The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Jonathan and David Renew Their Covenant
1 Samuel 20:10–29 — Jonathan and David Renew Their Covenant. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
10Then David asked Jonathan, “Who will tell me if your father answers you harshly?”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
dā·wiḏ ’el- way·yō·mer yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān mî yag·gîḏ lî ’ōw mah- ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ya·‘an·ḵā qā·šāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said David unto Jonathan: “Who will-declare to-me? Or what will-answer-thee thy-father hard?”
Where the English smooths the original
These questions of David were suggested by a correct estimate of the circumstances, namely, that Saul's suspicions would leave him to the conclusion that there was some understanding between Jonathan and David, and that he would take steps in consequence to prevent Jonathan from making David acquainted with the result of his conversation with Saul.Keil's reconstruction of David's reasoning is a deduction, not a statement of the text; Ellicott quotes it approvingly, which is why the same sentence appears twice in this brief.
Really David's question is very involved and ungrammatical, as was natural in his excited state.
Abarbinel thinks, that the first of these expressions is by way of question, who should declare to him his father's will and intention, whether good or bad: and the latter by way of outcry, woe unto meGill is relaying the medieval Jewish exegete Abarbanel, not asserting the reading himself.
Jonathan generously offers David his services. This is true friendship. Thus Christ testifies his love to us, Ask, and it shall be done for you; and we must testify our love to him, by keeping his commandments.
11“Come,” he replied, “let us go out to the field.” So the two of them went out into the field,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lə·ḵāh yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān ’el- way·yō·mer dā·wiḏ wə·nê·ṣê haś·śā·ḏeh šə·nê·hem way·yê·ṣə·’ū haś·śā·ḏeh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said Jonathan unto David: “Come, and-let-us-go-out the-field.” And-they-went-out two-of-them the-field.
Where the English smooths the original
That they might more fully, and freely, and familiarly talk of this affair between them, without any danger of being overheard by the servants of Saul
To escape observation they leave the city, in which the conversation has been held hitherto.
this interview for dramatic interest and moral beauty stands unrivalled in the records of human friendship.JFB's superlative is a literary judgement, not an exegetical claim; our own reading holds that the scene is also a hard political negotiation over Jonathan's heirs.
But who can fully understand the love of Jesus, who gave himself as a sacrifice for rebellious, polluted sinners!Henry moves straight from Jonathan's friendship to Christ's love for sinners. Note what he does not say: he does not make Jonathan a type of Christ, only an occasion for thinking about him.
12and Jonathan said, “By the LORD, the God of Israel, I will sound out my father by this time tomorrow or the next day. If he is favorable toward you, will I not send for you and tell you?
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān way·yō·mer ’el- dā·wiḏ Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê yiś·rā·’êl kî- ’eḥ·qōr ’eṯ- ’ā·ḇî kā·‘êṯ mā·ḥār haš·šə·li·šîṯ wə·hin·nêh- ṭō·wḇ ’el- dā·wiḏ wə·lō- ’āz ’eš·laḥ ’ê·le·ḵā wə·ḡā·lî·ṯî ’eṯ- ’ā·zə·ne·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said Jonathan unto David: “YHWH, God of-Israel! When I-search-out my-father about-this-time tomorrow, the-third, and-behold good toward David, and-not then I-send unto-thee and-uncover thy-ear —”
Where the English smooths the original
The time is thus reckoned: the present day; the morrow, which was the new moon festival; and the day after, which would reckon as the third day.
Jonathan begins by addressing Jehovah, but afterwards instead of putting the verb in the second person (so mayest Thou do) he repeats the divine Name.
O Lord God of Israel, do thou hear and judge between us. It is an abrupt speech, which is usual in great passions.Poole's first clause is his own supplied paraphrase of the bare vocative, not a translation of anything in the Hebrew; his second sentence is the honest observation.
13But if my father intends to bring evil on you, then may the LORD punish me, and ever so severely, if I do not tell you and send you on your way in safety. May the LORD be with you, just as He has been with my father.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
kî- ’ā·ḇî ’eṯ- yê·ṭiḇ ’el- hā·rā·‘āh ‘ā·le·ḵā Yah·weh kōh- ya·‘ă·śeh lî·hō·w·nā·ṯān wə·ḵōh yō·sîp̄ wə·ḡā·lî·ṯî ’eṯ- ’ā·zə·ne·ḵā wə·šil·laḥ·tî·ḵā wə·hā·laḵ·tā lə·šā·lō·wm Yah·weh wî·hî ‘im·māḵ ka·’ă·šer hā·yāh ‘im- ’ā·ḇî
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“— thus may-do YHWH to-Jonathan and-thus may-he-add: when it-seems-good to-my-father the-evil upon-thee, then-I-will-uncover thy-ear and-send-thee-away, and-thou-shalt-go to-peace. May-YHWH be with-thee as he-was with my-father.”
Where the English smooths the original
And that the knowledge hereof did not raise jealousy, and envy, and rage in him, who was the next heir of the crown, as it did in his father, must be ascribed to Jonathan’s piety towards God, to whose disposal he cheerfully submitted himself, and to his sincere friendship to David, in whose happiness he rejoiced as in his own.Poole's confidence that Jonathan knew of Samuel's sentence and had asked David outright is inference from 1 Samuel 23:17, and he says as much (“it is most likely”).
In this wish there is expressed the presentiment that David would one day occupy that place in Israel which Saul occupied then, i.e., the throne.
Jonathan already foresees David’s destiny, as is clear from the following verses.
14And as long as I live, treat me with the LORD’s loving devotion, that I may not die,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·lō ’im- ‘ō·w·ḏen·nî ḥāy wə·lō- ṯa·‘ă·śeh ‘im·mā·ḏî Yah·weh ḥe·seḏ wə·lō ’ā·mūṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-not — if yet-I alive — and-not wilt-thou-do with-me the-ḥesed of-YHWH, and-not shall-I-die;”
Where the English smooths the original
There is really no other course open than to follow the Syriac and Arabic, as Maurer, Thenius, and Ewald have doneThis is a conjectural emendation of the consonantal pointing, not a reading of the received Hebrew text. K&D adopts it because he judges the Masoretic sense impossible; a reader may weigh that judgement.
are prompted by a fear lest even David should conform to the barbarous Oriental custom by which the first king of a new dynasty often tried to secure himself on the throne by murdering his predecessor’s family.
That thou do not kill me or mine, as princes of another line used to kill the nearest relations of the former line, from whom the kingdom was translated to them.
Jonathan had a presentiment, doubtless from God, that David would be established upon the throne. By God's mercy he had the comfort, which he well deserved, of knowing that his own posterity would receive kindness at David's hand (see the marginal references).Barnes reads the presentiment as divinely given; the text itself says only what Jonathan says, and assigns no source to his conviction.
15and do not ever cut off your loving devotion from my household—not even when the LORD cuts off every one of David’s enemies from the face of the earth.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·lō- ‘aḏ- ‘ō·w·lām ṯaḵ·riṯ ’eṯ- ḥas·də·ḵā mê·‘im bê·ṯî wə·lō Yah·weh ’eṯ- bə·haḵ·riṯ ’îš ḏā·wiḏ ’ō·yə·ḇê mê·‘al pə·nê hā·’ă·ḏā·māh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“— and-not shalt-thou-cut-off thy-ḥesed from-with my-house unto forever; and-not even-in-the-cutting-off by-YHWH of-the-enemies-of David, each-man, from-upon the-face-of the-ground.”
Where the English smooths the original
Thy kindness; he saith not, the kindness of the Lord , as before, because the covenant between them seem to have been only personal, and not comprehending their posterity.Poole's inference that the earlier covenant was merely personal rests on this one change of wording; Benson and Gill read the same verse as simply extending an existing bond.
How unspeakable a generosity is here shown by Jonathan to stipulate for his own life, and the lives of his posterity, with that man whose life, humanly speaking, was now in his power!
Jonathan's meaning is, that the covenant between them should not be only between them personally, but include their posterity, as follows.
16So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “May the LORD hold David’s enemies accountable.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān way·yiḵ·rōṯ ‘im- bêṯ dā·wiḏ Yah·weh mî·yaḏ ḏā·wiḏ ’ō·yə·ḇê ū·ḇiq·qêš
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-cut, Jonathan, with the-house of-David; and-required-it YHWH from-the-hand of-the-enemies-of David.
Where the English smooths the original
but it is better to understand this verse as a remark interposed in the dialogue by the narrator
These last words probably are a euphemism, and mean David himself. So Rashi explains the words. The courtesy of an Oriental forbade his saying, May Jehovah punish David for it, but he prays that God would requite it on some one.The euphemism reading is a conjecture about scribal practice, credited to Rashi; Poole records it as one of two possibilities and prefers the other.
The Sept. points to a text making the whole of 1 Samuel 20:16 part of Jonathan’s speech
17And Jonathan had David reaffirm his vow out of love for him, for Jonathan loved David as he loved himself.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān dā·wiḏ way·yō·w·sep̄ lə·haš·bî·a‘ ’eṯ- bə·’a·hă·ḇā·ṯōw ’ō·ṯōw kî- ’ă·hê·ḇōw ’a·hă·ḇaṯ nap̄·šōw
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-added, Jonathan, to-cause-to-swear David by-his-love for-him, for with-the-love-of his-own-soul he-loved-him.
Where the English smooths the original
it having been in all ages a common custom in the East, when the dynasty was violently changed, to put to death the children and near relations of the former king.
he once more implored David most earnestly with an oath to show favour to him and his house.
with the most cordial affection, with a truly hearty and sincere love
18Then Jonathan said to David, “Tomorrow is the New Moon, and you will be missed, because your seat will be empty.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān way·yō·mer- lōw mā·ḥār ḥō·ḏeš wə·nip̄·qaḏ·tā kî mō·wō·šā·ḇe·ḵā yip·pā·qêḏ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said to-him Jonathan: “Tomorrow (is) new-moon, and-thou-shalt-be-mustered, for thy-seat will-be-mustered.”
Where the English smooths the original
At the State banquet of my father tomorrow your seat, as agreed upon, will be empty, then you and I—when King Saul misses you—will know the worst.Ellicott is paraphrasing Jonathan in his own dramatised voice, not translating; the Hebrew contains no equivalent of “we will know the worst.”
This section is the Haphtarah for the New Moon when it falls on the first day of the week.A note on Jewish liturgical use rather than on the sense of the verse: vv. 18 to 42 are read in synagogue when the New Moon falls on a Sunday, precisely because of the opening words “Tomorrow is the new moon.”
or be inquired after, because not in his usual place at mealtime.
19When you have stayed three days, hurry down to the place you hid on the day this trouble began, and remain beside the stone Ezel.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·šil·laš·tā mə·’ōḏ tê·rêḏ ū·ḇā·ṯā ’el- ham·mā·qō·wm ’ă·šer- nis·tar·tā šām bə·yō·wm ham·ma·‘ă·śeh wə·yā·šaḇ·tā ’ê·ṣel hā·’e·ḇen hā·’ā·zel
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-thou-shalt-do-a-third(-time), thou-shalt-go-down greatly, and-thou-shalt-come to the-place where thou-hidst there on-the-day-of the-deed; and-thou-shalt-sit beside the-stone, the-Ezel.”
Where the English smooths the original
whether David went fast or slow, as he was to hide there some time, but it was important that David should be far away, so that no prying eye might chance to catch sight of him.Ellicott is quoting Dean Payne Smith, not writing in his own voice.
In the Hebrew the words are, Thou shalt three times go down to a very low place
may have been given in remembrance of the parting of David and Jonathan beside it.An attractive conjecture and nothing more: the name would then commemorate an event that has not yet happened when the verse is spoken.
Nothing further can be said concerning the stone Ezel than that Ezel is a proper name.
20I will shoot three arrows to the side of it, as if I were aiming at a target.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wa·’ă·nî ’ō·w·reh šə·lō·šeṯ ha·ḥiṣ·ṣîm ṣid·dāh lə·šal·laḥ- lî lə·maṭ·ṭā·rāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-I, three-of the-arrows to-its-side I-will-shoot, to-send for-me to-a-target.”
Where the English smooths the original
He chose this way to avoid Saul’s suspicion, because bows and arrows were the principal arms of those times
No suspicion would be excited by Jonathan’s carrying the bow which was his usual weapon
three are pitched upon, according to the number of the days David was missingAn attractive symmetry, but the text gives no reason for the number three; Gill is supplying one.
21Then I will send a boy and say, ‘Go, find the arrows!’ Now, if I expressly say to him, ‘Look, the arrows are on this side of you; bring them,’ then come, because as surely as the LORD lives, it is safe for you, and there is no danger.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·hin·nêh ’eš·laḥ ’eṯ- han·na·‘ar lêḵ mə·ṣā ’eṯ- ha·ḥiṣ·ṣîm ’im- ’ā·mōr ’ō·mar lan·na·‘ar hin·nêh ha·ḥiṣ·ṣîm wā·hên·nāh mim·mə·ḵā qā·ḥen·nū wā·ḇō·’āh kî- Yah·weh ḥay- šā·lō·wm lə·ḵā wə·’ên dā·ḇār
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-behold, I-will-send the-lad: ‘Go, find the-arrows.’ If saying I-say to-the-lad, ‘Behold, the-arrows (are) from-thee and-hitherward, take-him,’ then-come, for peace (is) to-thee and-no word, as-YHWH-lives.”
Where the English smooths the original
This signal seems to have been agreed on between them, in case Jonathan was so watched and followed, as not to have an opportunity of communing with David by word of mouth.
then come, for peace is to thee, and it is nothing, as truly as Jehovah liveth.K&D's own literal rendering of the clause, which keeps the flat Hebrew “and it is nothing” where the English versions supply “no hurt” or “no danger.”
he might appear, and not be afraid of being seen by any, since by this sign he might be assured that Saul was well affected to him
22But if I say to the young man, ‘Look, the arrows are beyond you,’ then you must go, for the LORD has sent you away.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’im- ’ō·mar kōh lā·‘e·lem hin·nêh ha·ḥiṣ·ṣîm mim·mə·ḵā wā·hā·lə·’āh lêḵ kî Yah·weh šil·la·ḥă·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“But-if thus I-say to-the-stripling, ‘Behold, the-arrows (are) from-thee and-beyond,’ go! for YHWH has-sent-thee-away.”
Where the English smooths the original
Jonathan is prepared to recognise the Divine Will in the banishment of David from Saul’s court. God had another school in which the future king must be trained.The second sentence is Cambridge's own devotional inference; the verse says only that YHWH has sent David away, not why.
(i) The Lord is the author of your departure.
Take this for an intimation of God’s providence, that thou shouldst keep away from the court.
23And as for the matter you and I have discussed, the LORD is a witness between you and me forever.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·had·dā·ḇār ’ă·šer wā·’āt·tāh hin·nêh ’ă·nî dib·bar·nū Yah·weh bê·nî ū·ḇê·nə·ḵā ‘aḏ- ‘ō·w·lām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-the-word which we-have-spoken, I and-thou: behold, YHWH (is) between-me and-between-thee unto forever.
Where the English smooths the original
The plan being concerted, the friends separated for a time, and the amiable character of Jonathan again peers out in his parting allusion to their covenant of friendship.
As the witness of our covenant, and the avenger of any breach of it.
refers not merely to the sign agreed upon, but to the whole matter, including the renewal of the bond of friendship.
24So David hid in the field, and when the New Moon had come, the king sat down to eat.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
dā·wiḏ way·yis·sā·ṯêr baś·śā·ḏeh ha·ḥō·ḏeš way·hî ham·me·leḵ ʿal hal·le·ḥem way·yê·šeḇ le·’ĕ·ḵō·wl
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-hid-himself, David, in-the-field. And-it-was the-new-moon, and-sat the-king at the-bread to-eat.
Where the English smooths the original
for it seems probable that he went first to Beth-lehem, and thence returned to the field, when the occasion required.
else we must charge him with a downright lie, which ought not to be imagined (without any apparent cause) concerning so good a man, especially in so distressed and dangerous a condition.Poole's argument is frankly apologetic: he reconstructs David's movements so that the excuse of v. 6 need not be a lie. The text itself says nothing about a journey to Bethlehem.
in the E. V. signifies food in general, and is nowhere limited to the modem meaning fleshA note on seventeenth century English usage, not on Hebrew: “meat” in the Authorised Version means food of any kind. The misprint “modem” for “modern” is in the source text.
None were more constant than David in attending holy duties; nor had he been absent, but self-preservation obliged him to withdraw.
25He sat in his usual place by the wall, opposite Jonathan and beside Abner, but David’s place was empty.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ham·me·leḵ way·yê·šeḇ ‘al- kə·p̄a·‘am bə·p̄a·‘am mō·wō·šā·ḇōw ’el- mō·wō·šaḇ haq·qîr way·yā·qām yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān way·yê·šeḇ miṣ·ṣaḏ ’aḇ·nêr šā·’ūl dā·wiḏ mə·qō·wm way·yip·pā·qêḏ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-sat the-king upon his-seat as-time-by-time, at the-seat-of the-wall; and-he-rose, Jonathan, and-sat Abner beside Saul; and-the-place-of David was-mustered.
Where the English smooths the original
The person seated there has his left arm confined by the wall, but his right hand is at full liberty.
when Abner entered, Jonathan rose from his seat by the side of Saul, and gave up the place to Abner, in which case all that is wanting is an account of the place to which Jonathan moved.K&D reaches this reading by elimination, having rejected the Syriac, the Septuagint and Gesenius's and Thenius's conjectures; he concedes it leaves a gap in the text.
Kimchi thinks, that after Jonathan had sat down at the side of his father, he arose and placed Abner there, because he would not be near his father, that if he should be wroth with him on account of David, he might not be near him to smite himGill is transmitting Kimchi (David Kimhi, thirteenth century), not asserting the motive himself.
26Saul said nothing that day because he thought, “Something has happened to David to make him ceremonially unclean—surely he is unclean.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
šā·’ūl ḏib·ber wə·lō- mə·’ū·māh ha·hū bay·yō·wm kî ’ā·mar miq·reh hū bil·tî ṭā·hō·wr kî- hū lō ṭā·hō·wr
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-not-spoke Saul anything in-that day, for he-said: “A-happening (it is); he (is) not-clean, surely he (is) not clean.”
Where the English smooths the original
The new moon being a religious feast, and the meat to be eaten being peace-offerings, no one could assist at the feast who had any ceremonial uncleanness upon him (marginal references).
which he repeated in his mind for the confirmation of it, and in contempt, and to the reproach of DavidGill reads contempt into the repetition; the Hebrew supplies only the repetition itself, and Geneva's note at this verse reads Saul's thought more mildly.
(k) Yet he might have some business to let him.The Geneva gloss allows a second innocent explanation Saul did not reach for, which sharpens rather than softens the point: even the king's charitable guess is a ritual one.
27But on the day after the New Moon, the second day, David’s place was still empty, and Saul asked his son Jonathan, “Why hasn’t the son of Jesse come to the meal either yesterday or today?”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·hî mim·mā·ḥo·raṯ ha·ḥō·ḏeš haš·šê·nî då̄·wi·ḏs mə·qō·wm way·yip·pā·qêḏ šā·’ūl way·yō·mer bə·nōw yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān mad·dū·a‘ lō- ḇen- yi·šay ḇā ’el- hal·lā·ḥem gam- tə·mō·wl gam- hay·yō·wm ’el-
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-it-was on-the-morrow-of the-new-moon, the-second, and-was-mustered the-place-of David; and-said Saul unto Jonathan his-son: “Why has-not come the-son-of-Jesse, both yesterday and-today, to the-bread?”
Where the English smooths the original
So he calls him in contempt and scorn, to mark the meanness of his original, and as not deigning to call him by his proper name.
aware that no accident connected with ceremonial defilement would keep him away two following days.
The question was asked, as it were, casually, and with as great an air of indifference as he could assume.JFB reads the tone as calculated dissimulation. The Hebrew gives only the question; the assumed indifference is his inference from what follows at v. 30.
David's absence on the second day made Saul aware that it was no accident
28Jonathan answered, “David urgently requested my permission to go to Bethlehem,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
yə·hō·w·nā·ṯān ’eṯ- šā·’ūl way·ya·‘an dā·wiḏ mê·‘im·mā·ḏî niš·’ōl niš·’al ‘aḏ- bêṯ lā·ḥem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-answered Jonathan Saul: “Asking he-asked, David, from-me, unto Beth-Lechem.”
Where the English smooths the original
and as Saul was not at home, he asked leave of Jonathan, who was next to him, and acted for him; and he was very pressing and importunate in his suitGill is reconstructing the protocol to explain why David's leave was Jonathan's to give; the text says only that David asked it of Jonathan.
the elder brother, who was then at the head of the family, and arranged the sacrificial meal.
29saying, ‘Please let me go, because our clan is holding a sacrifice in the city, and my brother has told me to be there. So now, if I have found favor in your eyes, please let me go and see my brothers.’ That is why he has not come to the king’s table.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
way·yō·mer nā šal·lə·ḥê·nî kî miš·pā·ḥāh lā·nū ze·ḇaḥ bā·‘îr wə·hū ’ā·ḥî ṣiw·wāh- lî wə·‘at·tāh ’im- mā·ṣā·ṯî ḥên bə·‘ê·ne·ḵā nā ’im·mā·lə·ṭāh wə·’er·’eh ’eṯ- ’e·ḥāy ‘al- kên lō- ḇā ’el- ham·me·leḵ šul·ḥan
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-said: “Send-me-away, I-pray, for a-sacrifice of-clan (is) for-us in-the-city, and-he, my-brother, has-commanded me. And-now, if I-have-found favour in-thine-eyes, let-me-slip-away, I-pray, and-let-me-see my-brothers.” Therefore he-has-not come to the-table of-the-king.
Where the English smooths the original
as the ceremony was not a private family gathering, but one shared in by the district, the “brother” (probably the eldest), likely enough, was the convener of the absent member of the house of Jesse.Ellicott is relaying Dean Payne Smith's suggestion, offered to resolve why the singular “my brother” stands where Jesse was still living.
The eldest brother probably made the arrangements in Jesse’s old age.
either in his father’s name, or in the right of the first-born; one branch of which was authority over his brethren in all the concerns of the family
this was the reason of it, at least one reason of it, and Jonathan was not obliged to tell the whole.Gill concedes the evasion rather than defending it. Our own apparatus follows him: on the plain sense Jonathan's answer to his father is not the whole truth, and the narrator offers no comment either way.
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
⚙ The unit opens on a sentence that will not parse. Pulpit says so without softening it: “Really David's question is very involved and ungrammatical, as was natural in his excited state.” Ellicott reads the same roughness as evidence of authenticity, that the very words of the friends were remembered and reported. The whole difficulty sits on one syllable, א֛וֹ (ʼôw, H176), which means “or”; the “if” that makes the English smooth is, as Pulpit puts it, “an insertion of the A.V.,” and Keil & Delitzsch defends the disjunctive against Gesenius and Thenius. ⚙ Jonathan does not answer. His reply is a place: לְכָ֖ה, “come,” and out of the city. Gill gives the reason as tradecraft, that they might talk “without any danger of being overheard by the servants of Saul”; Cambridge the same, “To escape observation they leave the city”; K&D notes that Jonathan wanted ground where a sign could be fixed “in a way in which no one could suspect.” ⚙ The narrator then does two small things that govern the rest. He writes הַשָּׂדֶה, “the field,” twice in one verse, and he counts the men: שְׁנֵיהֶם, “the two of them.” Everything sworn from here on is sworn by two, in a place chosen because no third person is in it. That absence is what v. 23 will fill.
⚙ Jonathan's oath is built out of a body and a root. Twice he promises to וְגָלִיתִי אֶת־אָזְנֶךָ, literally “uncover thy ear” (gâlâh, H1540), the gesture of lifting a headdress to whisper; the English “tell you” is exact and loses the hand. Around it stands an oath the Hebrew does not finish. Cambridge: “Jonathan begins by addressing Jehovah, but afterwards instead of putting the verb in the second person (so mayest Thou do) he repeats the divine Name.” K&D refuses every supplied formula. Poole hears the break itself as the evidence: “It is an abrupt speech, which is usual in great passions.” ⚙ Then the hinge. חֶסֶד יְהוָה, the ḥesed of YHWH (H2617), is asked not for Jonathan's advantage but for his survivors, and Cambridge names the fear exactly: his words “are prompted by a fear lest even David should conform to the barbarous Oriental custom by which the first king of a new dynasty often tried to secure himself on the throne by murdering his predecessor's family.” Barnes reads the whole passage as a presentiment “doubtless from God, that David would be established upon the throne.” Benson states the cost: “How unspeakable a generosity is here shown by Jonathan to stipulate for his own life, and the lives of his posterity, with that man whose life, humanly speaking, was now in his power!” ⚙ And the verb of the plea is the verb of the covenant. kârath, to cut, is what Jonathan begs David not to do to his ḥesed (v. 15), what YHWH will do to David's enemies (v. 15), and what Jonathan himself does in v. 16, where the Hebrew says only “and Jonathan cut with the house of David” and K&D notes that בְּרִית, covenant, “must be supplied in thought.” One root, three cuts, and Jonathan's own house standing in the path of the third.
⚙ The sign is assembled from the most ordinary things a prince owns: a feast day, a chair, a bow, a boy. Cambridge gives the point of the bow precisely, that “No suspicion would be excited by Jonathan's carrying the bow which was his usual weapon”; Poole says the same from the other side, that Jonathan “chose this way to avoid Saul's suspicion, because bows and arrows were the principal arms of those times.” ⚙ The Hebrew ties seat to hiding place by a root. מוֹשָׁבֶךָ (“thy seat,” v. 18) and וְיָשַׁבְתָּ (“and thou shalt sit,” v. 19) are both yâshab, and so is Saul at the bread in vv. 24 and 25: the empty chair and the man crouched by a stone are the same posture in two places. And the verb that reports the vacancy, נִפְקַדְתָּ (pâqad, H6485), is the muster-verb, used three times across vv. 18, 25 and 27. English gives it three faces, “you will be missed,” “was empty,” “was still empty”; the Hebrew says one thing three times, that he was counted for and was not there. ⚙ Almost every clause of v. 19 is disputed and the voices admit it: Ellicott, that “quickly” comes from the Vulgate while “The literal rendering of m'od is 'greatly'”; Benson, that the Hebrew reads “Thou shalt three times go down to a very low place”; K&D, closing the file on the landmark with “Nothing further can be said concerning the stone Ezel than that Ezel is a proper name.” ⚙ The movement ends on a noun. Jonathan's הַדָּבָר (v. 23) is the same word that at v. 21 means “nothing”; K&D says “The word” covers “the whole matter, including the renewal of the bond of friendship.” Between two men in a field, dâbâr is both the all-clear and the contract.
⚙ The last movement is almost entirely furniture, and the furniture is the plot. The king sits עַל הַלֶּחֶם, at the bread; Gill: “it is in the Hebrew, 'he sat down at the bread.'” JFB explains the geometry of the place of honour: “The person seated there has his left arm confined by the wall, but his right hand is at full liberty.” ⚙ Into that fixed arrangement falls one unexplained motion, וַיָּקָם, “and he rose” (v. 25), and the text never says Jonathan sat down again. K&D, after rejecting the Syriac, the Greek and Thenius's conjecture in turn, concedes that on the best reading “all that is wanting is an account of the place to which Jonathan moved.” Gill preserves Kimchi's reason, that Jonathan arose and set Abner beside Saul so that he would not himself be within reach of his father's hand. The son is already measuring distances at the dinner table. ⚙ Saul's first silence is generous, and the narrator lets us hear him talk himself into it twice: he is not clean, surely he is not clean. Gill hears contempt already in the repetition. On the second day the courtesy fails and the name goes with it: not David but בֶן־יִשַׁי, the son of Jesse. Benson: “So he calls him in contempt and scorn, to mark the meanness of his original, and as not deigning to call him by his proper name.” ⚙ And Jonathan's answer is a half-truth, which Gill states without flinching: “this was the reason of it, at least one reason of it, and Jonathan was not obliged to tell the whole.” The unit closes at שֻׁלְחַן הַמֶּלֶךְ, the king's table, with the place still mustered and still empty.
⚙ Offered under Sola Scriptura, to be tested and not received: this chapter is usually read as the summit of human friendship, and JFB reads it exactly so, calling the interview unrivalled “in the records of human friendship.” We think the Hebrew is doing something colder and larger, and it says so with its verbs. ⚙ kârath, to cut: Jonathan cuts a covenant (v. 16), begs that his ḥesed not be cut off (v. 15), and in the same breath names the day YHWH cuts off David's enemies from the face of the ground (v. 15), a list on which his own father stands. shâlach, to send away: David asks Jonathan to send him away (v. 29), Jonathan swears to send him away (v. 13), and at v. 22 the sender turns out to have been YHWH all along. pâqad, to muster: the seat is counted three times and is empty three times. ⚙ Jonathan is the heir, and the commentators agree he knows it. Cambridge: “Jonathan already foresees David's destiny.” Barnes: a presentiment “doubtless from God.” What he asks for is not the throne, and not even his own life, which he expects to lose. He asks that the man who takes his inheritance not kill his children. That petition is answered decades later, at a table, in 2 Samuel 9. ⚙ So the reading we would put on this unit is that the covenant of 1 Samuel 20 is signed by the party who loses by it, and that this, not the affection, is what makes it holy enough to need God standing between the two men. The line below is our own fallible sentence and not a verse of Scripture; weigh it against the text and discard it if it will not hold.
Jonathan cuts the covenant with the hand that is signing away his own crown, and asks in return only that his children be allowed to eat.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
⚙ What Jonathan asks in vv. 14 to 15 is חֶסֶד (ḥeçed, H2617) for his house after his own death, and the Verifier's strongest candidate outside this chapter is 2 Samuel 9:7, where David tells Mephibosheth he will show him kindness for Jonathan's sake, restore the land (שָׂדֶה) of Saul, and seat him at the king's table continually. ⚙ The shared lexemes the Verifier records are the name Yᵉhôwnâthân and sâdeh, both common words, so no quotation and no verbal dependence is claimed here. The weight of the link is structural, and it is the structure of this entire unit: here the place at the king's table is empty and the son of Jesse is hiding in a sâdeh; there a crippled son of Jonathan is seated at that table on the strength of what was sworn in one. Cambridge states the fulfilment plainly at v. 14: “David fulfilled his promise by shewing kindness to Mephibosheth.”
2 Samuel 9:7 · 2 Samuel 21:7
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H3083 Yᵉhôwnâthân (in 74 vv) and H7704 sâdeh (in 309 vv) at 2 Samuel 9:7. Both are common, so no verbal or quotation claim is made; the recorded basis is the ḥesed-to-the-house oath of 20:14-15 being discharged there. 2 Samuel 21:7 carries no computed basis and is included only on the Cambridge Bible's own citation at 20:14.
⚙ At v. 21 Jonathan's servant is הַנַּעַר (naʻar, H5288), the ordinary boy. At v. 22, in the sentence that means flight, the word changes to לָעֶלֶם (ʻelem, H5958, from a root meaning something kept out of sight). The Verifier records that lexeme in only two verses of the Hebrew Bible, and the other is 1 Samuel 17:56, where Saul, watching David walk back from Goliath, tells Abner to enquire whose son the stripling is. Cambridge makes the same identification in one line at v. 22: “The stripling , as in 1 Samuel 17:56.” ⚙ The rarity is the argument. In the first scene Saul cannot name David and asks whose son the ʻelem is; in this scene another ʻelem carries the word that drives that same son of Jesse out of the court, and five verses later Saul still refuses the name and says only “the son of Jesse.” The Verifier also records mîy (“who”) and shâʼal (“to ask”) shared with 17:56, which is Saul asking the same question twice, years apart, and never getting past it.
1 Samuel 17:56
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H5958 ʻelem, recorded as occurring in only 2 vv in the whole Hebrew Bible, this unit's 20:22 and 1 Samuel 17:56; with H4310 mîy (in 344 vv) and H7592 shâʼal (in 157 vv) also shared. The rare lexeme carries the tier. No verse quotes the other and no citation is claimed; the Cambridge Bible records the same cross-reference independently at 20:22.
⚙ The first word of v. 19, וְשִׁלַּשְׁתָּ, is a Piel of shâlash (H8027), “to be, causatively make, triplicate.” The Verifier records the lexeme in only six verses of the Hebrew Bible, and in the other five threefoldness is the whole point: the three year old heifer, goat and ram of the covenant between the pieces (Genesis 15:9); the land divided in three so a manslayer can reach a city of refuge (Deuteronomy 19:3); Elijah's “Do it the third time” over the drenched altar (1 Kings 18:34); the threefold cord not quickly broken (Ecclesiastes 4:12); and the three storeys of Ezekiel's side chambers (Ezekiel 42:6). ⚙ This is a real verbal link and nothing more. No verse quotes another, and the commentators cannot agree what the Piel means here: Benson reads “Thou shalt three times go down to a very low place,” K&D defends “on the third day” from Arabic usage and from the ordinal at v. 12, Gill reports both and adds the marginal “tertiabis.” ⚙ We flag as our own hearing, and not as a claim about the text, that Ecclesiastes' threefold cord sits oddly well over a covenant that in v. 23 acquires its third strand.
Genesis 15:9 · Deuteronomy 19:3 · 1 Kings 18:34 · Ecclesiastes 4:12 · Ezekiel 42:6
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H8027 shâlash, recorded in only 6 vv (Genesis 15:9, Deuteronomy 19:3, 1 Kings 18:34, Ecclesiastes 4:12, Ezekiel 42:6, and 1 Samuel 20:19). The rarity of the lexeme is the recorded basis and is what carries the tier; no quotation or citation between these verses is claimed, and the sense of the Piel at 20:19 is itself disputed by Benson, Gill and K&D.
⚙ The Verifier's densest candidates all lie inside the Jonathan cycle and all rest on the same shared lexeme, the proper name יְהוֹנָתָן (H3083, in 74 verses). A name is common currency and proves only that these texts are about the same man, so nothing verbal is claimed. What the name gathers is still worth setting side by side. 1 Samuel 18:3 is the first cutting of this covenant, before the spear and before the flight; our v. 16 cuts it a second time and extends it to a house that does not yet exist; 1 Samuel 20:37 is the arrow flying beyond the lad, the sign of v. 22 actually given; and 2 Samuel 1:26 is David standing over Jonathan's body, saying his love was wonderful, passing the love of women. ⚙ The link is narrative and structural. JFB reads the whole interview as “unrivalled in the records of human friendship,” which is the right temperature for the scene and, we think, too warm for its politics, since what Jonathan is negotiating in vv. 14 to 16 is whether his children will be alive in twenty years.
1 Samuel 18:3 · 1 Samuel 20:37 · 2 Samuel 1:26
basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H3083 Yᵉhôwnâthân (in 74 vv) at 1 Samuel 18:3, 1 Samuel 20:37 and 2 Samuel 1:26. The lexeme is a common proper name and cannot bear a verbal tier; the recorded basis is the shared covenant narrative that the name indexes.
⚙ Verse 23 contains no word for witness. The Hebrew is יְהוָה בֵּינִי וּבֵינְךָ עַד־עוֹלָם, with bêyn (H996) written before each party exactly as the lexicon says the preposition behaves. K&D resists supplying anything, holding that the sense of witness and judge “is implied in the words, without there being any necessity to assume that עד had dropped out of the text,” and both K&D and Cambridge send the reader to Genesis 31:48 to 49, where Jacob and Laban part at a heap of stones with the same construction. ⚙ Two men with reason to fear each other's heirs, a cairn in open country, a God invoked precisely because no human witness will be present: the pattern is the same and no quotation is involved. ⚙ Honest limit: this pair is not in the Verifier's computed candidate list for the unit, so we have no shared-lexeme figure to show for it and we do not pretend to one. The basis is that two named commentaries cite it here, and the tier is set low accordingly.
Genesis 31:49
basis: No Verifier-computed shared-lexeme basis: this pair does not appear in the candidate list for the unit. The recorded basis is that Keil & Delitzsch and the Cambridge Bible both cite Genesis 31:48-49 in their notes on 1 Samuel 20:23, for the shared covenant-witness formula of YHWH standing between two parting covenanters. Structural only; no quotation and no verbal dependence claimed.
⚙ הָאֶבֶן הָאָזֶל (v. 19) is named once in the Hebrew Bible with any certainty. Barnes, commenting on this very verse, writes that it “is not mentioned elsewhere, except possibly in 1 Samuel 20:41,” and the hedge is his own. The Septuagint appears not to have read a name at all: Ellicott and Cambridge both report that the Greek has argab, a heap of stones, here and again at v. 41. K&D closes the question without answering it: “Nothing further can be said concerning the stone Ezel than that Ezel is a proper name.” ⚙ The English margin's “the stone that sheweth the way” comes from the Targum's “sign-stone” (Cambridge), and JFB's milestone follows it; Cambridge offers instead “stone of departure,” named for this parting; Ewald, per Ellicott, emends to “the lonely waste.” Gill's distances, so many furlongs from Jerusalem and from Jordan, he takes from Josephus at second hand through Adrichomius. ⚙ We flag rather than assert. Whether 20:41 is the same landmark depends entirely on which text of that verse is read, and the voices themselves disagree over whether Ezel is a name, a cairn, or a scribal accident.
1 Samuel 20:41
basis: Not in the Verifier candidate list, and the provenance is contested inside the sources themselves: Barnes says only 'possibly' of 1 Samuel 20:41, while Ellicott and Cambridge report that the Septuagint reads argab, a heap of stones, rather than a proper name in both verses. No shared-lexeme figure is available and none is claimed.
⚙ A cross-Testament pair cannot rest on shared Strong's numbers, since the words here are Hebrew and the words at John 15:13 to 15 are Greek. No verbal tier is possible and none is used. What is shared is a shape. Jonathan, the heir, binds himself by oath to the man who will take his throne, asks nothing for himself but mercy for his children, and names the bond חֶסֶד יְהוָה (v. 14). John's Jesus names the greatest love as laying down one's psychē for one's friends, and in the next breath stops calling his disciples servants and calls them friends. ⚙ Our unit puts נֶפֶשׁ beside love in the same clause: Jonathan loved David “with the love of his own nephesh” (v. 17, so Gill renders the Hebrew). The Septuagint standardly renders nephesh with psychē, but we are not claiming a lexical link across the Testaments, only that both texts locate the highest love at the point where a man's own life and standing are handed over. ⚙ Matthew Henry makes the same move at this passage, though to a different end, turning from Jonathan's offer to ask “who can fully understand the love of Jesus, who gave himself as a sacrifice for rebellious, polluted sinners!”
John 15:13 · John 15:15
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek against Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers are impossible by construction, so no verbal tier is available and none is used. The recorded basis is a shared structure, the friend who binds himself by giving up his own life or standing, with nephesh (H5315) at 1 Samuel 20:17 standing where psychē stands at John 15:13; Matthew Henry's note on 20:11-23 draws the Jonathan-to-Christ comparison independently. No quotation claimed in either direction.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
⚙ Saul will not use David's name. In v. 27 he is בֶן־יִשַׁי, the son of Jesse, and Benson, Poole, Gill and Geneva all read the phrase the same way, as contempt for the meanness of his origin: Gill says it is spoken “in contempt, and to the reproach of David,” Geneva that “he speaks contemptuously of David.” ⚙ That contemptuous title is the one the prophets take up and make messianic. Isaiah puts the shoot out of the stump of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1), and Paul quotes “the root of Jesse” as the hope of the nations (Romans 15:12). The reading of David in his rejection, hunted, hidden in a field, absent from the feast, his place counted and empty, as a figure of the anointed one refused by the rulers of his own people, is ancient and widely held; it is the plain force of the apostolic use of Psalm 118:22 at Acts 4:11. ⚙ We claim no more than the pattern, and the text supplies it without our help: the true king is the one whose seat is empty while another sits at the bread.
Isaiah 11:1 · Romans 15:12 · Acts 4:11
⚙ Jonathan is the crown prince, and the voices do not soften it. Cambridge: “Jonathan already foresees David's destiny.” Barnes: a presentiment “doubtless from God, that David would be established upon the throne.” Poole is sharper, observing that this knowledge raised no jealousy in the next heir of the crown, which he ascribes to “Jonathan's piety towards God, to whose disposal he cheerfully submitted himself.” ⚙ In v. 16 he cuts a covenant with the house of David, that is, with a dynasty which exists only as a promise and whose existence requires his own house to end. He asks for nothing a king would ask. He asks that his children be allowed to live. ⚙ We read this figurally and we mark the reading as ours. A son of the reigning house who empties his own claim to seat another, and does it by oath rather than by defeat, is a shape the gospel later fills, and Philippians 2:5-8 is the language for it. The honest caution: in the New Testament it is David, not Jonathan, who is the royal type, and Christ is called Son of David and Root of Jesse, never son of Saul. Read Jonathan here as an image of self-emptying love, not as a figure of the King.
Philippians 2:5-8 · 2 Samuel 1:26
⚙ The unit ends with a place at the king's table counted and empty, pâqad at vv. 25 and 27, and שֻׁלְחַן הַמֶּלֶךְ as its last two words. The oath sworn in the field is discharged in 2 Samuel 9, where David asks whether any of Saul's house is left that he may show him the kindness of God, and seats Jonathan's lame son at that table continually. Cambridge names the fulfilment at v. 14: “David fulfilled his promise by shewing kindness to Mephibosheth.” ⚙ The gospel figure many readers hear in that scene, a man with no claim and no feet brought to the king's table because of a covenant made before he was born and on account of someone else's name, is not drawn by any of the public-domain voices in this brief, and we will not dress our own reading in their authority. We mark it novel. ⚙ What the text does supply is the vocabulary that makes the reading possible: ḥesed asked for a house rather than a person (v. 15), an oath whose only guarantor is YHWH standing between the parties (v. 23), and a table with one seat that nobody living can fill.
2 Samuel 9:1 · 2 Samuel 9:7 · Ephesians 2:12-13
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
⚙ Text and sources for this unit, with what is uncertain named. 1. Verses 14 and 15 do not yield usable sense in the Masoretic Text as pointed, and the voices say so with one voice. Keil & Delitzsch, Ellicott, Cambridge and the Pulpit Commentary all report the same repair after the Syriac and Arabic, reading two of the three וְלֹא as וְלוּ, “O that.” K&D calls the Masoretic text here without appropriate meaning and rejects both Luther's and De Wette's attempts. Our literal rendering keeps the negatives visible rather than silently adopting the emendation, and the divergences name it; the BSB rendering printed in the brief follows the emended sense. 2. Three further Septuagint variants are reported by the voices and none is adopted here: “And Jonathan swore yet again to David” at v. 17 (Cambridge, Pulpit, by a change of vowels), argab or a heap of stones for the stone Ezel at v. 19 (Ellicott, Cambridge), and “my brothers” for “my brother” at v. 29 (Ellicott, Cambridge). At v. 16 the Septuagint points to a text making the whole verse part of Jonathan's speech (Cambridge). 3. The stone Ezel's location and even its nature are unknown. Barnes says it is not mentioned elsewhere “except possibly in 1 Samuel 20:41”; Gill's distances come from Josephus at second hand. Every thread touching it is flagged. 4. וַיָּקָם at v. 25 is a genuine crux. We follow K&D in taking it as Jonathan rising and yielding his place to Abner, and we say in the divergences that the BSB's “opposite” is an interpretation of qûwm, not a translation of it. Ellicott prefers a causative reading, “he arose and seated Abner at Saul's side.” 5. Two artefacts of the sourced interlinear are recorded rather than repaired: at v. 28 the word בֵּית is tagged “Preposition” with the placeholder gloss “vvv” where it is the first half of the place name Beth-Lechem, and at v. 13 the suffix on עִמָּךְ is parsed second person feminine singular though David is the addressee. Neither affects the sense and neither is our correction to make. 6. Thread bases: the shared-lexeme figures for 1 Samuel 17:56, 2 Samuel 9:7, 1 Samuel 18:3, 1 Samuel 20:37, 2 Samuel 1:26, 1 Samuel 19:2 and the shâlash cluster are Verifier-computed and are quoted as given, frequencies included. The Genesis 31 link rests only on K&D and Cambridge citing it here and carries no computed basis, which is why it is tiered structural and says so. The 1 Samuel 20:41 link is flagged because Barnes himself says only “possibly.” The John 15 link cannot carry shared Strong's numbers at all, being Greek against Hebrew, and is tiered accordingly. 7. The reading of Jonathan as a figure of self-emptying love is ours and is marked novel. Matthew Henry's move at this passage runs from Jonathan's friendship to Christ's love for sinners and to our obedience, which is a different claim, and we have not borrowed his authority for ours. 8. Jonathan's reply to Saul at v. 29 is, on the plain sense, not the whole truth. Gill concedes it without excuse and we follow him: “Jonathan was not obliged to tell the whole.” We record the fact rather than justify it.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)