Outline of Chapter 19:

       vv.    1–7        Jonathan Convinces Saul Not to Seek David’s Life

       v.      8         David Fights the Philistines

       vv.    9–10      Saul Makes a Direct Attempt on David’s Life/David Eludes Saul

       vv.   11–17      Saul Sends Assassins to David’s Home/Michal Helps David Escape

       vv.   18–21      David Goes to Samuel in Ramah/Saul Attempts to Have David Arrested There

       vv.   22–24      Saul Himself Goes to Kill David in Naioth

Charts and Maps:

       v.     11           Where Does Each Translation Place that night?

       v.     13           Summary of the Doctrine of Teraphim

       v.     19           Various Interpretations of Naioth

       v.     20           Interpreting and Understanding Samuel’s School of Prophets

       v.     24           The School of Prophets

       v.     24           The Appearances of Samuel in the Book of Samuel

I ntroduction: In 1Sam. 19, we have Saul making more attempts on the life of David. In this chapter, his desire to kill David becomes overt to the point that all of their common acquaintances, as well as much of Israel, are cognizant of Saul’s evil mission. We have several important things in this chapter: we again see the true character of Jonathan; we see the true character of Micah; and David becomes a fugitive for the remainder of Saul’s life.

To give a more detailed account of this chapter: Saul again decides that David has to die, and he tells all of his servants and Jonathan (v. 1). Jonathan recognizes that this is a very real threat, and he goes directly to David and tells him to hide and that he would get back to him (vv. 2–3). Jonathan then convinces his father that David his an asset and a loyal subject, and Saul is convinced (vv. 4–6). David returns to the palace, goes to war and then returns to the palace again, victorious in his battles with the Philistines (vv. 7–8). Saul suddenly makes an attempt on David’s life, and again attempted to pin David to the wall with his javelin (vv. 9–10). David escapes and goes home to his wife, Saul’s daughter. It is not clear exactly who knows what when David arrives home, but his wife Michal convinces him to surreptitiously leave that very night. She makes his bed look as though someone is sleeping there, David sneaks out the back window, and Saul’s officers make two trips to their house to get David, becoming much more insistent the second trip (vv. 11–15). When they discover that David is not sick in bed, but escaped, they brought Michal to Saul. However, instead of standing up for David as her brother did, she tells her father that David threatened her life (vv. 16–17).

David, meanwhile, goes to Samuel. It was Samuel who told him that he would become king over Israel, which seemed to get the ball rolling on a multitude of changes which took place in David’s life. They go to Naioth near Ramah, not necessarily to hide out, but because Samuel has a seminary there (v. 18). Saul finds out that David is in Ramah, and he sends officers there to either arrest or kill (perhaps Saul told them, “Bring David back here—dead or alive!”). However, when they find Samuel at his school of prophets, they are overtaken by the Spirit of God and overpowered, and they begin to speak God’s Word (vv. 19–20). Saul sends two more sets of officers who experience the same thing (v. 21). Finally, Saul goes to Naioth near Ramah, and he is overtaken by the Holy Spirit and he begins to speak God’s Word even as he travels toward Naioth. When he arrives at the school of prophets, he removes his clothes and continues to prophesy while naked. Again, Israel began to circulate the saying, “Is Saul among the prophets?” (vv. 22–24).

Jonathan Convinces Saul Not to Seek David’s Life

I should point out that v. 1b is apparently a part of v. 2 as well in some manuscripts (as per Young and the Amplified Bible). Since v. 2 makes more sense with 1b attached, I have also altered the translations below to reflect that (therefore, for instance, I have only quoted v. 1a for the NASB below; however, I will quote 1b with v. 2).

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so speaks Saul unto Jonathan and unto all his servants to kill David.

Septuagint                             And Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, to slay David. [According to the note in Brenton’s appendix, there are a lot of variations on this first verse].

Significant differences:          None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One day, Saul told his son Jonathan and his officers to kill David.

NAB                                       Saul discussed his intention of killing David with his son Jonathan and with all his servants.

NLT                                        Saul now urged his servants and his son Jonathan to assassinate David.

REB                                       Saul incited Jonathan his son and all his household to kill David.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

JPS (Tanakh)                        Saul urged his son Jonathan and all his courtiers to kill David.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Now Saul told Jonathan his son and all his servants to put David to death.

Young's Updated LT              And Saul speaks unto Jonathan his son, and unto all his servants, to put David to death.

What is the gist of this verse? Saul more than made his plans known to kill David. In this verse, he tries to enlist the help of Jonathan and his officials.

Translation: Then Saul proposed to Jonathan and to all his servants to kill David. Saul is doing more here than merely announcing his intention to kill David. He is attempting to enlist the help of Jonathan and his officials. It is possible that Saul recognizes Jonathan’s love for David, and is gauging Jonathan’s reaction. Or Saul may be expecting that Jonathan will be intimidated and stay out of his way. On the other hand, Saul may be completely oblivious to Jonathan’s strong emotions, being cognizant only of his own feelings of hatred toward David. Often the more hypersensitive and/or psychotic that a person becomes, the more likely they are to be completely oblivious to the thoughts and feelings of others. My thinking is that this is Saul’s mental state. He announces to his officers, which include Jonathan, that David must be killed. How Jonathan or anyone else feels is probably the last thing on Saul’s mind.

An important difference found in this verse and those which follows is, Saul’s attempts on David’s life become much more overt. Even though he did make two fairly direct attempts on David’s life by chunking a spear at David (1Sam. 18:11), this may have been written off by David as a sudden attack of paranoid-delusional behavior on the part of Saul. Despite this attack, Saul kept David in the military (although he apparently demoted David—1Sam. 18:13) and he eventually consented to allow David to marry into his family (1Sam. 18:27). So, what happened was dramatic, but somewhat explicable, and an act that may have been seen by David as an anomaly. However, here, in this verse, Saul clearly announces his intention to kill David.

Edersheim: And...the story becomes darker and darker. We have marked the progress of murderous thought in the king’s mind, from the sudden attack of frenzy to the scarcely self-confessed wish for the death of his victim, to designed exposure of his life, and lastly to a deliberate plan for his destruction. But now all restraints were broken through. Do what he might, David prospered, and all that Saul had attempted had only turned out to the advantage of the son of Jesse. Already he was the king’s son-in-law; Michal had given her whole heart to him; constant success had attended those expeditions against the heathen which were to have been his ruin; nay, as might be expected in the circumstances, he had reached the pinnacle of popularity. One dark resolve now settled in the heart of the king, and cast its shadow over every other consideration. David must be murdered. Saul could no longer disguise his purpose from himself, nor keep it from others. He spoke of it openly—even to Jonathan.

This might be a good place to point out that, all that is found in Scripture does not necessarily meet with God’s approval. This is a good example, as very few believers would read this passage and decide, I guess God wants to kill David. Here, Scripture merely records the events, without necessarily giving us a clear disapproval. We don’t have a v. 1b which reads, Saul’s intent to kill David was bad. We should know enough doctrine in order to realize that Saul is out of line, and his intent is wrong. Now, God clearly allows this, and there will be several reasons why God allows Saul to live and to put David on the run. However, it should not take a theological genius to recognize that Saul’s intent and actions are sinful. Now, what I am saying here may seem to be so obvious as to not require commentary. I agree. So, when we get down to v. 17, and Michal lies to her father, we should not understand this act to be approved by God either. This verse tells us: (1) not everything in the Bible is an act which God approves of and expects us to imitate; and, (2) the Bible does not stop during a narrative to tell us whether the action described is one approved by God or not. A natural question which would arise out of this is, how do we tell? How do we read Scripture and figure out what is right and what is wrong? God provided for the Jew (and for us) the Law of Moses, the 2^nd through 5^th books of the Bible, which clearly states what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, anyone reading Samuel should have a reasonable understanding of the Law.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And Jonathan son of Saul has taken pleasure in David exceedingly and so makes known Jonathan to David to say, “Seeking Saul my father to kill you. And now, take heed please: in the morning stay in a hiding place and hide yourself.

Septuagint                             And Jonathan, Saul’s son, loved David much; and Jonathan told David, saying, “Saul seeks to kill you. Take heed to yourself, therefore, tomorrow morning, and hide yourself, and dwell in secret.

Significant differences:          Any apparent differences are a matter of translating from the Hebrew into the Greek; in many of this individual places, the Hebrew could have been similarly rendered into the English.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       But Jonathan liked David a lot, and he warned David, “My father is trying to have you killed, so be very careful. Hide in a field tomorrow morning,... [there are portions of v. 3 in this translation].

NJB                                        But Jonathan, Saul’s son, held David in great affection, and Jonathan warned David, ‘My father Saul is looking for a way to kill you, so be on your guard tomorrow morning; go into hiding, stay out of sight.

NLT                                        But Jonathan, because of his close friendship with David, told him what his father was planning. “Tomorrow morning,” he warned him, “you must find a hiding place out in the fields.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         But Saul’s son Jonathan was very fond of David, so he reported to David, “My father Saul is trying to kill you. Please be careful tomorrow morning. Go into hiding, and stay out of sight.

JPS (Tanakh)                        But Saul’s son Jonathan was very fond of David, and Jonathan told David, “My father Saul is bent on killing you. Be on your guard tomorrow morning; get to a secret place and remain in hiding.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     But Jonathan, Saul’s son, greatly delighted in David. So Jonathan told David, saying, “Saul my father is seeking to put you to death. Now therefore, please be on guard in the morning, and stay in a secret place and hide yourself.

Young's Updated LT              And Jonathan son of Saul delighted exceedingly in David, and Jonathan declares to David, saying, “Saul my father is seeking to put you to death, and now, take heed, I pray you, in the morning, and you have stayed in a secret place, and have been hidden,...

What is the gist of this verse? Jonathan, because of his love for David, immediately goes to David and warns him of Saul’s evil intent. Jonathan suggests that David hide himself until he can sort things out with his father.

Translation: But Saul’s son Jonathan had greatly delighted in David,... As we have already observed, Jonathan took an immediate liking to David (1Sam. 18:1, 3–4). And, as has been pointed out, two men can have a great love for one another without being gay.

Translation: ...therefore Jonathan made known to David, saying, “My father Saul is seeking to kill you;... Saul told Jonathan his plans, hoping to enlist Jonathan to help him assassinate David. Jonathan instead goes to David and informs him of Saul’s plan. Now you may think, doesn’t David know this already? After all, Saul did try to kill him twice in the palace. Mental illness can be a state which comes and goes; a person can be normal and lucid one moment, and way out there the next. So, on one occasion (or possibly twice), Saul attempted to kill David. However, that was weeks or even months ago. David does not know if this is going to occur again; whether Saul has snapped out of it; after all, David is now his son-in-law and his wife, Saul’s daughter, loves him. It would be easy to understand that David would think that Saul has snapped out of it. What man would kill his own son-in-law whom his daughter dearly loves? However, suddenly, Saul has made his plans to kill David more public (now, all his servants and his son Jonathan—and possibly the rest of his sons know).

Also, this is probably the first time that Jonathan is fully aware of his father’s intention. It would have been out of character for David to go to Jonathan and say, “Hey, your old man tried to kill my last night while I was playing music for him.” However, at this point, Jonathan hears this from his father’s mouth directly, which concerns him greatly.

Translation: ...therefore, please be careful. Jonathan knows that Saul has become more overt about his desire to kill David, even to the point of enlisting Jonathan’s help. He therefore warns David to be careful.

Translation: Stay in a hiding place in the morning and stay hidden [lit., and hide yourself]. David is told to find a good hiding place and to remain there until the morning. Apparently, this intention of Saul’s has just been announced and Jonathan then ran to David to tell him. Jonathan no doubt will return to his father and try to determine what Saul’s next moves are.

You may wonder, doesn’t Saul know how Jonathan feels? Why doesn’t he intentionally leave Jonathan out of the loop? Saul, recall, is wack. He’s confused, he’s jealous, he is angry, he is filled with both hatred and fear. These are some pretty strong emotions. Therefore, he does not give a rip about what Jonathan thinks. After all, he is king and he is Jonathan’s father. Therefore, whatever he says pretty much goes—at least in his own mind. Furthermore, someone who is that obsessed often loses a great deal of perception. Saul probably does not recognize the depth and strength of Jonathan’s feelings. Saul’s actions throughout the next few chapters indicate that he is not fully cognizant of the bond between his son Jonathan and David. Saul is assuming that his son’s loyalities will be toward him, and not toward David. Therefore, Jonathan is going to be privy to most of the moves that Saul will make.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And I, I will go out and I have stood to a hand of my father in the field which you [are] there and I, I will speak in you unto my father and I have seen what and I have made [it] known to you.”

Septuagint                             And I will go forth and stand near my father in the field where you will be and I will speak concerning you to my father; and I will see what his answer may be, and I will tell you.”

Significant differences:          No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Hide in a field tomorrow morning, and I’ll bring him there. Then I’ll talk to him about you, and if I find out anything, I’ll let you know.”

NJB                                        I shall go out and keep my father company in the countryside where you will be, and shall talk to my father about you; I shall see what the situation is and then tell you.

NLT                                        I’ll ask my father to go out there with me, and I’ll talk to him about you. Then I’ll tell you everything I can find out.”

REB                                       I shall come out and join my father in the open country where you are and speak to him about you, and if I discover anything I shall tell you.’

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         I’ll go out and stand beside my father in the field where you’ll be. I’ll speak with my father about you. If I find out anything, I’ll tell you.”

JPS (Tanakh)                        I will go out and stand next to my father in the field where you will be, and I will speak to my father about you. If I learn anything, I will tell you.”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     “And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where you are, and I will speak with my father about you; if I find out anything, then I shall tell you.”

Young's Updated LT              ...and I—I go out, and have stood by the side of my father in the field where you are, and I speak of you unto my father, and I have seen what is coming, and I have declared it to you.”

I must admit that the first time that I read this, and in reading each additional translation, this verse made little sense to me. Jonathan says that he will get his father out to the field where David is hiding and talk to him, and if he finds out anything, then he will tell David. Well, this made very little sense to me because if Jonathan is going to talk to his father in the same place that David is, then he wouldn’t have to tell David what Saul said, because David will be right there and he could hear it for himself. However, the key is the translation, and pretty much all of the translators got it wrong (although Young was close).

What is the gist of this verse? Jonathan shares his plan with David. He is going to get his father to speak while he is near David in the field where David is hiding. If Jonathan sees anything, then he will make this known to David as well.

Translation: And I, [even] I will go out and stand next to my father in the field where you [are]. David is to go out and hide in a field, and Jonathan suggests here that he get his father out to that same field. Now, there must have been a great deal of trust between these men, because this could just as easily be a trap. However, Jonathan wants David to be able to hear with his own ears just exactly what Saul has to say.

Robert Gordon suggests that David was advised to hide where he would have a good view of what was going on, and would be able to assess Saul’s attitude for himself. Jonathan could then elaborate on the detail. Whether Jonathan’s drawing his father into the field would make it easier for him to meet David afterwards without incurring suspicion is less certain. That David stays within earshot (?) Of the conversation, and yet needs to be informed about it, is not necessarily a sign of a composite narrative, for, even if Jonathan contrived to bring his father within yards of David’s hiding-place, he could not tell in advance how much David would hear.

Translation: And I will speak before you to my father... The bêyth preposition is a preposition of proximity. Although it can be used in the sense of concerning, in respect to, on account of, it is usually rendered in, into, by, near, with, before, against. Certainly, Jonathan is going to be speaking to Saul about David; however, the key here is that he will be speaking to his father Saul near David; in the presence of David; before David. Most translators did not render this accurately because it makes very little sense when combined with their translation of the second half of this verse. However, if both portions of the verse are rendered accurately, then it all makes sense.

Translation: ...and [if] I see anything, then I will make [it] known to you.” David is going to be within hearing range of Saul and Jonathan. Now, I don’t know what the landscape was like or how David would hide that close, but I used to live in a house that if you stepped out the back door and walked into the forest, you only needed to walk about 10–15 yards and you could no longer see the house, as the woods were so thick (this was almost swampland in Texas). So David would be in a place where he could not see Saul and Jonathan, but he could hear them. What Jonathan is saying here is that, if he sees anything—that is, if he sees anything that David is unable to see—then he will make this known to him.

As has been mentioned, Saul is not fully cognizant of Jonathan’s bond with David. He has assumed that his own psychotic emotions supercede Jonathan’s friendship. Therefore here, in this context, as well as in 1Sam. 20, Saul will make known to Jonathan most of his intended moves (as Jonathan is a part of Saul’s senior staff). And, preview of coming attractions, when Saul realizes that Jonathan takes David’s side, he will accuse David of sedition and of alienating his own son from him.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so speaks Jonathan in David good unto his father and so he says unto him, “Does not sin the king in his servant in David because he has not sinned to you; and because his deeds [have been] good to you exceedingly.

Septuagint                             And Jonathan spoke favorably concerning David to Saul his father, and said to him, “Let not the king sin against your servant David, for he has not sinned against you, and his deeds [are] very good.

Significant differences:          No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

NLT                                        The next morning Jonathan spoke with his father about David, saying many good things about him. “Please don’t sin against David,” Jonathan pleaded. “He’s never done anything to harm you. He has always helped you in any way he could.

REB                                       Jonathan spoke up for David to his father Saul and said to him, ‘Sir, do not wrong your servant David; he has not wronged you; his achievements have all benefitted you greatly.

TEV                                       Jonathan praised David to Saul and said, “Sir, don’t do wrong to your servant David. He has never done you any wrong; on the contrary, everything he has done has been a great help to you.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So Jonathan spoke well of David to his father Saul. “You should not commit a sin against your servant David,” he said. “He hasn’t sinned against you. Instead, he has done some very fine things for you:...

JPS (Tanakh)                        So Jonathan spoke well of David to his father Saul. He said to him, “Let not Your Majesty wrong his servant David, for he has not wronged you; indeed, all his actions have been very much to your advantage.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Then Jonathan spoke well of David to Saul his father, and said to him, “Do not let the king sin against his servant David, since he has not sinned against you, and since his deeds have been very beneficial [lit., good] to you.

Young's Updated LT              And Jonathan speaks good of David unto Saul his father, and says unto hi, “Let not the king sin against his servant, against David, because he has not sinned against you, and because his works for you are very good;...

What is the gist of this verse? Jonathan sets everything up so that he and Saul and certainly some witnesses are out in a field; and David is nearby, within hearing range. Jonathan speaks well of David, pointing out that David has not done anything which wrongs the king; which is why Saul should not sin against David.

Translation: So Jonathan spoke well concerning David to his father,... Jonathan speaks well of David to his father. Although we may not be given the entire conversation, we have it summed up in this verse. Jonathan and others, will, on several occasions, attempt to reason with his father concerning David’s loyalty (see also 1Sam. 20:32 22:14). If you are normal and the logic for a position is clear and irrefutable, you figure that all you need to do is to present these facts to another person, and they will agree with you. Let me set you straight: when dealing with an irrational woman, no amount of logic will get you anywhere at anytime. When dealing with someone like Saul, no logical argument is going to sway him for very long (this argument of Jonathan’s will apparently reach Saul for a time).

Translation: ...and he said to him, “The king will not sin against his servant—against David—because he has not sinned with respect to you;... You will note the protocol here. Jonathan does not use the imperative mood, but he instead uses the 3^rd person masculine singular, Qal imperfect of to sin. He says, “The king will not sin with against David, because David has not sinned with respect to him.”

In fact, this portion of v. 4 is a miniature lesson in Hebrew. The first time we find châţâ (to sin), it is in the imperfect tense, meaning that it is incomplete action. Saul has not completed his sin against David. He has so far only announced his intentions with respect to David. However, the second time the verb is used, it is in the perfect tense, which is completed action. Up until that point in time, David had not sinned against Saul.

Secondly, note the difference of prepositions. It reads that Saul should not sin against David; however, we are then told that David has not sinned with respect to Saul. Saul has a specific sin in mind to commit against David: murder. However, David has not sinned in any way with respect to Saul. That is, one could not find any actions which even could be remotely considered as sins against Saul.

Jonathan will make a similar argument to his father in the next chapter when Saul realizes that Jonathan has subverted his plans to kill David (1Sam. 20:30–33). However, at that point, it will be clear to Jonathan that Saul can no longer be reasoned with (1Sam. 20:34).

Translation: ...and because his deeds [have been] extremely beneficial to you. Jonathan adds to his explanation. It is not simply that David hasn’t sinned against Saul but that what David has done has benefitted the king greatly. Saul’s directive to kill David makes little sense—in no way can David be construed of as an enemy of Saul’s. In fact, he is one of Saul’s greatest allies.

I want you to recall that David would be a challenge to Jonathan for the throne. Jonathan is one of the persons who is in line for the throne; however, if David becomes king, Jonathan would lose all claims to the throne. Also recognize that Jonathan has already heard Saul’s realization that the people favor David over his father (1Sam. 18:7–8, 14–16). Jonathan, no doubt, has already considered the fact that David may become king over Israel. However, Jonathan has a sense of integrity and places friendship above any personal ambition that he might have. Jonathan understands that God’s will is God’s will, and that there is no reason to run counter to God—his own father is a prime example of this.

Application: Your personal ambition should never ever supplant personal integrity. I can almost guarantee that you will be tested on this.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                         And he put his life in his hand, and struck down the Philistine, and the Lord has brought about a great salvation for all Israel. You saw it and rejoiced. Why therefore wilt you sin against innocent blood, by killing David, who is without fault?.

Masoretic Text                       And so he places his soul in his palm and so he strikes down the Philistine and so does Y^ehowah a deliverance great to all Israel. You saw and so you rejoice—and to why do you sin in blood innocent to kill David for nothing?”

Septuagint                             And he put his life in his hand, and struck the Philistine, and the Lord brought a great deliverance; and all Israel saw and rejoiced; why then do you sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?”

Significant differences:          The primary difference is, Saul saw and rejoiced in the Latin, Hebrew and Syriac concerning David’s victories; in the Greek, it is Israel which saw and rejoiced.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The next morning, Jonathan reminded Saul about the many good things David had done for him. Then he said, “Why do you want to kill David? He hasn’t done anything to you. He has served in your army and has always done what’s best for you. He even risked his life to kill Goliath. The Lord helped Israel win a great victory that day, and it made you happy.” [The CEV combined vv. 4–5, so I have presented them both here].

NLT                                        Have you forgotten about the time he risked his life to kill the Philistine giant and how the Lord brought a great victory to Israel as a result? You were certainly happy about it then. Why should you murder an innocent man like David? There is no reason for it at all!”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         He risked his life and killed the Philistine Goliath, and the Lord gave all Israel a great victory. When you saw it, you rejoiced. Why then should you sin by shedding David’s innocent blood for no reason?”

JPS (Tanakh)                        He took his life in his hands and killed the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great victory for all Israel. You saw it and rejoiced. Why then should you incur the guilt of shedding the blood of an innocent man, killing David without cause?”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     “For he took his life in his hand and struck the Philistine, and the Lord brought about a great deliverance for all Israel; you saw it and rejoiced. Why then will you sin against innocent blood, by putting David to death without a cause?”

Young's Updated LT              ...yea, he puts his life in his hand, and strikes down the Philistine, and Jehovah works a great salvation for all Israel; you have seen and have rejoiced, and why do you sin against innocent blood, to put David to death for nothing?”

What is the gist of this verse? In v. 5, Jonathan continues his compelling argument on behalf of David. Saul observed that David risked his own life and killed Goliath, by the deliverance of God; which act delivered all of Israel. Saul himself observed and rejoiced at this victory. Therefore, Jonathan asks his father, “Why would you sin against an innocent person and execute David for no reason?”

Translation: He risked his life [lit., he placed his soul in his palm] and struck down the Philistine,... Recall the Goliath came out and challenged Israel for 40 days and no one, including Saul, was willing to face him (1Sam. 17). David put his own life at risk when he faced (and killed) this Philistine.

David’s fight with Goliath is legend. Those who know little or nothing about Scripture know something about David and Goliath. For 40 days, Goliath paraded his huge personage before all of Saul’s army, asking for them to send out but one man to do battle, to settle the war between the Israelites and the Philistines. For 40 days, no man came forward from the ranks of Israel. And then when David brought supplies to his brothers, he hears this Philistine rag on Israel’s army, he hears what Saul will do for the man who defeats Goliath, and he stands up to the giant.

Translation: ...and Y^ehowah [through him] delivered [lit., made a great deliverance for] all Israel. Jonathan recognizes that it was God who, through David, delivered Israel. Had not David been willing to risk his life, Israel could be enslaved to the Philistines. The only portion of Jonathan’s argument which is recorded is the more general statement of the previous verse and the more specific statement of this verse. We know that David has been on at least four tours of duty in the armed forces (1Sam. 18:5, 13–14, 27 19:8). Because there is little emphasis given to these tours of duty, we have no idea as to how long David has been a soldier for Saul. No doubt Jonathan brought up specific instances of David’s heroism in battle (bearing in mind that he was careful not to reintroduce Saul to the painful times when the people appeared to sing David’s praises over his).

The words used here are very specific, intending to bring Saul back to something which he himself said several decades previous. Saul had just led his army so that they were victorious over the Ammonites and he said this: “Not a man will be put to death this day, for today, Jehovah has accomplished deliverance in Israel.” (1Sam. 11:13). Jonathan is attempting to bring his father back to a period of time prior to his mental illness.

Translation: You saw [this] and you [still] rejoice... This phrase jumps out at you. Jonathan is giving this narrative as to why Saul is out of line for trying to kill David; and between each point, he says and so. However, here, Jonathan simply says: “You observed this yourself!” It’s like Jonathan slapped Saul in the head to get his attention. Jonathan uses a perfect tense and follows this with the imperfect tense of to rejoice; “...you saw [this] [a completed action in the past] and you [continue to] rejoice [an act which is ongoing].” The imperfect tense means that this is an incomplete action. Saul is still rejoicing over David’s victories even to this day.

In Jonathan’s mind, he cannot understand at all what his father Saul is thinking. How can Saul have observed David’s victories—victories which he still celebrates—and yet desire to kill David. This does not fit into Jonathan’s brain.

Translation: ...so why do you [now] sin against innocent blood, [desiring] to kill David without cause?” Jonathan makes his point with a rhetorical question. He is not asking Saul to explain his reasons—he is making is clear as to why Saul is completely out of line. Saul’s intent is to kill David (the infinitive often speaks of intent and purpose); in doing so, Saul would be sinning against innocent blood.

This 5^th verse takes things up a notch. Not only has David never done anything remotely against Saul (v. 4), but Saul and all Israel have benefitted because of David’s very activities. David is a selfless, national hero who pulled Saul’s bacon out of the fire. “Now you want to kill David because he saved you? How much sense does that make?” Jonathan asks his father.

You will note that there is a lot less formality here, as Jonathan reaches a crescendo in his argument. There is no carefully couched language; Jonathan is not carefully avoiding stepping on Saul’s toes. He lays it on the line and pulls no punches. He does not call his father an idiot, although that would have been apropos.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                         And when Saul heard this, he was appeased with the words of Jonathan, and he swore, “As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain.”

Masoretic Text                       And so hearkens Saul to a voice of Jonathan and so swears Saul, “A life of Y^ehowah if he is killed.”

Peshitta                                 And Saul listened to the voice of Jonathan his son; and Saul swore, saying, “As the Lord lives, he will not be put to death.”

Septuagint                             And Saul hearkened to the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swore, saying, “The Lord lives if he dies.”

Significant differences:          Although the oath requires some sorting out, there are no fundamental differences. The Latin and Syriac reasonably interpret the meaning of the oath.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Saul agreed and promised, “I swear by the living Lord that I won’t have David killed!”

TEV                                       Saul was convinced by what Jonathan said and made a vow in the Lord’s name that he would not kill David.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Saul listened to Jonathan, and he promised, “I solemnly swear, as the Lord lives, he will not be killed.”

JPS (Tanakh)                        Saul heeded Jonathan’s plea, and Saul swore, “As the Lord lives, he shall not be put to death!”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     And Saul listened to the voice of Jonathan, and Saul vowed, “As the Lord lives, he shall not be put to death.”

Young's Updated LT              And Saul hearkens to the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swears, “Jehovah lives—he does not die.”

What is the gist of this verse? Saul listens to the passionate argument of his son, and swears that he will not try to kill David.

Translation: Saul listened to the voice of Jonathan... Saul did have his lucid moments. He was not a raving lunatic all of the time. God sent this evil spirit to torment and trouble him, but it was not something which could not be controlled. Here Saul is having a very clear, unperturbed time with Jonathan, and he listens intently to what Jonathan has to say, with the intention of following Jonathan’s advice.

We, unfortunately, do not have a word like shâma׳ in the English language. They did in Old English: to hearken. It was more than simply listening to what someone else had to say. It often meant to listen intently and then to act upon the advice, direction or mandates of the speaker. Saul respects and loves his son Jonathan probably more than Jesse loves his son David. He recognizes Jonathan’s logic, and can pose no counter argument.

Translation: ...and he [lit., Saul] swore, “The life of Y^ehowah if he is assassinated.” Few translators render this literally, as it would cause many readers to be nonplused. The idea is that Saul is swearing on his own life that David would not be assassinated. This sounds great, but, unfortunately, Saul is not a man to keep his word. He either lied or stretched the truth, when the actual truth would have put him in a bad light (1Sam. 13:10–14 15:9–21). Saul has made foolish oaths and did not keep them (1Sam. 14:24, 27, 43–45). So, even though Saul is probably saying this in all sincerity, it means very little. It reminds me of a roommate that I had once—he was willing to promise anything and he always was able to find an excuse. His word and sincerity were meaningless (and he knew how to appear sincere). But whatever came out of his mouth could be depended upon to be a lie, an excuse or a meaningless promise. He had no personal integrity. I have had specific tenants like this as well; they would make sincere promises, and very possibly believe these promises themselves; but they would rarely if ever follow through. This is Saul. The best that we can hope for is a short reprieve (a fact which Jonathan may or may not be aware of).

Application: The principle is this: for there to be any connection between what a person says and does depends entirely upon their own personal character. I have known parents to trust the words of their son or daughter even when their children lied right to their face. This does not build character in your son or daughter for you to believe everything they say. You raised them. You spend more time with them than anyone else (I hope). Therefore, you should know whether they have any personal integrity or not. And if you don’t know, you need to find out. When a child makes their first statement of truth to you, where there is a meaningful outcome depending upon whether they are telling the truth or not, then you need to make sure that they are telling you the truth. You need to know your child at a very early age and be able to determine whether they can be trusted or not. And, periodically you need to check this out, because kids change.

Application: Some things are easy: if a child promises to do something, do they follow through? Do you have to hassle them in order to get them to follow through? Do they make promises simply to put off doing something indefinitely? To teach a child the importance of standing by what he or she says is a fundamental lesson of growing up. It does not matter how screwed up today’s society is—you still need to teach your child that their word is their bond; that what they say should be something everyone else can depend upon.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so calls Jonathan to David and so he makes known to him all the words the these. And so brings Jonathan David unto Saul and so he is to his faces as yesterday, three days ago.

Septuagint                             And Jonathan called David, and told him all these words; and Jonathan brought David in to Saul, and he was before him as in former times.

Significant differences:          No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Jonathan called to David and told him what Saul had said. Then he brought David to Saul, and David served in Saul’s army just as he had done before.

NLT                                        Afterward Jonathan called David and told him what had happened. Then he took David to see Saul, and everything was as it had been before.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Jonathan told David all of this. Then Jonathan took David to Saul. So David was returned to his former status in Saul’s court.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Jonathan called David, and Jonathan told him all this. Then Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he served him as before.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Then Jonathan called David, and Jonathan told him all these words. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence as formerly.

Young's Updated LT              And Jonathan calls for David, and Jonathan declares to him all these words, and Jonathan brings in David unto Saul, and he is before him as before.

What is the gist of this verse? Once Saul and Jonathan had parted, Jonathan called for David (as he was in the same general area) and then told him all that Saul had said. Then Jonathan brought David back into the palace and things were as they were before.

Translation: Then Jonathan called to David and made known to him all these words. Apparently David was out of earshot, although he was probably in the same general area where Jonathan and Saul spoke to one another. Jonathan summoned David and told him the exchange that he and his father had had.

Translation: So Jonathan brought David to Saul... Jonathan assumed that it was safe, and he brought David to his father in the palace. He had temporarily established peace between David and Saul. This is not unlike the temporary peace which is established now and again between Israel and the Palestinians today.

Translation: ...and he was in his presence as before. This is more than David is simply standing before Saul; he has his old position back as palace musician and he functions in the palace just as he had done before (see 1Sam. 16:21 18:2, 10b). So, for a time, David enjoyed some peace in the palace of Saul.

David Fights the Philistines

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so is added the war to be and so goes out David and so he fights in the Philistines and so he strikes in them a striking great and so they flee from his faces.

Septuagint                             And there was again war [lit., war added to be] against Saul; and David did valiantly, and fought against the Philistines, and struck them with a very great slaughter, and they fled from before him.

Significant differences:          There are some significant differences in the text, but not in the overall meaning. Only in the Greek do we have this war as being against Saul; the phrase and he went out is not found in the Greek either.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The next time there was a war with the Philistines, David fought hard and forced them to retreat.

NLT                                        War broke out shortly after that, and David led his troops against the Philistines. He attacked them with such fury that they all ran away.

REB                                       When hostilities broke out again and David advanced to the attack, he inflicted such a severe defeat on the Philistines that they fled before him.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When war broke out again, David went to fight the Philistines. He defeated them so decisively that they fled from him.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Fighting broke out again. David went out and fought the Philistines. He inflicted a great defeat upon them and they fled before him.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     When there was war again, David went out and fought with the Philistines and defeated them with great slaughter, so that they fled before him.

NRSV                                    Again there was war, and David went out to fight the Philistines. He launched a heavy attack on them, so that they fled before him.

Young's Updated LT              And there adds to be war, and David goes out and fights against the Philistines, and strikes down among them—a great striking down, and they flee from his face.

What is the gist of this verse? When war against the Philistines broke out again, David went to fight against them, defeating them and causing them to retreat.

Translation: And when war [broke out] again [lit., and so the war is added to be],... The verb âçaph means that this is a reoccurrence. The Philistines and the Israelites had many wars with one another. Apparently, fighting stopped for a short time and then it broke out again. The use of the verb to be is a temporal use, marking the time that this occurred.

Translation: ...and David went out and fought the Philistines. This indicates to us that our understanding of the last portion of the previous verse is correct. David was restored to his former status. Recall that he held two positions with regards to the royal palace: when there was no war, he was the palace musician (1Sam. 16:21, 23 18:10 19:9); when war broke out, he was a commanding general (1Sam. 18:5, 13, 30 19:8). He apparently functioned as the former for an unspecified time and now as the latter.

Translation: He assaulted them with [such a] great slaughter... David apparently went to war with great and renewed vigor. He was in no hurry to become king. He was a patriot and was more than willing to face down the threats to his country’s security. His attack on the Philistines was vicious and decisive.

Translation: ...that they fled from him. The Philistines retreated. They suffered so many casualties at the hands of David and his men that they ran from him.

You may wonder, if the Philistines lost again and again to the Israelites, why did they continue to fight them? Hatred; pure and simple hatred. As long as there is a Jew in the Middle East, there will be no peace. They are hated by too many people. They are God’s people, so we should expect that Satan would foment hatred against them. Until the Philistines are almost completely destroyed, they will always war against the Jews. It is in their blood, you might say. I recall getting into a fight with this kid from down the street and I felt as though I had beaten him enough to walk away. However, he would not let me walk away. He kept coming at me and coming at me. I don’t recall how things ended, but I didn’t think this fight would ever end. He would not give up. These are the Philistines. They will come back, and they will come back, and they will come back—no matter how many times they are defeated.

It is very possible that this victory of David’s was the act which sets Saul off again in the next verse. As we recall, Saul previously became jealous of David when women attributed more Philistine deaths to David than to him (1Sam. 18:7). Therefore, even though this victory was a victory for Saul as well, it could have easily set off his rage once again.

Saul Makes a Direct Attempt on David’s Life/David Eludes Saul

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so is a spirit of Y^ehowah evil unto Saul and he in his house is staying and his spear in his hand and David is playing in a hand.

Peshitta                                 And an evil spirit from the Lord came upon Saul as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand; and David played the harp in his presence.

Septuagint                             And an evil spirit of God was upon Saul and he was sleeping in his house, and a spear [was] in his hand, and David was playing on the harp with his hands.

Significant differences:          There is a minor disagreement of the verb (is it staying, sitting or sleeping?); it can mean staying or sitting in the Hebrew. Also, the word harp is specifically mentioned in the Syriac and Greek. As is most often the case, the differences in the text has no affect upon the overall meaning.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One night, David was in Saul’s home, playing the harp for him. Saul as sitting there, holding a spear, when an evil spirit from the Lord took control of him.

NLT                                        But one day as Saul was sitting at home, the tormenting spirit from the Lord suddenly came upon him again. As David played his harp for the king,...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

JPS (Tanakh)                        Then an evil spirit of the Lord came upon Saul while he was sitting in his house with his spear in his hand, and David was playing [the lyre].

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Now there was an evil spirit from the Lord on Saul as he was sitting in his house with his spear in his hand, and David was playing the harp with his hand.

Young's Updated LT              And a spirit of sadness from Jehovah is unto Saul, and he is sitting in his house, and his javelin in his hand, and David is playing with the hand,...

What is the gist of this verse? Even though Saul has sworn to Jonathan that he will not harm David, an evil or distressing spirit of God comes to him while he is sitting in his house with a spear, listening to David playing music.