrow that the Philistines come to strip the dead, and they find Saul and his three sons fallen on the mount Gelbue.

Significant differences:          None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The next day the Philistines came back to the battlefield to carry away the weapons of the dead Israelite soldiers. When they found the bodies of Saul and his sons on Mount Gilboa,...

The Message                         The next day the Philistines came to plunder the dead bodies and found Saul and his sons dead on Mount Gilboa.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         The next day, when the Philistines came to strip the dead, they found Saul and his sons lying on Mount Gilboa.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

MKJV                                     And it happened on the next day, when the Philistines came to strip the dead, and they found Saul and his sons fallen in Mount Gilboa.

Young’s Updated LT             And it comes to pass on the next day, that the Philistines come to strip the wounded, and they find Saul and his sons fallen in Mount Gilboa.

What is the gist of this verse? The next day, after the Philistines had thoroughly defeated Israel’s army, they went back to find Saul and his three sons.

Translation: And it was on the next day the Philistines came to strip [the bodies] of the slain. The archers who initially found Saul did not go to his body right then and there. These soldiers were too disciplined to just stop and plunder those they had just killed. They were not going to stand over the bodies and do a victory dance so that everyone could see them. You cannot win a war if you are undisciplined. By the next day, Israel had been thoroughly defeated by the next day, so now it was payday for the Philistine soldiers. They were sent out to strip the bodies of the dead for anything of value. As this all took place, they also looked for the bodies of Saul and his sons.