In 1 Samuel 14, Jonathan, son of Saul, secretly decides to attack a Philistine outpost with his armor-bearer, motivated by a divine impulse. Despite the dangers, Jonathan expresses faith in God's ability to deliver them and successfully defeats the Philistines, creating confusion among their ranks. This act highlights both Jonathan's bravery and Saul's weaknesses as a leader during a critical moment for Israel.

1. 1 SAMUEL 14 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 One day Jonathan son of Saul said to his
young armor-bearer, “Come, let’s go over to the
Philistine outpost on the other side.” But he did
not tell his father.
BARNES, "Now ... - Rather “and,” since this verse is in immediate dependence
upon the preceding. When Jonathan saw the garrison come out again and again, in
defiance “of the armies of the living God,” at length “upon a day” he determined to
attack them.
CLARKE, "Come, and let us go over - This action of Jonathan was totally
contrary to the laws of war; no military operation should be undertaken without the
knowledge and command of the general. But it is likely that he was led to this by a
Divine influence.
The armor-bearer is the origin of what we call esquire, from escu, old French, a
shield; armiger is the Latin, from arma, weapons, and gero, I bear. In the times of
chivalry, the armiger, or esquire, was the servant of the knight who went after him,
and carried his lance, shield, etc. It is now (strange to tell!) a title of honor.
GILL, "Now it came to pass upon a day,.... At a certain time, a little after the
garrison of the Philistines had made the movement, 1Sa_13:23 and it is not to be
taken strictly for the day time; for it is probable it was in the night that the following
proposal was made, and began to be carried into execution; for Josephus (k) says it
was day light when Jonathan and his armourbearer came to the camp of the
Philistines; he had formed his scheme perhaps the night before, and he and his man
set out in the night time, and by break of day came up to the garrison, as after
related:
that Jonathan the son of Saul said unto the young man that bare his
armour; as was usual in those times for generals of armies to have such, and so in
1

2. later times; such were Automedon to Achilles, and Achates to Aeneas, as Grotius
observes:
come and let us go over to the Philistine garrison that is on the other
side; that is, go over the valley which lay between Michmash and Gibeah, to the
Philistines, that lay on the other side the valley beyond it; and so was not in it, but at
a pass on the hills, at the bottom of which this valley lay, and could be seen at a
distance, and pointed at with the finger, as Jarchi notes:
but he told not his father; lest he should disapprove of his project, and hinder
him from pursuing it; and had not his spirit been stirred up to this by the Lord, of
which he was fully persuaded, he would have acted not only a rash part, but contrary
to military discipline, in engaging in an enterprise without the knowledge and
direction of his general; unless we can suppose he had all unlimited commission
from his father to attack the enemy, at discretion, at any time, and any where.
HENRY 1-15, "We must here take notice,
I. Of the goodness of God in restraining the Philistines, who had a vast army of
valiant men in the field, from falling upon that little handful of timorous trembling
people that Saul had with him, whom they would easily have swallowed up at once. It
is an invisible power that sets bounds to the malice of the church's enemies, and
suffers them not to do that which we should think there is nothing to hinder them
from.
II. Of the weakness of Saul, who seems here to have been quite at a loss, and
unable to help himself. 1. He pitched his tent under a tree, and had but 600 men with
him, 1Sa_14:2. Where were now the 3000 men he had chosen, and put such a
confidence in? 1Sa_13:2. Those whom he trusted too much to failed him when he
most needed them. He durst not stay in Gibeah, but got into some obscure place, in
the uttermost part of the city, under a pomegranate-tree, under Rimmon (so the
word is), Ha-Rimmon, that Rimmon near Gibeah, in the caves of which those 600
Benjamites that escaped his themselves, Jdg_20:47. Some think that there Saul took
shelter, so mean and abject was his spirit, now that he had fallen under God's
displeasure, every hour expecting the Philistines upon him, and thereby the
accomplishment of Samuel's threatening, 1Sa_13:14. Those can never think
themselves safe that see themselves cast out of God's protection. 2. Now he sent for a
priest, and the ark, a priest from Shiloh, and the ark from Kirjath-jearim, 1Sa_14:3,
1Sa_14:18. Saul had once offended by offering sacrifice himself, 1Sa_13:9. Now he
resolves never to fall into that error again, and therefore sends for a priest, and hopes
to compromise the matter with God Almighty by a particular reformation, as many
do whose hearts are unhumbled and unchanged. Samuel, the Lord's prophet, had
forsaken him, but he thinks he can make up that loss by commanding Ahiah, the
Lord's priest, to attend him, and he will not make him stay for him nor reprove him,
as Samuel had done, but will do just as he bids him, 1Sa_14:18, 1Sa_14:19. Many love
to have such ministers as will be what they would have them to be, and prophesy
smooth things to them; and their caressing them because they are priests, they hope,
will atone for their enmity to those ministers that deal faithfully and plainly with
them. He will also have the ark brought, perhaps to upbraid Samuel, who in the days
of his government, for aught that appears, had not made any public use of it; or in
hopes that this would make up the deficiency of his forces; one would have supposed
that they would never bring the ark into the camp again, since, the last time, it not
only did not save them, but did itself fall into the Philistines' hands. But it is common
for those that have lost the substance of religion to be most fond of the shadows of it,
2

3. as here is a deserted prince courting a deserted priest.
III. Of the bravery and piety of Jonathan, the son of Saul, who was much fitter than
the father to wear the crown. “A sweet imp (says bishop Hall) out of a crab-stock.”
1. He resolved to go incognito - unknown to any one, into the camp of the
Philistines; he did not acquaint his father with his design, for he knew he would
forbid him; nor the people, for he knew they would all discourage him, and, because
he resolved not to heed their objections, he resolved not to hear them, nor ask their
advice, 1Sa_14:1, 1Sa_14:3. Nor had he so great an opinion of the priest as to consult
him, but, being conscious of a divine impulse putting him upon it, he threw himself
into the mouth of danger, in hope of doing service to his country. The way of access
to the enemies' camp is described (1Sa_14:4, 1Sa_14:5) as being peculiarly difficult,
and their natural entrenchments impregnable, yet this does not discourage him; the
strength and sharpness of the rocks do but harden and whet his resolutions. Great
and generous souls are animated by opposition and take a pleasure in breaking
through it.
2. He encouraged his armour-bearer, a young man that attended him, to go along
with him in the daring enterprise, (1Sa_14:6): “Come, and let us put our lives in our
hands, and go over to the enemies' garrison, and try what we can do to put them into
confusion.” See whence he draws his encouragements. (1.) “They are uncircumcised,
and have not the seal of the covenant in their flesh, as we have. Fear not, we shall do
well enough with them, for they are not under the protection of God's covenant as we
are, cannot call him theirs as we can, by the sign of circumcision.” If such as are
enemies to us are also strangers to God, we need not fear them. (2.) “God is able to
make us two victorious over their unnumbered regiments. There is no restraint in
the Lord, no limitation to the holy One of Israel, but it is all one to him to save by
many or by few.” This is a true easily granted in general, that it is all alike to
Omnipotence what the instruments are by which it works; and yet it is not so easy to
apply it to a particular case; when we are but few and feeble then to believe that God
can not only save us, but save by us, this is an instance of faith, which, wherever it is,
shall obtain a good report. Let this strengthen the weak and encourage the timid: let
it be pleaded with God for the enforcing of our petitions and with ourselves for the
silencing of our fears: It is nothing with God to help, whether with many or with
those that have no power, 2Ch_14:11. (3.) “Who knows but he that can use us for his
glory will do it? It may be the Lord will work for us, work with us, work a sign or
miracle for us.” So the Chaldee. We may encourage ourselves with hope that God will
appear for us, though we have not ground on which to build an assurance. An active
faith will venture far in God's cause upon an it may be. Jonathan's armour-bearer, or
esquire, as if he had learned to carry, not his arms only, but his heart, promised to
stand by him and to follow him withersoever he went, 1Sa_14:7. We have reason to
think that Jonathan felt a divine impulse and impression putting him upon this bold
adventure, in which he was encouraged by his servant's concurrence, otherwise the
danger was so great which he ran upon that he would have tempted God rather than
trusted him. And perhaps he had an actual regard to that word of Joshua (Jos_
23:10), One man of you shall chase a thousand, borrowed from Moses, Deu_32:30.
3. How bold soever his resolution was, he resolved to follow Providence in the
execution of it, which, he believed, would guide him with its eye (Psa_32:8), and
which therefore he would carefully attend and take hints of direction from. See how
he put himself upon Providence, and resolved to be determined by it. “Come” (says
he to his confidant), “we will discover ourselves to the enemy, as those that are not
afraid to look them in the face (1Sa_14:8), and then, if they be so cautious as to bid us
stand, we will advance no further, taking it for an intimation of Providence that God
would have us act defensively, and we will prepare as well as we can to give them a
3

4. warm reception (1Sa_14:9); but if they be so presumptuous as to challenge us, and
the first sentinel we meet with bid us march on, we will push forward, and make as
brisk an onset, assuredly gathering thence that it is the will of God we should act
offensively, and then not doubting but he will stand by us,” 1Sa_14:10. And upon this
issue he puts it, firmly believing, as we all should, (1.) That God has the governing of
the hearts and tongues of all men, even of those that know him not, nor have any
regard to him, and serves his own purposes by them, though they mean not so,
neither do their hearts think so. Jonathan knew God could discover his mind to him
if he pleased, and would do it, since he depended upon him, as surely by the mouth of
a Philistine as by the mouth of a priest. (2.) That God will, some way or other, direct
the steps of those that acknowledge him in all their ways, and seek unto him for
direction, with full purpose of heart to follow it. Sometimes we find most comfort in
that which is least our own doing, and into which we have been led by the
unexpected, but well observed, turns of Providence.
4. Providence gave him the sign he expected, and he answered the signal. He and
his armour-bearer did not surprise the Philistines when they were asleep, but
discovered themselves to them by day-light, 1Sa_14:11. The guards of the Philistines,
(1.) Disdained them, upbraided them with the cowardice of many of their people, and
looked upon them to be of the regiment of sneakers: Behold, the Hebrews come forth
out of their holes. If some of Christ's soldiers play the coward, others that play the
man may perhaps be upbraided with it. (2.) They defied them (1Sa_14:12): Come,
and we will show you a thing, as if they came like children to gaze about them; but
meaning, as Goliath (1Sa_17:44), that they would give them as meat to the fowls of
the air. They bantered them, not doubting but to make a prey of them. This greatly
emboldened Jonathan. With it he encouraged his servant; he had spoken with
uncertainty (1Sa_14:6): It may be the Lord will work for us; but now he speaks with
assurance (1Sa_14:12): The Lord has delivered them, not into our hands (he sought
not his own glory), but into the hand of Israel, for he aimed at nothing but the
advantage of the public. His faith being thus strengthened, no difficulty can stand
before him; he climbs up the rock upon all four (1Sa_14:13), though he has nothing
to cover him, nor any but his own servant to second him, nor any human probability
of any thing but death before him.
5. The wonderful success of this daring enterprise. The Philistines, instead of
falling upon Jonathan, to slay him, or take him prisoner, fell before him (1Sa_14:13)
unaccountably, upon the first blows he gave. They fell, that is, (1.) They were many of
them slain by him and his armour-bearer, 1Sa_14:14. Twenty Philistines fell
presently. It was not so much the name of Jonathan that made them yield so tamely
(though some think that this had become terrible to them, since he smote one of
their garrisons, 1Sa_13:3), but it was God's right hand and his arm that got him this
victory. (2.) The rest were put to flight, and fell foul upon one another (1Sa_14:15):
There was trembling in the host. There was no visible cause for fear; they were so
numerous, bold, and advantageously posted; the Israelites had fled before them; not
an enemy made head against them, but one gentleman and his man; and yet they
shook like an aspen-leaf. The consternation was general: they all trembled; even the
spoilers, those that had been most bold and forward, shared in the common fright,
the joints of their loins were loosed, and their knees smote one against another, and
yet none of them could tell why or wherefore. It is called a trembling of God (so the
original phrase is), signifying not only, as we render it, a very great trembling, which
they could not resist nor reason themselves clear of, but that it was supernatural, and
came immediately from the hand of God. He that made the heart knows how to make
it tremble. To complete the confusion, even the earth quaked, and made them ready
to fear that it would sink under them. Those that will not fear the eternal God, he can
make afraid of a shadow. See Pro_21:1; Isa_33:14.
4

5. JAMISON, "1Sa_14:1-14. Jonathan miraculously smites the Philistines’ garrison.
the Philistines’ garrison — “the standing camp” (1Sa_13:23, Margin) “in the
passage of Michmash” (1Sa_13:16), now Wady Es-Suweinit. “It begins in the
neighborhood of Betin (Beth-el) and El-Bireh (Beetroth), and as it breaks through
the ridge below these places, its sides form precipitous walls. On the right, about a
quarter of an acre below, it again breaks off, and passes between high perpendicular
precipices” [Robinson].
COFFMAN, "SUMMARY OF SAUL'S REIGN; HIS ADDITIONAL SINS
It will be remembered from our study of the Book of Numbers that the history of
Israel's wilderness sojourn, covering a period of about forty years, was extremely
abbreviated, with only a few events of that whole period being recorded. We
have another example of this same Biblical phenomenon in this chapter, where
all of Saul's wars during his forty-year reign are covered in a single short
paragraph.
There is a reason for this in both cases. In that of Israel's wanderings, God had
rejected that generation, forbidding their entry into Canaan; and for that
reason, practically no importance whatever could be attached to whatever they
did during the intervening time. For that reason, little was recorded. Even the
things which were written about that period, "were written for our examples" (1
Corinthians 10:11 ASV), "as a warning ... for our instruction" (RSV), and "for
our learning" (Romans 15:4).
Exactly the same thing is true here. The previous chapter revealed that God had
rejected Saul's continuing dynasty; and whatever Saul did afterward was of little
or no importance whatever, except that in a brief record of his mistakes, the
instruction of future generations might be accomplished.
What a commentary lies in these facts for all mankind! Once the destiny of a life
has been set by one's decisive behavior, and once the trajectory of his life has
been determined, if his life moves firmly in a direction against the will of God,
nothing whatever that he may do afterward is of any importance, except in the
event of his ultimate repentance and the reversal of his conduct.
5

6. As noted above, Saul's wars were very slightly recorded, but there is an
exception in the victory against the Philistines revealed in this chapter. Why?
The answer lies in the shameful and sinful behavior of Saul which prevented the
victory from being complete and which led to a perpetual war with the
Philistines all of Saul's life, ending finally in his death on Mount Gilboa.
Philbeck enumerates Saul's sins as: "(1) Entering the battle of Michmash
without awaiting divine counsel (1 Samuel 14:19); (2) invoking an egotistical and
pagan curse which deprived his army of the necessary food to support their
victorious pursuit of the Philistines; (3) causing his army, through fatigue and
hunger, to eat meat improperly bled (a violation of God's law); and (4)
condemning his son Jonathan to death."[1] The people had sense enough to
overrule that last stupid and unjustifiable sin of their king.
It is the record of these sins in the extent that they might instruct all generations
of men that justifies the extensive report of events in this chapter.
JONATHAN'S DECISION TO ATTACK
"One day Jonathan the son of Saul said to the young man who bore his armor,
"Come, let us go over to the Philistine garrison on the other side," But he did not
tell his father. Saul was staying in the outskirts of Gibeah under the
pomegranate tree which is at Migron; the people who were with him were about
six hundred men, and Ahijah the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, son of
Phinehas, son of Eli the priest of the Lord in Shiloh, wearing an ephod. And the
people did not know that Jonathan had gone. In the pass by which Jonathan
sought to go over to the Philistine garrison, there was a rocky crag on one side
and a rocky crag on the other side; the name of the one was Bozez, and the name
of the other was Seneh. The one crag rose on the north in front of Michmash,
and the other on the south in front of Geba."
"He did not tell his father" (1 Samuel 14:1). He probably knew that his father
would never approve of such a fool-hardy attempt.
"Let us go over to the Philistine garrison" (1 Samuel 14:1). The author
interrupted these words of Jonathan to describe the overall situation and scene
6

7. of the event to be related. Jonathan's words are resumed in 1 Samuel 14:6.
"Under the pomegranate tree" (1 Samuel 14:2). "The Hebrew word for
pomegranate is Rimmon; but there is no doubt that the tree is meant and not the
rock Rimmon (Judges 20:45,47)."[2] This position of Saul and his men, just
north of Gibeah, "Was about an hour's march from Geba, where Jonathan
was."[3]
"Abijah ... Abimelech" (1 Samuel 14:3). "Both of these names apply to the same
person, namely, the great-grandson of Eli";[4] and, as Barnes noted, "This
fragment of a genealogy is a very valuable help in the chronology."[5] However,
nothing very exciting is the result of it. Barnes made the deduction from it that,
"about fifty years had elapsed"[6] since the capture of the ark of the covenant by
the Philistines; and Willis from the same passage made the deduction that only
"about thirty years"[7] had passed, and from this concluding that Saul's reign
was "about twenty years." To this writer, it appears that the estimate of "fifty
years" is more likely to be correct, because it fits the tradition of Saul's forty-
year reign.
"A rocky crag ... a rocky crag ... Bozez ... Seneh" (1 Samuel 14:4). "The southern
cliff was Seneh, which means acacia, so named from the trees in the vicinity; and
the northern cliff was Bozez, meaning shining."[8]
The naming of such landmarks has continued throughout history. The two peaks
on opposite sides of the Saginaw river are called Eternity and Trinity.
ELLICOTT, " (1) Now it came to pass.—As if in strong contrast to Saul—who at
Gilgal openly made light of the supernatural assistance promised by Samuel,
showing plainly by his conduct on that memorable occasion that he hardly
believed in the part the invisible King had laken in the history of the people—the
action of Jonathan at Michmash, which led to the rout of the Philistine army, is
related with some detail. Jonathan was the typical warrior of that wild and
adventurous age—recklessly brave, chivalrous, and generous, possessing
evidently vast strength and unusual skill in all warlike exercises. He was
animated with an intense faith in the willingness and power of the Eternal to
help Israel. This mighty faith in the ever-presence of the God who chose Israel,
was the mainspring of the victorious power of all the great Hebrew heroes—of
men like Joshua and Gideon, Barak and Samson. David, the greatest of them all,
7

8. we shall see, possessed this sublime spirit of faith in a pre-eminent degree. But
King Saul utterly lacked it; hence his rejection.
The young prince’s heart burned within him at the degradation which the
Philistine occupation brought upon the people. His father was too prudent to
engage in battle with his own feeble and disorganised forces, so Jonathan
determined, with the help of the Divine Friend of Israel, to strike a blow at these
insolent foes. Under any other circumstances—without the consciousness of
supernatural help—to attempt such a feat of arms would have been madness;
but Jonathan had an inward conviction that an unseen Arm would hold a shield
before him. It is noticeable that he never communicated his desperate purpose to
his father, Saul.
HAWKER, "The history of Israel under the reign of Saul, brightens up a little in
this Chapter. Jonathan, the son of Saul, prompted, it should seem, by a Divine
impulse, goes forth with his armour-bearer only, to a garrison of the Philistines.
He is made successful: - the host of Israel, when informed of it, follows after; and
a great slaughter is obtained over the Philistines. In the close of this Chapter, we
have a short relation of Saul's family.
1 Samuel 14:1
(1) ¶ Now it came to pass upon a day, that Jonathan the son of Saul said unto the
young man that bare his armour, Come, and let us go over to the Philistines'
garrison, that is on the other side. But he told not his father.
There appears so much of God's mercy, manifested in what we read in this
chapter, that I beg the Reader, more particularly to regard it, When the Lord
works without means, and sometimes contrary to means, this becomes a more
striking display of his Almighty hand. Let the Reader, before he enters upon the
events recorded in this chapter, observe the dangerous state of Israel. There were
with Saul, but six hundred men, and they trembling with fear: whereas, the host
of the Philistines consisted of thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand
horsemen, and people as the sand of the sea shore for multitude. How was it, that
this great host had not swallowed up the handful of Saul's army? Was it not,
because the Lord restrained them? Can it be referred unto any other cause?
Though Israel merited nothing from God, but his displeasure, yet the Lord will
not forsake his people, for his great Name's sake. This Samuel had said, and this
8

9. the Church had found, in all ages. Compare 1 Samuel 12:22, with Psalms
106:7-8. And cannot the Reader find similar proofs in his own history? Oh! it is
sweet, it is precious, when we discover the aboundings of grace, over the
aboundings of sin. There is a blessed nevertheless, in all the histories of God's
people.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:3. And Ahiah, the son of Ahitub — The high-priest,
who was here to attend upon the ark, which had been brought hither, 1 Samuel
14:18. The son of Eli, the Lord’s priest in Shiloh — These last words manifestly
belong not to Ahiah, but to Eli, who was high-priest while the tabernacle was at
Shiloh. Wearing an ephod — Or rather, the ephod; that is, the high-priest’s
ephod, comprehending the breast-plate with the Urim and Thummim, which
were inseparable from it. These Ahiah, being high-priest, now wore. Saul, being
now in great distress, probably had sent for Ahiah, that he might consult God for
him, as there should be occasion.
CONSTABLE, "Jonathan's success at Michmash 14:1-23
Armed with trust in God and courage, Jonathan ventured out to destroy Israel's
enemy in obedience to God's command to drive out the inhabitants of Canaan
(cf. 1 Samuel 9:16). He would have made a good king of Israel. Saul remained in
Gibeah, evidently on the defensive. His comfortable position under a fruit tree
(cf. 1 Samuel 22:6; Judges 4:5) in secure Gibeah, surrounded by his soldiers,
contrasts with Jonathan's vulnerable and difficult position with only the support
of his armor bearer. Jonathan was launching out in faith to obey God, but Saul
was resting comfortably and failing to do God's will.
The reference to priestly activity at Shiloh (1 Samuel 14:3) shows that the nation
still regarded Shiloh as a cultic site (i.e., a site where the people practiced formal
worship).
"Saul is accompanied by Ahijah, a member of the rejected priestly house of Eli
(1 Samuel 14:3), and this first mention of an Elide after the disasters which befell
Eli's family in chap. 4 triggers the response 'rejected by Yhwh.' Lest the point be
missed, it is reinforced by the odd and needless genealogical reference to
Ichabod, Ahijah's uncle, picking up on 1 Samuel 4:21-22, and reminding the
reader that 'the glory has departed.' His own royal glory gone, where else would
we expect Saul to be than with a relative of 'Glory gone'? The axes which here
intersect, the rejection of Saul and the rejection of the Elide priesthood, will do
so again in 1 Samuel 22:11-19, when Saul will bloodily fulfill the prophecy of 1
Samuel 2:31-33, wreaking Yhwh's will on the Elides." [Note: David Jobling,
9

10. "Saul's Fall and Jonathan's Rise: Tradition and Redaction in 1 Samuel 14:1-46,"
Journal of Biblical Literature 95:3 (1976):368-69.]
Bozez (1 Samuel 14:4, lit. shining) was the south-facing cliff near the Philistine
camp at Michmash, perhaps so named because it reflected the sun that shone on
it from the south. Seneh (lit. thorny) faced north and was closer to Geba.
Jonathan's route was an extremely difficult one. This fact accounts for his being
able to surprise the Philistines.
In contrast to Saul, Jonathan had a true perception of God's role as the leader
and deliverer of His people (1 Samuel 14:6). He viewed the Philistines as
unbelievers under divine judgment whom God wanted exterminated (cf. Genesis
17). He believed that God would work for His people in response to faith, as He
had done repeatedly in Israel's history. He also had learned that superior
numbers were not necessary for God to give victory in battle (cf. 1 Samuel 17:47;
Judges 7:4; Judges 7:7).
"Other parallels with the story of Gideon commend themselves as well: the hero
accompanied by only one servant (1 Samuel 14:7; cf. Judges 7:10-11); the sign (1
Samuel 14:9-10; cf. Judges 7:13-15); the panic (1 Samuel 14:15; cf. Judges 7:21);
the confusion, causing the enemy soldiers to turn on 'each other with their
swords' (1 Samuel 14:20; cf. Judges 7:22); reinforcements from the 'hill country
of Ephraim' (1 Samuel 14:22; cf. Judges 7:24); and the pursuit (1 Samuel 14:22;
cf. Judges 7:23 ...)." [Note: Youngblood, p. 661.]
Perhaps Jonathan chose his sign arbitrarily simply to determine how the Lord
wanted him to proceed. Some commentators have felt he did not.
"If the Philistines said, 'Wait till we come,' they would show some courage; but if
they said, 'Come up to us,' it would be a sign that they were cowardly ..." [Note:
Keil and Delitzsch, p. 138.]
Half a furrow of land (1 Samuel 14:14) was half a parcel of land that a yolk of
oxen could plow in one day. Evidently God assisted Jonathan by sending a mild
earthquake to unnerve the Philistines further (1 Samuel 14:15; cf. Deuteronomy
10

11. 7:23).
When Saul should have been acting, he was waiting, and when he should have
been waiting, he was acting (1 Samuel 14:18-19). He may have viewed the ark as
a talisman that he planned to use to secure God's help. Or he may have used the
Urim and Thummim. [Note: Merrill, "1 Samuel," p. 214.] As Saul watched, the
multitude of Philistine soldiers that covered the area began to dissipate. He
evidently concluded that he did not need to seek the Lord's guidance or blessing
(cf. 1 Samuel 13:12).
God caused the Philistines to fight one another (1 Samuel 14:20; cf. Judges 7:22;
2 Chronicles 20:23). Some Israelite deserters or mercenaries who were fighting
for the Philistines even changed their allegiance and took sides with Jonathan.
The tide of battle had turned. Beth-aven stood near Michmash, but the exact site
is uncertain.
LANGE, ". “On a day” (‫יּוֹם‬ַ‫,)ה‬ on the definite day on which the following
occurred. The words: And Jonathan said to his armor-bearer: Let us go over to
the Philistines’ garrison, are repeated in 1 Samuel 14:6 for the continuation of
the narrative which they introduce. What lies between [ 1 Samuel 5-14:2 ] is a
statement of the existing special circumstances and local relations. This detailed
narration shows that it is taken from the account of an eye-witness. The
“garrison” of the Philistines is the advanced post mentioned in 1 Samuel 13:23.
On the other side.[FN1]
The interjacent statements introduce us into the details of the whole situation: 1)
Jonathan says nothing to his father of his purpose, because he would have
forbidden it as too dangerous; the undertaking is set on foot secretly, in the hope
of surprising the enemy in sleep or unprepared2) Saul ( 1 Samuel 14:2) is
encamped at the extremity of Gibeah. This is mentioned to show that Jonathan
could unknown to him make such a blow. Gibeah ( 1 Samuel 14:16) is the city
Gibeah in Benjamin, whither also Samuel had gone from Gilgal ( 1 Samuel
13:15) back of Geba towards the south, yet with its extremity ( 1 Samuel 14:16)
not so far from the pass of the southward-trending Wady, that the movements in
the ranks of the Philistines opposite could not be thence observed. Under the
pomegranate-tree which is in Migron. By “rimmon” we must here understand
not the name of a place, but, on account of the Art, the well-known pomegranate.
According to Judges 20:45 a rock near Gibeah bore the name “Rock of the
pomegranate” [Rimmon]; and was well adapted for a fortified position. It is a
11

12. natural supposition that the same place is meant here, named after the well-
known pomegranate. Luther here renders Migron incorrectly suburb.
Linguistically it can only signify a place, which, however, from the local relations
cannot be the Migron of Isaiah 10:28, north of Michmash, whose name seems to
be found in the ruins of Magrun, eight minutes from Beitin. Rob. II:340 [see Am.
ed. I, 463, Stanley’s Sin. and Pal. 202]. Rather this place lay south of the pass of
Michmash on the northern extremity of Gibeah-Benjamin (Saul), and was
marked by the well-known pomegranate. From the context it appears that
Gibeah-Benjamin[FN2] extended far along on the heights which stretched out
(south of Geba) north-east towards the pass of Michmash, and ended in a rock
on which the pomegranate stood, and on whose declivity lay the place Migron.
The word means perhaps “precipice” (Then.) which is linguistically better than
“threshing-floor” (Rosenm. Alterth. II, 2, 171). That two contiguous places
should bear this name Isaiah, on account of the nature of the ground, as little
surprising (Winer) as the frequent occurrence of the names Ramah and Gibeah
(Geba).—3) Saul’s following consisted of about six hundred men and Ahiah the
high-priest. We must render: And Ahiah—bare the ephod.[FN3] The words
“priest of Jehovah in Shiloh” belong not to Ahiah (Sept, Luth.), but to Eli.
Wearing the ephod was a sign of the high-priestly office. Probably Ahiah was
with Saul at Gilgal, and ministered in the offering there made by him. The name
Ahiah [“Jehovah is brother” or “brother of Jehovah”] is identical with
Ahimelech [“brother of the king”] under which this great-grandson of Eli, the
sole survivor, ( 1 Samuel 2:33) of the house of Eli, appears ( 1 Samuel 21:2; 1
Samuel 22:9; 1 Samuel 22:11; 1 Samuel 22:20; 1 Samuel 30:7, e. a.). As to
whether of the two names was the original, Ewald remarks that they may have
been used without much distinction (since melech “king” might refer to God) as
in Elimelech (in Ruth) and Elijah (Gesch. II:585, Rem3).—The people with Saul
also knew nothing of Jonathan’s purpose. This statement connects itself
naturally with the remark on Saul’s following.—4) Exact description of the
ground which Jonathan had to traverse in his bold secret enterprise, 1 Samuel
14:4-5. According to Robinson’s remarks the plural “passes” is to be explained
of the several passages which were made possible by the side-valleys. It is not
probable that the plural refers to a long passage over the mountain (Then.).
Further the word “between” is intelligible only on the supposition of several
passes. Between these passes lay opposite one another two rocky crags or
projections, formed by the side-wadys opening right and left into the deep,
precipitous Wady Esther -Suweinit. Robinson went from Jeba (Geba) through
that Wady across to Michmash. In this passage (from south to north) he had on
the left two hills with steep rocky sides. “Behind each,” says Hebrews, “runs up a
smaller Wady, so as almost to isolate them. One is on the side towards Jeba and
the other towards Mukhmas” (II:329 [Am. ed. I:441]). To this observation of
Robinson answers exactly the description in 1 Samuel 14:5, according to which
the one rock-ledge, Bozez, was a column[FN4] on the north, the other Seneh, on
12

13. the south, opposite Geba.
PETT, "YHWH Commences The Work Of Deliverance Through Jonathan (1
Samuel 14:1-14).
Jonathan, Saul’s son, and a man of great faith, clearly found it a hard and trying
experience to watch the marauders going about their oppressive work, while he,
and Saul and his men, moved around the mountains keeping out of the way, and
his restless spirit longed to do something more positive. Surely, he thought,
YHWH would want them to act in some way to help His downtrodden people?
Thus the sight of the small unit of Philistines who were watching out for them
from the crags seems especially to have irked him, and in the end he decided that
here at least was something that he could do something about on his own (this
indiscipline in itself suggests that he was still only a young man with a young
man’s faith in himself and disregard for discipline).
So he called his ‘armourbearer’ and explained to him his purpose. His intention
was to attack the detachment of Philistines who were stationed in the hills
watching for any sign of Saul’s men. His armourbearer, who was no doubt
unswervingly loyal to him, fell in line with him. He informed him that he was
willing to go with him wherever he went, and was willing to follow him in
whatever he attempted to do. The final result of Jonathan’s faith would be that
the nest of Philistines were rooted out and mainly killed, something which would
then result in panic in the Philistine camp.
It should be noted that this chapter presents us with a deliberate contrast
between Jonathan, the man whose firm faith in YHWH brings about the victory,
and who eschews folly, and a Saul who, without Samuel’s help, appears to be lost
and not sure what to do. First he waits under the pomegranate tree, and then he
dithers in his camp talking to the Priest. And when he finally does belatedly act
he commits a gross folly. So Jonathan is seen as positive and unhesitating, firm in
his faith and confident in YHWH, while Saul is seen as equivocating, as
attaching to himself the new High Priest from the failed house that had
previously caused the glory to depart from Israel, as making foolish oaths, and
initially as not feeling that he can go forward without a talisman like the Ark,
until he is finally forced to do so by the circumstances. While deeply religious,
for he consults the High Priest, makes unthinking oaths and deprecates the
eating of blood, his is revealed as a religion tied to symbols rather than to
obedience. His lack of closeness to YHWH, already reflected at Gilgal, continues
13

14. to be revealed. It is made very apparent by this that he no longer has Samuel
with him, and that he lacks ‘the Spirit of YHWH’.
1 Samuel 14:1
‘Now it fell on a certain day, that Jonathan the son of Saul said to the young man
who bore his armour, “Come, and let us go over to the Philistines’ garrison, that
is on that side over there.” But he did not tell his father.’
Jonathan now calls on his armourbearer to accompany him in an assault on the
Philistines. An ‘armourbearer’ (literally ‘bearer of stuff’) was not strictly just
there in order to carry weapons. It was more a position of trust and honour.
Such a man was basically a faithful servant, in this case also a soldier and
probably a seasoned veteran, who carried out his superior’s wishes in any way
that he desired. In many cases he might have nothing to do with armour, or even
go to the battlefield. He could be a household servant with special attachment.
But, as we have suggested, in this case he was probably a seasoned soldier who
was allocated to Jonathan in order to act as his right hand man, and stay with
him when danger was around, with a special responsibility to watch his back.
They were comrades-in-arms.
That is why Jonathan called on him to join him in a secret foray against the
Philistine contingent who were watching out for them from the crags. He did not
want his father to know, presumably because he knew that his father would
forbid it. And the worst that could happen was that the two of them might die
together.
K&D, "Jonathan's heroic act. - With strong faith and confidence in the might of the
Lord, that He could give the victory even through the hands of very few, Jonathan resolved to
attack the outpost of the Philistines at the pass of Mukhmas, accompanied by his armour-
bearer alone, and the Lord crowned his enterprise with a marvellous victory.
1Sa_14:1-2
Jonathan said to his armour-bearer, “We will go over to the post of the Philistines, that is
over there.” To these words, which introduce the occurrences that followed, there are
attached from ‫יו‬ ִ‫ב‬ ָ‫א‬ְ‫וּל‬ to 1Sa_14:5 a series of sentences introduced to explain the
situation, and the thread of the narrative is resumed in 1Sa_14:6 by a repetition of
Jonathan's words. It is first of all observed that Jonathan did not disclose his
14

15. intentions to his father, who would hardly have approved of so daring an enterprise.
Then follows a description of the place where Saul was stationed with the six
hundred men, viz., “at the end of Gibeah (i.e., the extreme northern end), under the
pomegranate-tree (Rimmon) which is by Migron.” Rimmon is not the rock Rimmon
(Jdg_20:45), which was on the north-east of Michmash, but is an appellative noun,
signifying a pomegranate-tree. Migron is a locality with which we are not
acquainted, upon the north side of Gibeah, and a different place from the Migron
which was on the north or north-west of Michmash (Isa_10:28). Gibeah (Tuleil el
Phul) was an hour and a quarter from Geba, and from the pass which led across to
Michmash. Consequently, when Saul was encamped with his six hundred men on the
north of Gibeah, he may have been hardly an hour's journey from Geba.
PULPIT, "JONATHAN SMITES THE PHILISTINE GAR-BISON (1Sa_14:1-15).
1Sa_14:1
Now it came to pass upon a day. Literally, "And there was a day, and Jonathan,"
etc.; or, as we should say, And it happened one day that Jonathan. The phrase means
that Jonathan’s brave feat took place not many days after the garrison had occupied
the cliff, probably only two or three, but without definitely stating how many. He
told not his father. Not only because Saul would have forbidden so rash an
enterprise, but because secrecy was essential to any chance of success: probably too
the purpose came upon him as an inspiration from above.
SBC, "These were evil days for the people of Israel. But it was in these dark days that
Jonathan shone so famous. It is yet true that difficulties prove our mettle, and that
the greater the hardship or peril, the more is the victory worth telling. We learn from
this chapter—
I. That the presence of the enemy should rouse our courage. Jonathan could not
allow the Philistines to be even at Michmash, strong as it was, without ever striking a
blow. Is there not need for more chivalry among the soldiers of Christ?
II. It was Jonathan who conceived the plan of attacking the Philistines, which leads
us to say that princes should set the example. It is a shame when a private has to lead
a forlorn hope, and yet too often in Church history we find the poor and ignorant
more full of zeal for God than the rich and learned.
III. Earnest leaders should not lack brave followers. We are not told the name of the
young man who was Jonathan’s armour-bearer, but he was worthy of the situation.
The best of leaders is all the better for the knowledge that his followers will not fail
him. Let those of us whose place is not to lead yet help our Commander by acting, so
that whenever He looks at us He will see our faces say, "I am with Thee according to
Thine heart."
IV. Jonathan knew that God can win by a minority. If, in fighting the Lord’s battles,
we wait till we can outnumber the foe, we shall never do exploits. Joshua and Caleb
were outvoted, but they said, "Let us go up and possess it." The fewer there are, the
more room for Omnipotence. The units of Christian workers are the thin edge of the
wedge.
V. At the battle of Michmash, we have been taught that God helps those who help
themselves. God works by means, and delights in co-operating with His people. Do
not wait till the enemy has fled, but turn the battle by your bravery, even if it be by a
single hand.
15

16. T. Champness, New Coins from Old Gold, p. 255.
BI 1-23, "Come, and let us go over to the Philistine garrison.
Jonathan’s exploit at Michmash
It is evident that, Saul had no thought at this time of making an attack on the
Philistines. How could he, wish soldiers so poorly armed and so little to encourage
them? Samuel does not appear to have been with him. But, in his company was a
priest, Ahiah, the son of Ahitub, grandson of Eli, perhaps the same as Ahimelech,
afterwards introduced. Saul still adhered to the forms of religion; but he had too
much resemblance to the Church of Sardis—“Thou hast a name that thou livest, and
art dead.” The position of the army of Israel with reference to the Philistines seems to
have been very similar to what it was afterwards when Goliath defied the army of the
living God. The Israelites could only look on, in helpless inactivity. But just as the
youthful spirit of David was afterwards roused in these circumstances to exertion, so
on the present occasion was the youthful spirit of Jonathan. It was not the first time
that he had attacked the garrison of the Philistines. (1Sa_13:3.)
But what he did on the former occasion seems to have been under more equal
conditions than the seemingly desperate enterprise to which be betook himself now.
A project of unprecedented daring came into his mind. He took counsel with no one
about it. A single confidant and companion was all that he thought of—his armour
bearer, or aide-de-camp. And even him he did not so much consult as attach.
“Come,” said he, “and let us go over unto the garrison of these uncircumcised; it may
be that the Lord will work for us; for there is no restraint by the Lord to save by many
or by few.” No words are needed to show the daring character of this project. The one
point of view in which there was the faintest possibility of success was that the Lord
God might favour the enterprise. The God of their fathers might work for them, and
if He did so there was no restraint with Him to work by many or by few. Had He not
worked by Ehud alone to deliver their fathers from the Moabites? Had he not worked
by Shamgar alone, when with his ox goad he slew six hundred Philistines? Had he
not worked by Samson alone in all his wonderful exploits? Might he not work that
day by Jonathan and his armour bearer, and, after all, only produce a new chapter in
that history which had already shown so many wonderful interpositions? Jonathan’s
mind was possessed by the idea. After all, if he failed, he could but lose his life. It is in
this working of faith that must be regarded as the most characteristic feature of the
attempt of Jonathan. He showed himself one of the noble heroes of faith, not
unworthy to be enrolled in the glorious record of the eleventh chapter of the
Hebrews. What encouragement is here for every Christian worker! Don’t despond
when you seem to fail in your first and most direct endeavour. But Jonathan’s faith in
God was called to manifest itself in a way very different from that in which the faith
of most young persons has to be exercised now. Faith led Jonathan to seize sword
and spear, and hurry out to an enterprise in which he could only succeed by risking
his own life and destroying the lives of others. We are thus brought face to face with a
strange but fascinating development of the religious spirit—military faith. The
subject has received a new and wonderful illustration in our day in the character and
career of that great Christian hero, General Gordon. No one imagines that without
his faith Gordon would have been what he was or could have done what he did. It
gave him a conviction that he was an instrument in God’s hands, and that when he
was moved to undertake anything as being God’s will, he would be carried through all
difficulties, enabled to surmount all opposition, and to carry the point in face of the
most tremendous odds. And to a great extent the result verified the belief. One is
almost disposed to envy Jonathan, with his whole powers of mind and body knit up
16

17. to the pitch of firmest and most dauntless resolution, under the inspiration that
moved him to this apparently desperate enterprise. All the world would have rushed
to stop him, insanely throwing away his life, without the faintest chance of escape.
But a voice spoke firmly in his bosom—I am not throwing away my life. And
Jonathan did not want certain tokens of encouragement. It was something that his
armour bearer neither flinched nor remonstrated. Whether in the way of friendly
banter or otherwise, the garrison, on perceiving them, invited them to come up, and
they would “show them a thing.” Greatly encouraged by the sign, they clambered up
on hands and feet till they gained the top of the rock. Then, when nothing of the kind
was expected, they fell on the garrison and began to kill. So sudden and unexpected
an onslaught threw the garrison into a panic. And thus the faith of Jonathan had a
glorious reward. The inspiration of faith vindicated itself, and the noble self-devotion
that had plunged into this otherwise desperate enterprise, because there was no
restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few, led thus to a triumph more speedy
and more complete than even Jonathan could have ventured to dream of.
1. This incident is full of lessons for modern times.
1. First, it shows what wide and important results may come from individual
conviction. Did not the Reformation begin through the steadfastness of Luther,
the miner’s son of Eisleben, to the voice that spoke out so loudly to himself? Did
not Carey lay the foundation of the modern mission in India, because he could
not get rid of that verse of Scripture. “Go ye into all the world, and preach the
Gospel to every creature?” Did not Livingstone persevere in the most dangerous,
the most desperate enterprise of our time, because he could not quench the voice
that called him to open up Africa or perish? Learn, everyone, from this, never to
be faithless to any conviction given to you, though, as far as you know, it is given
to you alone.
2. This narrative shows what large results may flow from individual effort. Think
how many children have been rescued by Dr. Barnardo, how many have been
emigrated by Miss Macpherson, how many souls have been impressed by Mr.
Moody, how many orphans have been eared for by Mr. Muller, how many
stricken ones have been relieved in the institutions of John Bost.
3. Lastly, we may learn from this narrative that the true secret of all spiritual
success lies in our seeking to be instruments in God’s hands, and in our lending
ourselves to Him, to do in us and by us whatever is good in His sight. It was not
Jonathan’s project that was to be carried out; it was the Lord’s cause that was to
be advanced. Jonathan had no personal ends in this matter. He was willing to
give up his life, if the Lord should require it. It is a like consecration in all
spiritual service that brings most blessing and success. “He that loveth his life
shall lose it, and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.”
(W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
The battle of Michmash
These were evil days for the people of Israel. But it was in these dark days that
Jonathan shone so famous. It is yet true that difficulties prove our mettle, and that
the greater the hardship or peril, the more is the victory worth telling.
I. The presence of the enemy should rouse our courage. Is there not need for more
chivalry among the soldiers of Christ? How sin lords it over us, even in England.
Intemperance, lust, cruelty, ignorance, are the enemies of our ]and; and they do
almost as they like; they are slaying our people, starving our children, dishonouring
17

18. our women. Think, for instance, of the history of one gin palace Where are our
Jonathans? If we could not tolerate the presence of an invading foe how can we bear
to see the arrogance and cruelty of the enemies of Jesus Christ in this so-called
Christian land? It was Jonathan who conceived the plan of attacking the Philistines;
which leads us to say—princes should set the example. Officers, to the front. Have
you wealth?—use it as becomes a prince of God. Have you learning?—use it to slay
ignorance. How the example of Lord Shaftesbury has animated weaker men, and
made them feel like the armour bearer of Jonathan
II. It is true that earnest leaders should not lack brave followers. We are not told the
name of the young man who was Jonathan’s armour bearer, but he was worthy of the
situation. Listen to him: “Do all that is in thine heart: turn thee; behold, I am with
thee according to thy heart.” As if he had said, “Look at me; do I look like flinching?
If thou art first, I will be second! I am ready to follow thy lead: thou canst not go
where I will not be close behind.” If Jesus Christ could only have a Church like that
armour bearer, how soon the victory would be ours! And it is yet true that the best of
leaders is all the better for the knowledge that his followers will not fail him. Let
those of us whose place is not to lead, yet help our commander by acting, so that
whenever he looks at us he will see our faces say, “I am with thee according to thy
heart.”
III. Jonathan knew that God can win by a minority. He said to his companion,
“There is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few.” He remembered that
God had promised, “One shall chase a thousand, two put ten thousand to flight.” If,
in fighting the Lord’s battles, we wait till we outnumber the foe, we shall never “do
exploits.” Joshua and Caleb were outvoted, but they said, “Let us go up at once and
possess it.” The twelve apostles did not wait, but, in the teeth of the Sanhedrim,
preached “Jesus and the resurrection.” At one time John Wesley was almost the only
clergyman who dared the rotten eggs of the Philistines of his day, and now he and his
brother have a monument in Westminster Abbey!
IV. At the battle of Michmash, we have been taught that God helps them who help
themselves. God worked with the brave men who had gone alone. This “trembling of
God,” as it is called in the margin, struck a panic into the hearts of the Philistines.
This might have happened if Jonathan had not gone up, but most likely not. God
works yet by means, and delights in cooperating with His people. If you want God to
help you, help yourself. Climb up the hill in spite of Philistinic sneers, and when you
are at the top, the earth shall quake. You will not be alone very long. Saul brought his
army after the brave pair had gone alone, and the number of Saul’s people increased
directly, as you read in verses 21, 22. The enslaved Hebrews rose against their
masters, and these also who had hid themselves. “So the Lord saved Israel that day.”
(Thomas Champness.)
The valiant soldier
While the Philistines are making inroads upon Israel—sending out their different
companies—and strengthening themselves in garrisons or strongholds—poor Saul
remains, with his six hundred men, fearful and dispirited, under a pomegranate tree;
a standing proof of what God had told Israel should befall them when they sinned
against Him—their enemies the head, and they the tail. But God never will leave
Himself without a little faithful remnant, be it ever so small, so despised, or so
invisible. Haven’t you sometimes seen a tree of which the fruit has been gathered,
with just two or three left on in some part that has been overlooked, or in the very
uppermost bough, where they could not well be reached? Now, God compares the
18

19. very few of His people, whom He reserves, to this: “Two or three berries in the top of
the uppermost bough, four or five in the outmost fruitful branches thereof.” (Isa_
17:6). When we look at this we need to ask, with intense earnestness, “Lord, make me
one of those few.” Jonathan, bold as a lion, strong in the Lord, and in the power of
His might, says to his armour bearer, “Come, and let us go over to the Philistines’
garrison, that is on the other side. But he told not his lather.” No, he had learned not
to confer with flesh and blood, when flesh and blood made him a coward in the cause
of his God. When you see plainly what is your duty, however difficult, go forward.
There will be many evil counsellors, who can talk much of the trials and difficulties,
and make other hearts faint like their own: but, you recollect, the Lord does not like
such soldiers; He would not let them stay in His army, for He well knew how catching
fear is, and what sad work it makes in the camp of Israel. There is a Counsellor from
whose lips you may ever hear, “Fear not.” “Incline your ear, and come unto Him.” We
see the children of this world urging each other forward—overcoming endless
difficulties—and accomplishing immense designs—while, too often, if God’s children
have any great work which they would fain do for Him, a thousand difficulties, and
ten thousand fears are started, and while they are debating the enemy is gaming
ground. Oh, for one such view of our precious Master as Jonathan had! Did we thus
see Him all difficulties would vanish. (Helen Plumptre.)
Room for services in the church
In the fourteenth chapter we see on the part of Jonathan what may be described as a
disorderly courage. Disorderly courage has often been crowned with successes, and
has therefore presented a strong temptation to ill-controlled natures. Free lances
have unquestionably done good service in many a man, physical and moral. At the
same time there ought to be a great central authority in all well-conducted
operations. Room should always be left for genius, and for those sudden impulses of
the soul which it is sometimes impossible to distinguish from inspiration: but taking
the rank and file, and looking upon the Church as a whole, it will he found that a
quiet exercise of discipline and a steady pursuit of paths of order will answer best in
the great issue. In the Church, let us repeat, room should be found for all sorts of
men: for the great king and the young soldier, for the flashing genius and the slow
moving mind. (J. Parker, D. D.)
2 Saul was staying on the outskirts of Gibeah
under a pomegranate tree in Migron. With him
were about six hundred men,
19

20. BARNES, "Under a pomegranate - Compare 1Sa_22:6; Jdg_4:5. Saul was at
the northern extremity of Gibeah, about an hour’s march from Geba, where Jonathan
was.
Migron, if the reading is correct, must be a different place from the Migron of Isa_
10:28.
CLARKE, "Under a pomegranate tree - Under Rimmon, which not only
signifies a pomegranate tree, but also a strong rock, in which six hundred Benjamites
took shelter, Jdg_20:45. Probably it was in this very rock that Saul and his six
hundred men now lay hidden.
GILL, "And Saul tarried in the uttermost part of Gibeah,.... Not daring to go
out against the Philistines, but remained in the furthest part of Gibeah, at the
greatest distance from the camp of the Philistines, in the strongest part of the city, or
deeply entrenched in the outer, part of it in the field:
under a pomegranate tree; where were his headquarters; his tent or pavilion was
erected under a large spreading pomegranate, which protected him from the heat of
the sun: or
under Rimmon; the rock Rimmon; under the shelter of that, and in the caverns of
it; where a like number of Benjaminites he now had with him formerly hid
themselves, Jdg_20:47.
which is in Migron; a part of Gibeah, or rather of the field of Gibeah, so called; for
near it it certainly was; and is also mentioned along with Michmash, and as lying in
the way of the march of Sennacherib king of Assyria, to Jerusalem, Isa_10:28.
and the people that were with him were about six hundred men; which is
observed to show that no addition was made to his little army; it was the same it was
when he came thither, the people did not flock to his assistance, being in fear of the
army of the Philistines, which was so powerful; see 1Sa_13:15.
JAMISON, "Saul tarried in the uttermost part of Gibeah — Hebrew,
“Geba”; entrenched, along with Samuel and Ahiah the high priest, on the top of one
of the conical or spherical hills which abound in the Benjamite territory, and
favorable for an encampment, called Migron (“a precipice”).
WHEDON, " 2. The uttermost part of Gibeah — The outskirts of the city, or, as
Keil supposes; the extreme northern end.
Migron — This place must have been in the immediate vicinity of Gibeah, but its
exact position is unknown. The Migron of Isaiah 10:28 seems to have been north
of the Wady es-Suweinit, and, if so, must have been a different place from this.
20

21. HAWKER, "(2) And Saul tarried in the uttermost part of Gibeah under a
pomegranate tree which is in Migron: and the people that were with him were about
six hundred men; (3) And Ahiah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, the son of
Phinehas, the son of Eli, the LORD'S priest in Shiloh, wearing an ephod. And the
people knew not that Jonathan was gone.
Though Saul was thus reduced to the lowest state, and his fears were now visible, in
taking shelter under a tree, instead of facing the enemy, yet we find no humblings of
soul. He doth not send for Samuel, but Ahiah. He will not indeed again invade the
priest's office, but calls for the priest of the Lord, and the Ark: but alas! there is no
saving change made upon him. Though he hath the Ark of the divine presence with
him, yet he finds no strength nor confidence in the presence of the Lord. Alas!
outward services of worship without inward grace, only tend to keep the heart from
God, and do not lead to God.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:2-3 a
‘And Saul abode in the uttermost part of Gibeah under the pomegranate-tree which is
in Migron, and the people who were with him were about six hundred men, and
Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod’s brother, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the
priest of YHWH in Shiloh, wearing an ephod.’
Meanwhile Saul with his men had moved from Geba to a precipice (migron) on the
borders of the land around Gibeah, where there was a prominent and well known
pomegranate tree. With them also was Ahijah, who was presumably the High Priest
(he was wearing the ephod), having now reached the age at which he could serve.
“Ahi-yah” could be another name for ‘Ahi-melech’, with Yah and Melech (king)
interchangeable, or Ahimelech (1 Samuel 21:1; 1 Samuel 22:9) may have been his
brother or son. We are reminded that he was the son of Ahitub who was Ichabod’s
elder brother, and, as we know, Ichabod (1 Samuel 4:21) was the son of Phinehas,
who was the son of Eli. Eli had been the priest of YHWH in Shiloh. Thus Ahijah was
of Eli’s line and was not in YHWH’s favour, as the reference to Ichabod (‘the glory
has departed’) emphasises. It is probable that Ahitub had either died comparatively
young, or was for some reason disqualified from the High Priesthood as a result of
some defect, which would explain why Samuel had had to act as High Priest until
Ahijah came of age. Now, however, Ahijah had taken up his position (he was wearing
the ephod, a special sleeveless jacket worn by the High Priest - compare 1 Samuel
21

22. 2:28 - although the term here probably indicates the wearing of all the special
garments of the High Priest) and was presumably with Saul in order to provide him
with divine guidance. Had Ahitub still been alive he would have been around
Samuel’s age. The phrase ‘The priest of YHWH in Shiloh’ probably refers to Eli.
Shiloh has probably by this time dropped out of the picture as a Sanctuary. Ahijah is
mentioned again in 1 Samuel 14:18.
The mention of Ahijah here is significant, and especially his connection with
Ichabod - ‘the glory has departed’ (see 1 Samuel 4:21-22). The prophetic wisdom and
inspiration of Samuel has been replaced by the ritualistic activities of an uninspired
Priest from a rejected line. Saul still had enough of his religion in him to want
YHWH’s guidance, but he had lost the source of his true contact with YHWH and
was now making do with very much second best. This comes out all through the
passage in his hankering after the Ark of God (1 Samuel 14:18), in his foolish oath
made on his own behalf (1 Samuel 14:24), in the near execution of Jonathan (1
Samuel 14:44-45) because the Priest could get no answer from YHWH, and in the
inability to take advantage of the situation to defeat the Philistines once and for all (1
Samuel 14:46).
1 Samuel 14:3 b
‘And the people did not know that Jonathan had gone.’
Meanwhile Jonathan was on his way, and no one knew that he had gone. He had
simply slipped away unnoticed. He had not wanted anyone to prevent him from going.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:2
Saul tarried in the uttermost part of Gibeah. I.e. the part nearest Geba.
Under, not a, but the pomegranate tree, the well known tree at Migron. Saul
evidently shared to the full in the love of trees common among the Israelites (see
1Sa_22:6). The Hebrew word for pomegranate is Rimmon, but there is no doubt that
the tree is here meant, and not the rock Rimmon (Jdg_20:45, Jdg_20:47), so called
probably from a fancied resemblance to the fruit. Migron, said to mean a cliff was
apparently a common name for localities in this mountainous district, as in Isa_
10:28 we read of one lying to the north of Michmash, whereas this is to the south.
22

23. 3 among whom was Ahijah, who was wearing
an ephod. He was a son of Ichabod’s brother
Ahitub son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the
Lord’s priest in Shiloh. No one was aware that
Jonathan had left.
BARNES, "Whether “Ahiah” or “Ahijah” is the same person as “Ahimelech the
son of Ahitub” (see the marginal reference), or whether Ahimelech was the brother or
son of Ahijah, and his successor in the priesthood, it is impossible to say certainly.
Most probably “Ahijah” and “Ahimilech” are variations of the same name; the latter
element in each alone being different, ‫מלך‬ melek (king) being substituted for the
divine name ‫יה‬ yâhh. Compare “Eliakim” and “Jehoiakim” 2Ki_23:34, “Eliab” and
“Eliel” 1Ch_6:27, 1Ch_6:34.
This fragment of a genealogy is a very valuable help to the chronology. The
grandson of Phinehas, the son of Eli, was now High Priest; and Samuel, who was
probably a few years older than Ahitub the son of Phinehas, was now an old man. All
this indicates a period of about 50 years or upward from the taking of the ark by the
Philistines.
The Lord’s priest in Shiloh - But as Eli was so emphatically known and
described in 1 Sam. 1–4, as God’s Priest at Shiloh, and as there is every reason to
believe that Shiloh was no longer the seat of the ark in Saul’s time (see 1 Sam. 22;
1Ch_13:3-5), it is better to refer these words to Eli, and not to Ahijah, to whom the
next words, “wearing an ephod,” apply. (See 1Sa_2:28; Jdg_1:1 note.)
CLARKE, "Ahiah, the son of Ahitub - Phinehas, son of Eli the high priests
had two sons, Ahitub and I-chabod; the latter was born when the ark was taken, and
his mother died immediately after. Ahiah is also called Ahimelech, 1Sa_22:9.
Wearing an ephod - That is, performing the functions of the high priest. This
man does not appear to have been with Saul when he offered the sacrifices, 1Sa_13:9,
etc.
GILL, "And Ahiah the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother,.... Ichabod was the
23

24. child that Phinehas's wife bore prematurely on hearing the news of the ark being
taken and of the death of her husband and father-in-law, which name she gave him
on that account, and died; see 1Sa_4:19, he, it seems, had an elder brother, called
Ahitub, who died young, and this Ahiah was the son of him; for not he, but Ahitub,
was Ichabod's brother:
the son of Phinehas; so Ichabod was:
the son of Eli; so Phinehas was:
the Lord's priest in Shiloh; this refers not to Ahiah for he was not now priest in
Shiloh, which was destroyed: and besides, he was now in the camp of Saul; but to Eli,
who when living exercised the priest's office in Shiloh:
wearing an ephod; as Ahiah now did; not such as common priests wore, but the
ephod the high priest wore, which had the breastplate of judgment, the Urim and
Thummim, in it, by which inquiry was made, 1Sa_14:37. The meaning of all this is,
that the high priest is now with Saul, and the ark also, which and the high priest
might be sent for on this occasion, 1Sa_14:18.
and the people knew not that Jonathan was gone; or they would have gone
with him, namely, the military men that were particularly with him; he and Saul were
in two different parts of Gibeah, with distinct bodies of men; whether the thousand
that Jonathan first had with him all continued is not certain; it seems probable they
did not; it can hardly be thought he should have more with him than were with Saul;
see 1Sa_14:2, though from 1Sa_14:17 they seem now to have been together.
K&D, "1Sa_14:3
Along with Saul and his six hundred men, there was also Ahiah, the son of Ahitub,
the (elder) brother of Ichabod, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the priest at
Shiloh, and therefore a great-grandson of Eli, wearing the ephod, i.e., in the high
priest's robes. Ahiah is generally supposed to be the same person as Ahimelech, the
son of Ahitub (1Sa_22:9.), in which case Ahiah (‫ָה‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ֲח‬‫א‬, brother, i.e., friend of Jehovah)
would be only another form of the name Ahimelech (i.e., brother or friend of the
King, viz., Jehovah). This is very probable, although Ahimelech might have been
Ahaiah's brother, who succeeded him in the office of high priest on account of his
having died without sons, since there is an interval of at least ten years between the
events related in this chapter and those referred to in 1 Samuel 22. Ahimelech was
afterwards slain by Saul along with the priests of Nob (1Sa_22:9.); the only one who
escaped being his son Abiathar, who fled to David and, according to 1Sa_30:7, was
invested with the ephod. It follows, therefore, that Ahiah (or Ahimelech) must have
had a son at least ten years old at the time of the war referred to here, viz., the
Abiathar mentioned in 1Sa_30:7, and must have been thirty or thirty-five years old
himself, since Saul had reigned at least twenty-two years, and Abiathar had become
high priest a few years before the death of Saul. These assumptions may be very
easily reconciled with the passage before us. As Eli was ninety-eight years old when
he died, his son Phinehas, who had been killed in battle a short time before, might
have been sixty or sixty-five years old, and have left a son of forty years of age,
namely Ahitub. Forty years later, therefore, i.e., at the beginning of Saul's reign,
Ahitub's son Ahiah (Ahimelech) might have been about fifty years old; and at the
death of Ahimelech, which took place ten or twelve years after that, his son Abiathar
might have been as much as thirty years of age, and have succeeded his father in the
24

25. office of high priest. But Abiathar cannot have been older than this when his father
died, since he was high priest during the whole of David's forty years' reign, until
Solomon deposed him soon after he ascended the throne (1Ki_2:26.). Compare with
this the remarks on 2Sa_8:17. Jonathan had also refrained from telling the people
anything about his intentions, so that they did not know that he had gone.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:3
Ahiah, the son of Ahitub. (See on 1Sa_13:9.) It is interesting to find the house of
Eli recovering at last from its disaster, and one of its members duly ministering in his
office before the king. It has been debated whether he was the same person as
Ahimelech, mentioned in 1Sa_21:1, etc; the supposition being grounded on the fact
that Ahiah is never spoken of again. But he may have died; and with regard to the
argument drawn from the similarity of the names, we must notice that names
compounded with Ah (or Ach), brother, were common in Eli’s family, while
compounds with Ab, father, were most in use among Saul’s relatives. Ahiah or Ahijah
means Jah is brother; his father is Ahitub, the brother is good; why should he not
call another son Ahimelech, the brother is king? Jehovah’s priest in Shiloh. This
refers to Eli, the regular rule in Hebrew being that all such statements belong, not to
the son, but to the father. Wearing an ephod. Literally, ephod bearing. The ephod,
as we have seen on 1Sa_2:18, was the usual ministerial garment; but what is meant
here is not an ordinary ephod of linen, but that described in Le 1Sa_8:7, 1Sa_8:8,
wherein was the breastplate, by which Jehovah’s will was made known to his people,
until prophecy took its place. All this, the former part of the verse, must be regarded
as a parenthesis.
WHEDON, " 3. Ahiah — Here we meet again with the descendants of Eli. See
note on
1 Samuel 2:33. It is generally supposed, and quite probable, that Ahiah is only a
different name for Ahimelech, mentioned 1 Samuel 22:9; still, it is possible that
Ahimelech may have been his brother, and successor in the office of high priest.
The presence of the priest with Saul is here mentioned in anticipation of what is
to be stated in 1 Samuel 14:18-19; 1 Samuel 14:36-37.
ELLICOTT, " (3) Ahiah, the son of Ahitub.—The Chronicles, rehearsing these
facts, show us what a terrible impression the last events in Eli’s reign as high
priest had made in Israel. The destruction of Shiloh, the death of the high priest,
the fall of Phinehas and his brother in battle, the melancholy circumstances of
the birth of I-chabod, were still fresh in the memory of the people. Well might
Jonathan be ready to sacrifice himself if he could deal an effectual blow upon
these hereditary enemies of his country. Of this high priest Ahiah we never hear
again in these Books of Samuel. He is generally supposed to be the same as the
high priest Ahimelech, who was subsequently murdered by Doeg, by the
direction of Saul, with the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 22:9, &c.). The name Ahiah
signifies “brother,” or “friend of the Eternal”; Ahimelech, “brother of the king,”
25

26. may be another form of the same name.
Wearing an ephod.—The ephod here alluded to is not the ordinary priestly
vestment of white linen, but that official garment worn alone by the high priest,
in which was the breast-plate of gems with the mysterious Urim and Thummim,
by which inquiry used to be made of the Lord.
4 On each side of the pass that Jonathan
intended to cross to reach the Philistine outpost
was a cliff; one was called Bozez and the other
Seneh.
BARNES, "(The southern cliff was called “Seneh,” or “the acacia,” and the same
name still applies to the modern valley, dotted by acacias. The northern cliff was
named “Bozez” or “Shining.” The valley runs nearly due east, and the northern cliff is
of ruddy and tawny tint, crowned with gleaming white chalk, and in the full glare of
the sun almost all the day. (Conder.))
CLARKE, "The name of the one was Bozez - Slippery; and the name of the
other Seneh, treading down. - Targum.
GILL, "And between the passages by which Jonathan sought to go over
unto the Philistines' garrison,.... One of which is called the passage of
Michmash, 1Sa_13:23 and was that by which they went from Gibeah to Michmash;
the other, which might be called the passage of Gibeah, was that by which they went
from Michmash to Gibeah, and in effect was but one; and this was seized by the
garrison of the Philistines, on that part of it which was towards Michmash; so that
there was no way of access to the camp of the Philistines, which Jonathan therefore
proposed to go over to and destroy, but his difficulties were very great:
there was a sharp rock on the one side, and a sharp rock on the other
26

27. side; not that there was on each side of the passage or passages to the right and left a
cragged rock, between which men passed as they went from place to place; for the
position of them in the next verse shows the contrary; but there was "the tooth of a
rock" (l), as it is in the original text; or a promontory or prominence on the one side
towards Michmash, which stood out like a tooth; and another promontory or
prominence on that towards Gibeah; so that both must be gone over to get to the
camp, the only passage being guarded by the garrison; and indeed it seems to me
there was but one rock, and two precipices at the opposite parts of it, and which
stood between the passages, which precipices must be climbed over:
and the name of the one was Bozez, and the name of the other Seneh;
which, according to the Targum, the one signifies "lubrication", being smooth and
slippery, and the other "treading", being more trodden and beaten: but Hillerus (m)
derives both from clay, which seems not so agreeable to a rock; though in another
place (n) he makes the former to have its name from whiteness, which is the colour of
some rocks and clifts; and one should think the latter rather has its name from
bushes, brambles, and thorns, that might grow upon it.
JAMISON, "between the passages — that is, the deep and great ravine of
Suweinit.
Jonathan sought to go over unto the Philistines’ garrison — a distance of
about three miles running between two jagged points; Hebrew, “teeth of the cliff.”
there was a sharp rock on the one side, and a sharp rock on the other
side ... Bozez — (“shining”) from the aspect of the chalky rock.
Seneh — (“the thorn”) probably from a solitary acacia on its top. They are the only
rocks of the kind in this vicinity; and the top of the crag towards Michmash was
occupied as the post of the Philistines. The two camps were in sight of each other;
and it was up the steep rocky sides of this isolated eminence that Jonathan and his
armorbearer (1Sa_14:6) made their adventurous approach. This enterprise is one of
the most gallant that history or romance records. The action, viewed in itself, was
rash and contrary to all established rules of military discipline, which do not permit
soldiers to fight or to undertake any enterprise that may involve important
consequences without the order of the generals.
WHEDON, "4. Bozez and… Seneh — These rocks were in the valley that lay
between Geba and Michmash. The statements of this verse and the next are well
explained by Robinson, (Bib. Res., vol. i, p. 441:) “In the valley, just at the left of
where we crossed, are two hills of a conical, or, rather, a spherical form, having
steep, rocky sides, with small wadies running up behind each, so as almost to
isolate them. One is on the side towards Jeba, and the other towards Mukhmas.
These would seem to be the two rocks mentioned in connexion with Jonathan’s
adventure: they are not, indeed, so ‘sharp’ as the language of Scripture would
seem to imply, but they are the only rocks of the kind in this vicinity. The
northern one is connected towards the west with an eminence still more distinctly
isolated.”
K&D, "1Sa_14:4-5
27

28. In 1Sa_14:4, 1Sa_14:5, the locality is more minutely described. Between the passes,
through which Jonathan endeavoured to cross over to go up to the post of the
Philistines, there was a sharp rock on this side, and also one upon the other. One of
these was called Bozez, the other Seneh; one (formed) a pillar (‫צוּק‬ָ‫,)מ‬ i.e., a steep
height towards the north opposite to Michmash, the other towards the south
opposite to Geba. The expression “between the passes” may be explained from the
remark of Robinson quoted above, viz., that at the point where he passed the Wady
Suweinit, side wadys enter it from the south-west and north-west. These side wadys
supply so many different crossings. Between them, however, on the north and south
walls of the deep valley, were the jagged rocks Bozez and Seneh, which rose up like
pillars to a great height. These were probably the “hills” which Robinson saw to the
left of the pass by which he crossed: “Two hills of a conical or rather spherical form,
having steep rocky sides, with small wadys running up behind so as almost to isolate
them. One is on the side towards Jeba, and the other towards Mukhmas” (Pal. ii. p.
116).
HAWKER, "Verses 4-6
(4) And between the passages, by which Jonathan sought to go over unto the
Philistines' garrison, there was a sharp rock on the one side, and a sharp rock on
the other side: and the name of the one was Bozez, and the name of the other
Seneh. (5) The forefront of the one was situate northward over against
Michmash, and the other southward over against Gibeah. (6) And Jonathan said
to the young man that bare his armour, Come, and let us go over unto the
garrison of these uncircumcised: it may be that the LORD will work for us: for
there is no restraint to the LORD to save by many or by few.
This is the first introduction we have, in the sacred history of Jonathan, the son
of Saul; and a most pleasing one it is. There can be no doubt, but that his mind
was under gracious influences, from the strong confidence he expressed in the
sovereignty of the Lord. He knew enough of Jehovah, and that in a covenant way
it appears, from the line he draws between Israel and the uncircumcised
Philistines, to know that few or many, are of no avail with him. Reader! what a
lesson is this, to you and me? Had Jonathan such confidence in God, and shall
our faith be less? I beg the Reader to remark with me, the grounds of this well
formed faith of Jonathan's, namely, the divine glory. He had heard, no doubt, of
the Lord's former interferences, in Israel's distresses. Now, saith Jonathan, this
is the time for God to work. The glory must be wholly his, if he save us. Oh!
Reader! may the Holy Ghost give you and me to profit from this view of faith, in
one who never possessed the advantages for the exercise of it, which you and I
do. We have seen Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith, accomplishing
redemption: and his promise, like himself, is unchangeable. He saith; If we have
faith as a grain of mustard seed, we might say to the sycamore tree, Be thou
28

29. plucked up by the root, and it should obey you. Luke 17:6. Lord I would say,
increase our faith!
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:4. Between the passages — Two passages, both which
Jonathan must cross, to go to the Philistines, and between which the following
rocks lay; but the words may be rendered, in the middle of the passage; the
plural number being put for the singular. There was a sharp rock — Which is
not to be understood, as if in this passage one rock was on the right hand, and
the other on the left; for so he might have gone between both, and there was no
need of climbing up to them. But the meaning is, that the tooth (or prominence)
of one rock (as it is in the Hebrew) was on the one side; that is, northward,
looking toward Michmash, (the garrison of the Philistines,) and the tooth of the
other rock was on the other side; that is, southward, looking toward Gibeah,
(where Saul’s camp lay,) and Jonathan was forced to climb over these two rocks,
because the common ways from one town to the other were obstructed.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:4-5
‘And between the passes, by which Jonathan sought to go over to the Philistines’
garrison, there was a rocky crag on the one side, and a rocky crag on the other
side, and the name of the one was Bozez, and the name of the other Seneh. The
one crag rose up on the north in front of Michmash, and the other on the south
in front of Geba.’
The actual scenery of the road that Jonathan took to reach the Philistines is
described. It presents us with a picture of mountain grandeur. As he proceeded
along the mountain passes with his companion he saw a rocky crag on each side
rising up like a tooth. One was called Bozez which means ‘shining’. This was
because the sun shone directly on it causing its white chalk to blaze with light.
The other was named Seneh which means ‘acacia’, probably because of its acacia
trees, which are still to be found in the associated valley.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:4-5
In 1Sa_14:4, 1Sa_14:5, the locality is more minutely described. Between the passes,
through which Jonathan endeavoured to cross over to go up to the post of the
Philistines, there was a sharp rock on this side, and also one upon the other. One of
these was called Bozez, the other Seneh; one (formed) a pillar (‫צוּק‬ָ‫,)מ‬ i.e., a steep
height towards the north opposite to Michmash, the other towards the south
opposite to Geba. The expression “between the passes” may be explained from the
remark of Robinson quoted above, viz., that at the point where he passed the Wady
Suweinit, side wadys enter it from the south-west and north-west. These side wadys
supply so many different crossings. Between them, however, on the north and south
walls of the deep valley, were the jagged rocks Bozez and Seneh, which rose up like
pillars to a great height. These were probably the “hills” which Robinson saw to the
left of the pass by which he crossed: “Two hills of a conical or rather spherical form,
29

30. having steep rocky sides, with small wadys running up behind so as almost to isolate
them. One is on the side towards Jeba, and the other towards Mukhmas” (Pal. ii. p.
116).
5 One cliff stood to the north toward Mikmash,
the other to the south toward Geba.
GILL, "The forefront of the one was situate northward, over against
Michmash,.... The northern precipice of this rock was towards Michmash, where
the Philistines lay encamped, and where was the passage of Michmash the garrison
went into and possessed:
and the other southward, over against Gibeah; the southern precipice faced
Gibeah, and both precipices were to be got over before he could get to the garrison,
these lying between the two passages; the one at one end, called the passage of
Michmash, the other at the other, which might be called the passage of Gibeah.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:5
Was situate, etc. The word thus translated is that rendered pillar in 1Sa_2:8, and
the verse should possibly be translated, "And the one tooth (or crag) was a rocky
mass on the north over against Michmash, and the other was on the south over
against Geba" (not Gibeah, as the A.V.; see 1Sa_13:16). But the word is omitted in the
versions, and may be an interpolation.
6 Jonathan said to his young armor-bearer,
“Come, let’s go over to the outpost of those
uncircumcised men. Perhaps the Lord will act in
30

31. our behalf. Nothing can hinder the Lord from
saving, whether by many or by few.”
BARNES, "It is remarkable that the epithet “uncircumcised,” used as a term of
reproach, is confined almost exclusively to the Philistines. (Compare 1Sa_17:26, 1Sa_
17:36; Jdg_14:3; Jdg_15:18, etc.) This is probably an indication of the long
oppression of the Israelites by the Philistines and of their frequent wars.
CLARKE, "Let us go over - Moved, doubtless, by a Divine impulse.
There is no restraint to the Lord - This is a fine sentiment; and where there is
a promise of defense and support, the weakest, in the face of the strongest enemy,
may rely on it with the utmost confidence.
GILL, "And Jonathan said to the young man that bare his armour,.... A
second time, as Abarbinel thinks; the young man giving no answer to him the first
time, perhaps through fear, he repeats it, and enlarges upon it for his
encouragement:
come, and let us go over unto the garrison of these uncircumcised; as
these Philistines were, whereas several of the other nations, though Heathen, were
circumcised; as the Edomites, Arabians, and others; and this Jonathan observes to
the young man, in hope that they being such the Lord would deliver them into their
hand:
it may be that the Lord will work for us; a sign, as the Targum, a miracle, as
indeed he did; and of which Jonathan was persuaded in his own mind, though he did
not choose to express himself in a confident way; not knowing in what manner, and
whether at this time the Lord would appear, and work salvation and deliverance; and
yet had a strong impulse upon his mind it would be wrought, and therefore was
encouraged to try this expedient:
for there is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few; he is not
limited to numbers, and can easily work salvation by a few as by many. It is no
difficult thing to him to save by few, nor can anything hinder him, let the difficulties
be what they will, when he has determined to deliver his people.
JAMISON, "it may be that the Lord will work for us — This expression did
not imply a doubt; it signified simply that the object he aimed at was not in his own
power - but it depended upon God - and that he expected success neither from his
own strength nor his own merit.
31

32. COFFMAN, "JONATHAN'S VICTORY AGAINST THE PHILISTINES
"And Jonathan said to the young man who bore his armor, "Come, let us go
over to the garrison of these uncircumcised; it may be that the Lord will work
for us; for nothing can hinder the Lord from saving by many or by few." And
his armor-bearer said to him, "Do all that your mind inclines to; behold, I am
with you, as is your mind, so is mine." Then said Jonathan, "Behold, we will
cross over to the men, and we will show ourselves to them. If they say to us,
`Wait until we come to you,' then we will stand still in our place, and we will not
go up to them. But if they say, `Come up to us,' then we will go up; for the Lord
has given them into our hand. And this shall be the sign to us." So both of them
showed themselves to the garrison of the Philistines; and the Philistines said,
"Look, Hebrews are coming out of the holes where they have hid themselves."
And the men of the garrison hailed Jonathan and his armor-bearer, "Come up to
us, and we will show you a thing." And Jonathan said to his armor-bearer,
"Come up after me, for the Lord has given them into the hand of Israel." Then
Jonathan climbed up on his hands and feet, and his armor-bearer after him. And
they fell before Jonathan, and his armor-bearer killed them after him. and that
first slaughter which Jonathan and his armor-bearer made, was of about twenty
men within as it were half a furrow's length in an acre of land. And there was a
panic in the camp, in the field, and among all the people; the garrison and even
the raiders trembled; the earth quaked; and it became a very great panic."
"Nothing can hinder the Lord from saving by many or by few" (1 Samuel 14:6).
The remarkable faith of Jonathan is evident throughout this chapter. Some have
supposed that he might have been inspired by the Spirit of God which is not at
all unlikely.
If they say, `Come up to us,' then we will go up (1 Samuel 14:8). Keil explained
this sign as indicating cowardice on the part of the garrison;[9] but it seems to
this writer that the sign might have been altogether an arbitrary one revealed to
Jonathan by the Lord. The garrison might have thought the two men were
defectors to their side, or that it was beneath the dignity of the whole garrison to
go after only two opponents.
"Hebrews are coming out of holes where they have hid themselves" (1 Samuel
14:11). H. P. Smith wrote that, "This expression does not necessarily presuppose
the account in 1 Samuel 13:6";[10] but, of course, that is exactly what it does
32

33. presuppose.
"And they fell before Jonathan" (1 Samuel 14:13). The amazing success of this
attack was due to "its utter surprise."[11] Another similar historical victory
achieved by scaling what was thought to be an impossible place of ascent is that
of General James Wolfe who scaled the bluff along the St. Lawrence river below
Quebec on the night of Sept. 13,1759, and on the following morning surprised
and defeated the Marquis de Montcalm; and the continent of North America
went over to the British![12] However, in Jonathan's victory, the surprise was
only the human side of it; there was also a timely earthquake (1 Samuel 14:15)
that completely finished all resistance by the Philistines.
"As it were half a furrow's length in an acre of land" (1 Samuel 14:14). Keil
calculated this measurement to be about the same as "a rod,"[13] which is the
equivalent of five and one half yards, sixteen and one half feet, or 5.02 meters.
"The earth quaked" (1 Samuel 14:15). Some scholars have supposed this 'quake'
to have been a reference to the earth-shaking stampede of the Philistines, but we
believe the opinion of scholars such as H. P. Smith and John Willis is correct.
"God intervened in Israel's behalf by causing an earthquake."[14]
ELLICOTT, " (6) And Jonathan said.—This companion in arms answered to
the esquire of the knight of the middle ages. Gideon, Joab, David, and others of
the famous Israelite warriors, were constantly accompanied in a similar manner
by an armour-bearer.
Come, and let us go over.—Although in this history of the great deed of
Jonathan there is no mention of the “Spirit of the Lord” having come upon him,
as in the case of Gideon (Judges 6:34), Othniel (Judges 3:10), Samson, and
others—who, in order to enable them to accomplish a particular act, were
temporarily endowed with superhuman strength and courage and wisdom—
there is no shadow of doubt but that in this case the “Spirit of the Lord”
descended on the heroic son of Saul. All the circumstances connected with this
event, which had so marked an influence on the fortunes of Israel, are evidently
supernatural. The brave though desperate thought which suggested the attack,
the courage and strength needful to carry it out, the strange panic which seized
the Philistine garrison, the utter dismay which spread over the whole of the
Philistine forces, and which caused them to fly in utter confusion before the
33

34. small bands of Israelites, all belong to the same class of incidents so common in
the earlier Hebrew story, when it is clear that the Glorious Arm of the Eternal
helped them in a way it helped no other peoples.
The term “uncircumcised” is commonly applied to the Philistines, and to other of
the enemies of Israel. It is used as a special term of reproach. The enmity
between Philistia and Israel lasted over a long period, and was very bitter.
It may be that the Lord will work for us.—These words explain the apparent
recklessness of Jonathan’s attempt. It was Another who would fight the armed
garrison on those tall peaks opposite, and bring him safely back to his people
again.
For there is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few.—“O Divine
power of faith, which makes a man more than men. The question is not what
Jonathan can do, but what God can do, whose power is not in the means, but in
Himself. There is no restraint in the Lord to save by many or by few. O
admirable faith in Jonathan, whom neither the steepness of the rocks nor
multitude of enemies can dissuade from such an assault.”—Bishop Hall.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:6. The garrison of these uncircumcised — So he calls
them, to strengthen his faith by this consideration, that his enemies were enemies
to God; whereas he was circumcised, and therefore in covenant with God, who
was both able and engaged to assist his people. It may be — He speaks
doubtfully; for though he felt himself stirred up by God to this exploit, and was
assured that God would deliver his people, yet he was not certain that he would
do it at this time, and in this way. That the Lord will work — Great and
wonderful things. There is no restraint to the Lord to save by many or few —
From this it appears that Jonathan had a true faith in the power of God, being
fully persuaded that he could do every thing, and needed not the help or co-
operation of natural causes.
COKE, ". Jonathan said to the young man that bare his armour— We are to
consider this whole exploit as undertaken and carried on by the immediate
impulse of God. Josephus supposes that Jonathan went away in the night. Do all
that is in thine heart, in the next verse, signifies, whatever thou devisest and
approvest. And I am with thee, according to thy heart, means, in every thing in
which thou canst desire or command my concurrence. See Chandler's Review, p.
34

35. 87 and the note on 1 Samuel 14:14 of the foregoing chapter.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:6. Continuation of the narrative, with resumption of
Jonathan’s words to his armor-bearer [ 1 Samuel 14:1], but with the difference
that the Philistines are here not called by their own name, but “uncircumcised.”
This expression marks the difference between them and Israel as covenant-
people, which forms the basis for the following utterance of Jonathan. Ewald’s
characterization of Jonathan’s feeling as “a mixture of youthful impatience and
lofty courage” (III:48) does not fully explain the inner side of this deed. Its
natural basis is youthful heroic spirit and impetuous desire of achievement; but
it receives high ethical value and significance from its religious root in
Jonathan’s God-fearing and God-trusting heart, whose feeling is expressed in the
word: Perhaps Jehovah will work for us, for there is no restraint to Jehovah to
save by many or by few.—Over against the “uncircumcised” Jonathan is clearly
conscious: 1) that his people is the chosen one, belonging to the Lord, with whom
the Lord has made a covenant, and2) that the Lord cannot deny His almighty
help to this people as their covenant-God. This word of Jonathan expresses the
genuine theocratic disposition of the liveliest consciousness of God and the
firmest trust in God, whence alone could come a true deliverance of the people
from their oppressive burden. The “perhaps” indicates not a doubt, but the
humility which was coupled with Jonathan’s heroic spirit; he is far from
tempting God. The humble and modest hope which is expressed in the word:
“perhaps the Lord will work for us” is straightway grounded on the truth: there
is no restraint to the Lord, that Isaiah, he is at liberty to save by many or by few;
that Isaiah, the Lord’s help is not dependent on the extent or the degree of the
means by which it is realized; his helping power is not conditioned, but absolute.
The same thought in Psalm 147:10-11; 2 Chronicles 14:11; 1 Maccabees 3:18-19.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:6
‘And Jonathan said to the young man who bore his armour, “Come, and let us
go over to the garrison of these uncircumcised people. It may be that YHWH will
work for us, for there is no restraint to YHWH to save by many or by few.” ’
As they progressed Jonathan explained his intentions. They would continue to
make their way towards the Philistine outpost, trusting in YHWH to work for
them. For as he pointed out, YHWH was able to save by many or by few
(compare Judges 7:4; Judges 7:7). Jonathan is thus seen as a man of great faith,
which was why he could not see how YHWH could possibly let the
‘uncircumcised Philistines’ triumph in the end. The Philistines were looked down
on by their neighbours because unlike most people in Canaan they were
35

36. uncircumcised. They were thus often derogatorily known as ‘the uncircumcised
Philistines’.
We note that Jonathan had learned the lesson that had been forgotten by a
failing Saul, that ‘YHWH could save by many or by few’. Jonathan knew that
what mattered was not the number in the army, but that YHWH was working
for them. If that were the case were irrelevant. Had Saul remembered that
lesson, a lesson especially brought home by the story of Gideon (Judges 7:6-7 -
Saul had twice as many men as Gideon, also divided into three companies) he
would never have offered the sacrifices before Samuel came.
K&D, "1Sa_14:6
And Jonathan said to his armour-bearer, “Come, we will go over to the post of
these uncircumcised; it may be that Jehovah will work for us; for (there is) no
hindrance for Jehovah to work salvation by many or few.” Jonathan's resolution
arose from the strong conviction that Israel was the nation of God, and possessed in
Jehovah an omnipotent God, who would not refuse His help to His people in their
conflict with the foes of His kingdom, if they would only put their whole trust in Him.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:6
Uncircumcised. An epithet of dislike almost confined to the Philistines. But
underneath the whole speech of Jonathan lies the conviction of the covenant relation
of Israel to Jehovah, of which circumcision was the outward sign. Notice also
Jonathan’s humble reliance upon God. It may be that Jehovah will work for us,
etc.
7 “Do all that you have in mind,” his armor-
bearer said. “Go ahead; I am with you heart
and soul.”
CLARKE, "Behold, I am with thee - I shall accompany thee whithersoever
36

37. thou goest, and share all thy dangers.
GILL, "And his armourbearer said unto him,.... Very readily and cheerfully:
do all that is in thine heart; whatever is thy pleasure, that thou hast a mind to do,
that is upon thy heart, and thou art desirous of, and strongly inclined and affected to:
turn thee; which way thou wilt, towards the garrison of the Philistines, or
elsewhere:
behold, I am with thee, according to thy heart; I will go with thee wherever
thou goest, and do whatsoever thou wouldest have me to do; I am at thy command,
and according to thy wish and desire, and in all things subject to thy will; I am as
thine own heart.
K&D, "1Sa_14:7
As the armour-bearer approved of Jonathan's resolution (˂ָ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ֵ‫ט‬ְ‫,נ‬ turn hither), and
was ready to follow him, Jonathan fixed upon a sign by which he would ascertain
whether the Lord would prosper his undertaking.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:7
Turn thee. The Hebrew seems to have preserved the very words of the young man,
and the difficulty in rendering this phrase arises from its being a colloquial
expression. "Face about" would be our phrase; but the sense is, "On with you; I will
follow."
HAWKER, "Verses 7-10
(7) And his armourbearer said unto him, Do all that is in thine heart: turn thee;
behold, I am with thee according to thy heart. (8) Then said Jonathan, Behold,
we will pass over unto these men, and we will discover ourselves unto them. (9) If
they say thus unto us, Tarry until we come to you; then we will stand still in our
place, and will not go up unto them. (10) But if they say thus, Come up unto us;
then we will go up: for the LORD hath delivered them into our hand: and this
shall be a sign unto us.
It should seem to have been pretty much the custom, in the early ages, to
ascertain the reality of being commissioned by the Lord, by some sign. Thus
Abraham's servant; (Genesis 24:12-21) and Gideon respecting the Midianites:
Judges 6:36-40. And Reader, I know not, what your own experience may furnish
of such things, but I confess, that in the circumstances of my life, I do feel a
37

38. growing confidence in divine assurances, when they are opened to my view by
divine instructions. I consider that mercy, be it what it may, as good as possessed,
which the Lord leads me to ask in the faith of Jesus. Oh! it is a sweet and self-
rewarding employment, to watch the Lord Jesus in all things: for sure I am, that
then, in all things, we shall find him watching over his people for good. What a
very very precious scripture is that of he Lord by the prophet to this purpose:
Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land
assuredly, with my whole heart, and with my whole soul. Jeremiah 32:41.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:7
‘And his armourbearer said to him, “Do all that is in your heart. Turn yourself,
for see, I am with you according to what your heart desires.” ’
Jonathan’s faithful attendant was willing to follow wherever he led. Whatever
Jonathan wanted was good enough for him. So he told him to ‘carry on’. It
should be noted that this faithful follower was essential to his plan. We must
never forget the importance of a faithful assistant. ‘Turn yourself’ may suggest
that Jonathan had stopped and turned round to speak to him. Now, says his
attendant, he can turn round again and go forward.
8 Jonathan said, “Come on, then; we will cross
over toward them and let them see us.
GILL, "Then said Jonathan, behold, we will pass over to these men,....
Over the precipices to them, as steep and as cragged as they are:
and we will discover ourselves to them; present themselves to them at
daylight, and let them know plainly who they were, that they were Hebrews.
K&D, "1Sa_14:8-10
“Behold, we go over to the people and show ourselves to them. If they say to us,
Wait (‫מּוּ‬ֹ‫,דּ‬ keep quiet) till we come to you, we will stand still in our place, and not go
38

39. up to them; but if they say thus, Come up unto us, then we will go up, for Jehovah
hath (in that case) delivered them into our hand.” The sign was well chosen. If the
Philistines said, “Wait till we come,” they would show some courage; but if they said,
“Come up to us,” it would be a sign that they were cowardly, and had not courage
enough to leave their position and attack the Hebrews. It was not tempting God for
Jonathan to fix upon such a sign by which to determine the success of his enterprise;
for he did it in the exercise of his calling, when fighting not for personal objects, but
for the kingdom of God, which the uncircumcised were threatening to annihilate, and
in the most confident belief that the Lord would deliver and preserve His people.
Such faith as this God would not put to shame.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:8. Jonathan explains that, in carrying out his purpose, he
proposes that they first show themselves to the Philistines.—In verses9, 10, we
are told how he would therein find a divine sign whether the Lord would grant
unto them success in their design. He supposes two cases. If the Philistines at his
hail should say: “keep still ! till we come to you,” they will not go up to them; for
that would be a sign of courage and preparedness. But if they should say: “come
up to us,” they will go up; for that would be a sign of carelessness and slackness.
This he would regard as a divine sign that God had given the Philistines into his
hands. The divine sign, which Jonathan proposed to find, was a fact which
guaranteed the success of the enterprise on its natural-human side also.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:8-10
‘Then said Jonathan, “Look, we will pass over to the men, and we will disclose
ourselves to them. If they say thus to us, ‘Wait until we come to you,’ then we will
stand still in our place, and will not go up to them. But if they say thus, ‘Come up
to us,’ then we will go up, for YHWH has delivered them into our hand, and this
will be the sign to us.” ’
Jonathan then laid out his plan of action. They would cross over to the crag
where the Philistine outpost was stationed and allow them to see them. Once they
had done that their actions would be determined by how the Philistines
responded. If they said, ‘wait there until we come to you’, that is what they
would do. They could then be ready to defend themselves, or even slip away
among the rocks. If, however, they said, ‘Come up to us’, then they would go up,
and that would be a sign that YHWH was going to deliver the Philistine garrison
into their hands.
39

40. 9 If they say to us, ‘Wait there until we come to
you,’ we will stay where we are and not go up to
them.
CLARKE, "If they say thus unto us - Jonathan had no doubt asked this as a
sign from God; exactly as Eliezer the servant of Abraham did, Gen_24:12.
GILL, "If they say thus unto us,.... By this and what follows he gives his man a
sign by which both might know how they should conduct themselves in this
expedition, and what would be the issue, whether they should succeed or not: should
they say,
tarry until we come to you; this, as it would express boldness in the men of the
garrison, and show that they were ready to come out and fight, would portend evil,
and then what they had to do was to be upon the defensive:
then we will stand still in our place; wait till they came to them, and make the
best defence of themselves as they could, showing as little fear as possible, and not
attempting to retreat and flee:
and will not go up unto them; neither go backwards nor forwards; not backward,
which would show fear; nor forward, to expose themselves to too much danger from
the garrison, they appearing to be bold and intrepid.
JAMISON, "if they say, Come up unto us; then we will go up: for the
Lord hath delivered them into our hand — When Jonathan appears here to
prescribe a sign or token of God’s will, we may infer that the same spirit which
inspired this enterprise suggested the means of its execution, and put into his heart
what to ask of God. (See on Gen_24:12).
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:9
Tarry. Hebrew, "be still," "stand still," the word used by Joshua of the sun (Jos_
10:12, Jos_10:13); but not the word rendered stand still just below, where the
Hebrew has, "We will stand under us," i.e. we will stop just where we were.
40

41. 10 But if they say, ‘Come up to us,’ we will
climb up, because that will be our sign that the
Lord has given them into our hands.”
BARNES, "Though it is not expressly said, as in the case of Gideon Jdg_6:34,
Othniel Jdg_3:10, and others, that the Spirit of the Lord came upon him, yet the
whole course of the narrative, especially 1Sa_14:13-16, indicates an extraordinary
divine interposition.
GILL, "But if they say unto us, come up unto us,.... Which however spoken in
contempt of them, yet would discover some fear, that they did not care to come out of
their hold to them, and expose themselves to any danger; and besides being bid to
come up, though it might be in a sneering ironical way, as supposing it impracticable
for them; yet this would lead them on to make the attempt; and while the men were
careless and secure, they might obtain their point:
then we will go up: the precipice, which was supposed impassable:
for the Lord hath delivered them into our hands: they being afraid to come
out, and scornful and self-confident in their garrison: and this shall be a sign unto us;
a direction how to behave, what steps to take, and a confirming sign assuring of
success. Bishop Patrick and others observe, from Herodotus (o), something similar
to this, of the Paeonians, who went to war with the Perinthians, directed by the
oracle; and were ordered that if the Perinthians provoked them to fight, calling them
by name, then they should invade them; but, if not, should abstain; and so they did,
and overcame; for when they met, there were three single combats; in the two first
the Perinthians were conquerors, and began to triumph and insult; upon which the
Paeonians said to one another, now is the oracle fulfilled, now is our business, and so
fell upon them, and left few of them.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:10
A sign. The waiting of the garrison for Jonathan and his armour bearer to mount up
to them would be a sign of great indifference and supineness on their part; but what
he rather meant was that they were to regard it as an omen. Kim’hi has a long
digression in his commentary on this place to show that there was nothing
superstitous in their looking for a prognostic to encourage them in their hazardous
undertaking. God, he says, bade Gideon go to the camp of the Midianites to obtain
such a sign. as Jonathan looked for here (see Jdg_7:11).
41

42. WHEDON, " 10. Come up unto us — This invitation from the men of the
Philistine garrison they would regard as a sign from Jehovah — a prophecy of
success. “It was not tempting God for Jonathan to fix upon such a sign by which
to determine the success of his enterprise, for he did it in the exercise of his
calling, when fighting not for personal objects, but for the kingdom of God,
which the uncircumcised were threatening to annihilate. He did it in the most
confident belief that the Lord would deliver and preserve his people; and such
faith as this God would not put to shame.” — Keil.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:10. This shall be a sign unto us — Jonathan, not being
assured of the success of this intended exploit, desires a sign, and by the instinct
of God’s Spirit pitches on this. He could upon no good ground have spoken in
this manner without an impulse from God, who often suggested such thoughts
and resolutions unto good men’s minds in ancient times, as we see in the example
of Abraham’s servant, Genesis 24:14, &c. God, we must observe, has the
governing of the hearts and tongues of all men, even of those that know him not,
and serves his own purposes by them, though they mean not so, neither do their
hearts think so.
11 So both of them showed themselves to the
Philistine outpost. “Look!” said the Philistines.
“The Hebrews are crawling out of the holes they
were hiding in.”
GILL, "And both of them discovered themselves unto the garrison of the
Philistines,.... They passed over the valley that lay between Michmash and Gibeah,
and presented themselves at the bottom of the hill or rock on which the garrison was,
to the open view of it; and who might easily discern who they were, that they were
Hebrews, as they did, as follows:
and the Philistines said, behold, the Hebrews came forth out of the holes
where they had hid themselves, being in want of provisions, and almost starved,
42

43. and so obliged to come out to seek for sustenance; see 1Sa_14:6.
JAMISON, "Behold, the Hebrews come forth out of the holes — As it
could not occur to the sentries that two men had come with hostile designs, it was a
natural conclusion that they were Israelite deserters. And hence no attempt was
made to hinder their ascent, or stone them.
K&D, "1Sa_14:11-13
When the two showed themselves to the garrison of the Philistines, they said,
“Behold, Hebrews come forth out of the holes in which they have hidden
themselves.” And the men of the garrison cried out to Jonathan and his armour-
bearer, “Come up to us, and we will tell you a word,” i.e., we will communicate
something to you. This was ridicule at the daring of the two men, whilst for all that
they had not courage enough to meet them bravely and drive them back. In this
Jonathan received the desired sign that the Lord had given the Philistines into the
hand of the Israelites: he therefore clambered up the rock on his hands and feet, and
his armour-bearer after him; and “they (the Philistines) fell before Jonathan,” i.e.,
were smitten down by him, “and his armour-bearer was slaying behind him.”
HAWKER, "Verses 11-13
(11) And both of them discovered themselves unto the garrison of the Philistines:
and the Philistines said, Behold, the Hebrews come forth out of the holes where
they had hid themselves. (12) And the men of the garrison answered Jonathan
and his armourbearer, and said, Come up to us, and we will shew you a thing.
And Jonathan said unto his armourbearer, Come up after me: for the LORD
hath delivered them into the hand of Israel. (13) And Jonathan climbed up upon
his hands and upon his feet, and his armourbearer after him: and they fell before
Jonathan; and his armourbearer slew after him.
To what source, but the sovereignty of the Lord, can we ascribe it, that when
these two poor solitary soldiers of the army of Israel, were climbing up, and were
so exposed to danger, that the Philistines did not at once destroy them? How
evidently did the Lord overrule the minds of the Philistines? And depend upon
it, Reader, so it is in a thousand instances in life. The Lord God promised his
people, to send the hornet among their enemies. And what is this, but the
restraining power of his Almighty hand upon their minds? Deuteronomy 7:20.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:11-12. Both of them discovered themselves — At the
bottom of the rocks. Come up to us, &c. — A speech of contempt and derision. The
Lord hath delivered them, &c. — Jonathan, hearing those of the garrison make use of
the very words which he had fixed on as a sign of victory, immediately concluded that
43

44. God had influenced their minds and tongues, and thereby caused them to use the
words, and would certainly render his designed attempt successful. And he piously
and modestly ascribes the success, which he now foresees, to God only. And he does
not say, into our hand, but into the hand of Israel; for he sought not his own glory, but
the public good. His faith being thus strengthened, nothing can stand against him: he
climbs the rock upon all four, though he had nothing to cover him, none to second
him, nor any probability of any thing but death before him.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 14:11. When Jonathan and his esquire showed themselves, the
latter of the two cases occurred. The outposts of the Philistines cry scornfully:
Hebrews are coming forth out of their holes, and call out to them: Come up to us, and
we will tell you something. An expression taken directly from the life of the people,
containing an apparently bold challenge, yet (as we may see) not meant in earnest, and
concealing cowardice or careless security and neglect. Cleric.: “They hoped to have
sport with them, not supposing that they could there climb the rock.” Jonathan is now
sure that God has given them into his hands.[FN6]
[“more fully”] instead of the text “slaying;” the latter is to be retained from the
connection, the narrative, from the rapidity of the affair, pressing on to describe how
Jonathan, pushing on, strikes down with overwhelming might every one whom he
meets, without stopping to kill completely, while the armor-bearer, following him,
kills those that were struck down, that they might not rise again. The Heb. word
(‫ת‬ ֵ‫מוֹת‬ ְ‫)מ‬ means “killing completely,” as in 1 Samuel 17:51; 2 Samuel 1:9 sq.—A like
bold deed in scaling a castle in the Numidian war is told in Sall. Bell. Jugurth, c. 89,
90.—[This force of “complete killing” can hardly be assigned to this Heb. form
(Polel, here causative of Qal, of ‫.)מוּת‬ It means simply “kill,” and so in the passages
cited by the author, and the statement here seems to be that not only Jonathan, but also
his armor-bearer (like the feudal esquire) took part in the combat. The phrase “fell
before him” fairly means “fell dead;” the words do not warrant the history gotten out
of them by Dr. Erdmann. But the Heb. text, though somewhat hard, may be
maintained without this. See “Text. and Gramm.”—Tr.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:11
‘And both of them disclosed themselves to the garrison of the Philistines, and the
Philistines said, “Behold, the Hebrews come forth out of the holes where they
had hid themselves.” ’
Acting accordingly, they made their presence known to the Philistines, with the
result that they were greeted with jeers. So the cowardly Hebrews had come out
of the holes where they had hidden themselves, had they?
44

45. 12 The men of the outpost shouted to Jonathan
and his armor-bearer, “Come up to us and we’ll
teach you a lesson.”
So Jonathan said to his armor-bearer, “Climb
up after me; the Lord has given them into the
hand of Israel.”
BARNES, "We will show you a thing - Said mockingly.
CLARKE, "Come up to us, and we will show you a thing - This was the favorable sign
which Jonathan had requested. The Philistines seem to have meant, Come, and we will show
you how well fortified we are, and how able to quell all the attacks of your countrymen.
GILL, "And the men of the garrison answered Jonathan and his armourbearer,.... The
guards that were set to watch the garrison, who descrying them, called to them, and said:
come up to us, and we will show you a thing; we have something to say to you, a pretty
thing to show you, when you shall pay dear for your boldness and impudence, in daring to
come so near; not imagining that they could come, or would dare to attempt to come any
further:
and Jonathan said unto his armourbearer, come up after me; follow me, and never fear
but we will find a way to come up to them, however difficult it may be:
for the Lord hath delivered them into the hand of Israel; he knew by their language that
God had given them a spirit of fear, that they durst not come out of their hold, and come
down to them; and that he had cast them into a spirit of security and vain confidence, that
they could never come at them, and give them any trouble; and from thence he concluded
deliverance was at hand for the people of Israel, he seeking not his own private interest and
glory, but the public good; and which he was ready to ascribe not to his own valour and
courage, but to the power, kindness, and goodness of God.
45

46. PULPIT, "1Sa_14:12
Come up to us, and we will show you a thing. The Philistines thus give Jonathan the very
omen he had desired. The last clause is a popular phrase, and expresses a sort of amused
contempt for the two adventurers. Raillery of this sort is not at all uncommon between the
outposts of two armies.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:12
‘And the men of the garrison answered Jonathan and his armourbearer, and
said, “Come up to us, and we will show you something.” And Jonathan said to
his armourbearer, “Come up after me, for YHWH has delivered them into the
hand of Israel.”
Then the Philistines jeeringly called on them to come up so that they could ‘learn
something from them’, at which Jonathan turned to his companion and declared,
“Come up after me, for YHWH has delivered them into the hand of Israel.” He
had received the sign that he wanted. Now he had no doubt that YHWH was
with them. The Philistines may have been uncertain about how many Israelites
were with Jonathan, hidden among the rocks, so we can understand their
wariness. And they knew what good mountain fighters the Israelites were. But
what they probably did not expect was that Jonathan would actually do what
they asked. They probably thought that he had stumbled on them by accident
and would now curry away.
NISBET, "A REAL HERO
‘And Jonathan said to his armourbearer, Come up after me.’
1 Samuel 14:12
I. In marked contrast to the dispirited father is the splendid courage of his heroic
son. There are great gulfs between some Bible fathers and their sons. But never
was there a wider separation between a father’s heart and the heart of his child
than there is in our Lesson. Saul was dispirited, Jonathan was bold. Saul was
quite hopeless, Jonathan was flushed with a sure hope in God. Saul only wanted
to get alone and brood, but Jonathan was ready for all hazards. You see the
46

47. separating work of sin. It was Saul’s sin that had sundered the two hearts. It was
not because Saul was ageing and Jonathan was young; and it was not because
the one was father and the other child, that there lay such a gulf between the
two. It was because the hope and joy and swift obedience of Jonathan were
distant by a whole world from the disobedience of Saul. And sin is always
separating like that. We sometimes talk of social sins. But every sin at last is anti
social.
II. Jonathan then was full of hope and courage.—None but a hero would have
ever dreamed of going single-handed against the Philistines. And when we read
about the strength of their position, and the almost inaccessible cliffs below
them, the very thought of attack might seem absurd. Now the Bible never
encourages reckless daring. It is no record of madcap escapades. And had this
been a wild adventure of hot-blooded youth we should never have had the story
of it here. What lifts it up out of the rank of escapades is faith. It roots in a noble
and reasonable trust in God. Jonathan was inspired and moved by the Spirit of
the Highest. His bold adventure then, crowned by success, is but one of a
thousand that have helped the world. It is through the lonely daring of faith that
we are saved.
III. The whole conduct of Jonathan in this episode reveals the depth of the trust
in God that filled him.—We note it, for example, in his silence. He never told his
father what he was doing. He felt that Saul would never have understood. He
whispered no word of it to the army of Israel. They would have called it an act of
rashest folly. Jonathan consulted not with flesh and blood when the Spirit of God
called him to his task. ‘He had no swagger about him,’ said a war correspondent
of General Gordon; ‘he sauntered past me and among the men as silent as a
statue, and as quiet as a civilian.’ Deep faith is silent. True trust is never noisy.
Like a strong river, it covers up the boulders round which the shallow stream
stops to fret and chatter. I daresay David was thinking of his dear friend, long
since slain on the heights of Gilboa, when the chords of his harp were swept to
that undying music, ‘Be still and know that I am God.’
IV. The strength of his trust too comes out in another way.—Jonathan distrusted
all military stratagem. He only asked for a sign from God. He went up, openly, to
the base of the Philistine stronghold, and at the sign of God, he made the assault.
Does not that show that he knew that it was God’s work? He was to win through
the sovereignty of the Lord, and not through the stratagem of man. And
Jonathan found, as in like perils a thousand soldiers of the Cross have found,
47

48. that the foolishness of God is wiser than men.
Illustrations
(1) ‘One thing should be emphasised—the character of Jonathan as the story
reveals it. We see here the same soldierly ability as marked Saul in his original
choice of Michmash. From his father the son had inherited his dash and reckless
courage as well as his cleverness in strategy. But there was that in Jonathan
which last Lesson showed wanting in Saul—spiritual understanding and faith in
God. The sixth verse is the key to the whole passage. Jonathan counted on the
Lord to work for him, while Saul took matters into his own hand. There are no
words more famous in the Old Testament than these: “There is no restraint to
the Lord to save by many or by few.” And as Jonathan trusted in the Lord, so
the faithful armourbearer trusted in Jonathan, as verse 7 shows. Faith in God
inspires confidence, and every one is strengthened by a heroic religious soul.’
(2) ‘Let no disciple of Jesus undertake any enterprise without the witness of the
Spirit with his spirit that God has sent him. It was according to that dispensation
that Gideon and Jonathan should ask signs; but in this last time—when the Son
of God is come, and hath given us an understanding that we may know Him that
is true, and we are in Him that is true; and as the anointing which the believing
soul has received teacheth him all things, and is truth and is no lie—we get our
assurance of the mind of God not by asking the evidence of external signs, but by
the inward witness of the Spirit with our spirit, first that we are sons of God, and
then concerning every truth which He reveals unto us, and every service which
He calls us to fulfil.’
13 Jonathan climbed up, using his hands and
feet, with his armor-bearer right behind him.
The Philistines fell before Jonathan, and his
armor-bearer followed and killed behind him.
48

49. CLARKE, "Jonathan climbed up - It seems he had a part of the rock still to get over.
When he got over he began to slay the guards, which were about twenty in number, these
were of a sort of outpost or advanced guard to the garrison.
Slew after him - Jonathan knocked them down, and the armor-bearer despatched them.
This seems to be the meaning.
GILL, "nd Jonathan climbed up upon his hands and upon his feet,.... He did not attempt
to go up the way or pass the Philistines kept, but turned aside and climbed up a precipice
thought inaccessible, and came upon them unseen, and at unawares; for had he attempted to
come up in any part where he was seen, they could easily have beat him down, and prevented
his ascent; but though the place he climbed was so very steep and cragged, yet going on all
four, as we say, he surmounted the difficulty; for he took this method of going on his hands
and feet, not so much that he might not be seen; but because otherwise he could not have got
up, not being able to stand on his feet; some think it was the precipice called Bozez he
climbed, which, according to the Targum, had its name from its being lubricous and slippery:
and his armourbearer after him; who clambered up in the same manner, in imitation of his
master, and as taught and directed by him:
and they fell before Jonathan, and his armourbearer slew after him; Jonathan, coming
upon them at an unawares, knocked them down; or falling upon them, and laying about him
with great dispatch, wounded them, and laid them prostrate to the ground; and his
armourbearer following them, put them to death, dispatched them at once; and so between
them both made quick riddance of them.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:13
Upon his hands and upon his feet. Of course a single stone rolled down upon them while
thus clambering up the precipitous side of the cliff would have sent them to the bottom; but
the Philistines, apparently considering the ascent impossible, seem entirely to have neglected
them. The youthful appearance of the two no doubt contributed to throw them off their guard.
And they fell before Jonathan. The brevity of the Hebrew very well expresses the rapidity
of Jonathan’s action. Used to mountaineering, he was ready, as soon as he had reached the
summit, to commence the attack, and the Philistines, little expecting so vigorous an onslaught
from so feeble a force, were surprised, and made but a slight resistance. The armour bearer
also behaved with a bravery like his master’s.
ELLICOTT, "(13) And they fell before Jonathan . . .—The sign he prayed for
was given him. There were probably but few sentinels at their posts; the
inaccessibility of the craggy fortress had lulled the garrison into security. The
few watching him at first mocked, and then, as Jonathan advanced with strange
rapidity, they seem to have been, as it were, paralysed—the feat was hardly
49

50. human—as the man, all armed, sprang over the rocky parapet. “His chief
weapon was his bow,” writes Dean Stanley; “his whole tribe was a tribe of
archers, and he was the chief archer of them all.” Arrived at the summit, in
rapid succession he shot his deadly bolts, his gallant armour-bearer following his
chief’s example. and twenty men, so says the record, fell before they had
recovered their surprise. In a moment a panic seized the garrison, and a hurried
flight ensued, for they felt they had to deal with no mortal strength.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:13. They fell before Jonathan — It is probable that the
garrison, after they had spoken to Jonathan and his armour-bearer, concerned
themselves no further about them, so that they climbed up unperceived, and fell
upon the Philistines unawares, and perhaps when they were unarmed. And being
endowed with extraordinary strength and courage, and having, with incredible
boldness, killed the first they met with, it is not strange if the Philistines were
both astonished and intimidated; God also struck them with a panic; and withal,
infatuated their minds, and possibly put an evil spirit among them, which in this
universal confusion made them conceive that there was treachery among
themselves, and therefore caused them to sheath their swords in one another’s
bowels,
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:13
‘And Jonathan climbed up on his hands and on his feet, and his armourbearer
after him, and they fell before Jonathan; and his armourbearer slew them after
him.’
Instead the two men scrambled up the sides of the hill. They had been mountain
men all their lives and it presented no difficulty to them. And arriving at the
summit, and probably taking everyone by surprise, they attacked the Philistines
boldly. Although the Philistines well outnumbered them they probably could not
all get at the two at the same time because of the terrain. They may well also have
been looking round warily for other Israelites trying to creep up on them. But
the result was that Jonathan and his companion, filled with zeal for YHWH, was
able to slay them all one by one.
14 In that first attack Jonathan and his armor-
bearer killed some twenty men in an area of
50

51. about half an acre.
BARNES, "Within as it were an half acre ... - The Hebrew text is extremely obscure.
Hence, there is some probability that the true reading is preserved by the Septuagint which
translates the clause “with darts and stones and flints of the field.” Others take the words to
mean: “in about half the time that a yoke of oxen draw a furrow in the field.”
CLARKE, "A half acre of land - The ancients measured land by the quantum which a
yoke of oxen could plough in a day. The original is obscure, and is variously understood. It is
probably a proverbial expression for a very small space.
GILL, "And the first slaughter which Jonathan and his armourbearer made was about
twenty men,.... Or the first blow they struck, as the Targum, they killed about twenty men;
that is, they did not stop smiting, but followed their blows so quickly, that in a very little
time, as well as in a very small space of ground, so many were killed:
even within as it were an half acre of land, which a "yoke" of oxen might plough; that is, in
one day; the word is used for a furrow, Psa_129:3 and is supposed by some (p) to be the
length of one furrow; but if so, it must be a circular furrow; so much ground was given to
Horatius Cocles as could be ploughed round about in one day, for his brave opposition to
Porsena, king of the Etruscans, when he endeavoured to restore the family of the Tarquins
(q). This was a space of ground which the Romans call "actus", a measure of land one
hundred and twenty feet square, which being doubled made an acre, called by them
"jugerum", being as much as a yoke of oxen could plough in one day, as Pliny says (r); so
that an acre was two hundred and forty feet long, and one hundred and twenty broad, and
contained an area of 28,800 four square Roman feet; and this space here mentioned, which
was half an acre, contained 14,400 Roman feet (s); and within this space of ground, without
going any further, twenty men were killed, which struck a panic into the whole garrison and
host, supposing there was a large army of men behind them coming on, as follows. The
Septuagint version renders these words as representing the slaughter made "with darts, and
the casts of stones, and flints of the field" (t).
JAMISON, "that first slaughter, which Jonathan and his armour-bearer made, was
about twenty men, within as it were an half acre of land, which a yoke of oxen might
plow — This was a very ancient mode of measurement, and it still subsists in the East. The
men who saw them scrambling up the rock had been surprised and killed, and the spectacle of
twenty corpses would suggest to others that they were attacked by a numerous force. The
success of the adventure was aided by a panic that struck the enemy, produced both by the
sudden surprise and the shock of an earthquake. The feat was begun and achieved by the faith
of Jonathan, and the issue was of God.
51

52. K&D, "1Sa_14:14
The first stroke that Jonathan and his armour-bearer struck was (amounted to) about twenty
men “on about half a furrow of an acre of field.” ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ֲ‫ﬠ‬ַ‫,מ‬ a furrow, as in Psa_129:3, is in the
absolute state instead of the construct, because several nouns follow in the construct
state (cf. Ewald, §291, a.). ‫ד‬ֶ‫מ‬ֶ‫,צ‬ lit. things bound together, then a pair; here it signifies
a pair or yoke of oxen, but in the transferred sense of a piece of land that could be
ploughed in one morning with a yoke of oxen, like the Latin jugum, jugerum. It is
called the furrow of an acre of land, because the length only of half an acre of land
was to be given, and not the breadth or the entire circumference. The Philistines, that
is to say, took to flight in alarm as soon as the brave heroes really ascended, so that
the twenty men were smitten one after another in the distance of half a rood of land.
Their terror and flight are perfectly conceivable, if we consider that the outpost of the
Philistines was so stationed upon the top of the ridge of the steep mountain wall, that
they would not see how many were following, and the Philistines could not imagine it
possible that two Hebrews would have ventured to climb the rock alone and make an
attack upon them. Sallust relates a similar occurrence in connection with the scaling
of a castle in the Numidian war (Bell. Jugurth. c. 89, 90).
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:14
Within as it were an half acre of land, which a yoke of oxen might plow.
The Hebrew for this long circumlocution is, "within about a half furrow of a yoke of
land." The Septuagint translates, "with darts and slings and stones of the field," but
the other versions give no support to this rendering. The Israelites, like most ancient
nations, were accustomed to measure land by the quantity which a yoke of oxen
could plough in a day,—something really less than an acre,—so that the A.V. gives the
fight sense. When Jonathan made his attack, the garrison probably, not knowing bow
few their assailants were, ran in confusion to the narrow tongue of land where the
exit was, and getting in one another’s way, were soon panic stricken and helpless.
WHEDON, "14. A half acre of land — Literally, Within about half a furrow of a
yoke of land; that is, half a furrow’s length. A yoke of land is what a yoke of
oxen would plough in a day. So the Latin word for acre is jugerum, from jugum,
a yoke. This first slaughter made by Jonathan and his companion was, therefore,
within a comparatively small space of ground.
ELLICOTT, "(14) And that first slaughter . . .—Considerable doubt exists as to
the exact meaning of this verse. The LXX. either had here a different text before
them, or else translated, as has been suggested, “conjecturally, what they did not
understand;” their rendering is “about twenty men, with darts and slings and
stones of the field.” Ewald explains the Hebrew words as follows: “At the very
beginning he strikes down about twenty men at once, as if a yoke of land were in
course of being ploughed, which must beware of offering opposition to the sharp
ploughshare in the middle of its work.” The simplest interpretation seems to be
that twenty men were smitten down, one after the other, in the distance of half a
52

53. rood of land. Bunsen considers this verse an extract from a poet.
HAWKER, "Verse 14-15
(14) And that first slaughter, which Jonathan and his armourbearer made, was
about twenty men, within as it were an half acre of land, which a yoke of oxen
might plow. (15) And there was trembling in the host, in the field, and among all
the people: the garrison, and the spoilers, they also trembled, and the earth
quaked: so it was a very great trembling.
It should seem, that a similar effect, like that which the Lord wrought in the host
of Midian, must have been induced, to cause this great consternation, and
trembling. The thing was of the Lord. Judges 7:22.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:14
‘And that first slaughter, which Jonathan and his armourbearer made, was
about twenty men, within as it were half a furrow’s length in an acre of land.’
There were apparently just over twenty men in the outpost of whom most were
killed, although it may well be that there were a few more and that one or two
escaped to take the news back to the main camp of a ‘ferocious and victorious
attack’ by the Israelites. And this all took place in an area which was a mere
‘half a furrow’s length in a yoke of land’. The size of a yoke of land would be
determined by what could be ploughed in a certain time by a yoke of oxen.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:14-15. Within a half acre of land — The garrison seems
to have been divided into several bands, and posted upon several craggy
eminences; for this first party that Jonathan attacked seems to have been quite
separate from the rest. There was a trembling in the host — That is, in the whole
host which was in the field. The Philistines, hearing of this slaughter of the
twenty men, undoubtedly concluded that they had been attacked by a
considerable number of Israelites, which put them into a great consternation.
Among all the people — That is, among all the rest of their forces, as well as
those in the garrison at Michmash, and the spoilers, mentioned 1 Samuel 13:17;
the report of this prodigy, and with it the terror of God, speedily passing from
one to another. The Hebrew is, a trembling of God, signifying not only a very
great trembling, but such as was supernatural, and came immediately from the
hand of God. He that made the heart knows how to make it tremble. To complete
their confusion, even the earth quaked; it shook under them, and made them
fear it was just going to swallow them up. Those who will not fear the eternal
God, he can make afraid of a shadow.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:14. That first slaughter, &c.— The expression in this
53

54. verse, possibly, was proverbial. It imports only, that this slaughter was made in a
very small compass: that Jonathan slew twenty men within the space of half an
acre of ground. This sudden and unexpected attack of Jonathan's threw them
into a panic fear; and as their army consisted, it is most likely, of different
nations, (see chap. 1 Samuel 13:5.) they fell into the greater confusion, as not
understanding, and perhaps suspecting each other. Pindar has finely observed
upon panic fears, that "when men are struck with divine terrors, even the
children of the gods, i.e. the most heroic spirits, betake themselves to flight."
Nero. ix. ver. 63. Some have supposed from the expression, 1 Samuel 14:15 and
the earth quaked, that the Lord sent a real earthquake to terrify them: but the
expression is figurative; meaning that the whole place, the whole district where
the Philistine army was encamped, was in an extraordinary emotion. The French
version renders the 15th verse very intelligibly. And there was a great terror in
the camp, in the field, and among the people. The garrison and the spoilers were
terrified; and the place was in consternation, as if a mighty terror had been sent
by God. We refer to Hallet, vol. 2: p. 21 and Kennicott's Dissertation, vol. 1: p.
453 for some critical observations on the 14th verse.
REFLECTIONS.—Never did Israel appear in a more distressed situation: they
have neither courage nor arms; God is offended; their enemies are at the gate;
and they without place to flee to, or power to resist: but, for his own name's sake,
God will not utterly forsake his people, though they so justly deserve it. We have
here,
1. Saul reduced to the greatest straits; no increase of his army; retired to the
uttermost part of Gibeah, for the greater security, or more ready flight, if the
Philistines advanced; his tent spread under a grove of pomegranates. Hither, to
consult God in his difficulties, since Samuel had left him, he sends for the ark of
God, and Ahiah the high-priest, hoping by this application to God in his own
way that he might have better success than when he sacrificed for himself. Note;
(1.) Drowning men catch at straws. They will have the priest and sacrament at
their dying bed, who, in their lives, were negligent of both. (2.) If the power of
godliness be absent, the form of it can profit us nothing: nay, only deceive us, if
we trust in it, to our ruin.
2. Jonathan's noble exploit. Moved, as we must suppose, by a divine impulse, he
secretly quits the camp in Gibeah, and, with his armour-bearer, advances
towards the Philistines' garrison, who seem to have been posted on one of the
craggy rocks near Michmash, to guard the pass that was between them.
54

55. Jonathan proposes to his armour-bearer to go boldly up and fall upon them,
since, if the Lord pleased, he could save as well by few as many. The proposal
being agreed to, Jonathan determines to rest the matter upon a providential
issue. He would appear in sight of the garrison: if the men called to them to
stand, and threatened to come over, then they should advance no further; but if
they said, in contempt of them, Come up; then they should fall on, assuredly
concluding that God was with them. Just as he said, God directed their word.
The Philistines concluded them famished for hunger, and forced to surrender,
and therefore deridingly bid them come up, and then they should see how they
would treat them. Inspired with divine courage and confidence, they now
advance, assuredly concluding that God had delivered the Philistines into their
hands. Though steep the precipice, they climb the craggy rock, whilst, expecting
no danger, the Philistines probably looked on, and amused themselves with the
eagerness of these despised Hebrews. But no sooner had Jonathan and his
armour-bearer firm footing, than they fell on furiously and unexpectedly, and
twenty men presently were slain within the space of half an acre of land.
Probably these were a party of scouts, who, thus smitten, fled, and carried a
panic along with them into the garrison and camp, God spreading the terror on
every side. Note; (1.) The greatness of danger serves only for the more glorious
exercise of faith in the saints of God. (2.) Whatever our difficulties are, if we have
Omnipotence on our side, we may boldly advance. (3.) It is good to follow the
leadings of Providence. (4.) They who sport at God's Israel, will do it at their
cost. (5.) God can with secret terrors reach the hearts of his enemies, and turn
their own swords against them. (6.) They who commit their ways unto the Lord,
will find that he can bring to pass the most improbable events. No man ever
trusted him, and was confounded.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:14. The result of this first slaughter which Jonathan and
his armor-bearer made: about thirty men were thus killed. In the last words of
the verse the overthrow is set forth in terms taken from ploughing: in about a
half-furrow of a yoke of land.—This indicates the position of the fallen, after
Jonathan, pressing impetuously on, had struck them down one after another,
and his armor-bearer after him had killed those that were not dead. This
occurred in the space of about half a furrow in a piece of land which one could
plough with a yoke of oxen in a day.[FN7] In the length of about a half-yoke lay
the twenty slain Philistines stretched out in a row. Cleric.: “Such apparently was
the extent of the point of rock which the Philistines had occupied.” Of the
translation of the Sept.: “about twenty men with darts and slings and stones of
the field,” Clericus rightly says: “They translated conjecturally what they did
not understand.” To Ewald’s rendering “as if a yoke of land were in ploughing”
(so Bunsen, who regards this as an extract from a poet) there are, in the first
place, two objections: 1) that the word (‫)מנעה‬ means “furrow,” and not
“ploughing,” and2) that “yoke of land” means not the animals, but the land
55

56. itself. Further objection to this rendering, especially in reference to the
completed fact here related [Ewald represents it as an advancing Acts, while the
first half of the verse speaks of it as finished.—Tr.], see in Thenius.—[The Sept.
text may easily be gotten from the Hebrews, omitting the ‫ך‬.‫ו‬.‫נופס‬ . as repetition
(see Then. and Wellhausen), and gives a better sense. Bib. Com.: “There is
nothing remarkable in twenty men being killed in half an acre of land; and
moreover the Heb. sentence is extremely obscure, without any apparent reason
for its being so. … A measure of time would not be out of place, if the words
could mean ‘in about half the time that a yoke of oxen draw a furrow in the
field.’ ” Others, less well, understand here a space enclosed by a furrow.
Philippson remarks that the ancients were accustomed to measure land by the
ploughing of oxen; but the difficulty here is not in the way of stating the land-
measure, but in understanding why it is stated. Kitto (Daily Bib. Ill.) gives a good
narrative of the exploit of Jonathan. The text must be regarded as unsettled.—
Tr.]
Israel Routs the Philistines
15 Then panic struck the whole army—those in
On this occasion Saul built an altar (1Sa_14:35), that he might offer sacrifice, either by way
of acknowledgment of the victory they had obtained or by the way of atonement for the sin
they had been guilty of. The same was the first altar that he built, and perhaps the rolling of
the great stone to kill the beasts on reminded him of converting it into an altar, else he would
not have thought of it. Saul was turning aside from God, and yet now he began to build altars,
being most zealous (as many are) for the form of godliness when he was denying the power
of it. See Hos_8:14, Israel has forgotten his Maker, and buildeth temples. Some read it, He
began to build that altar; he laid the first stone, but was so hasty to pursue his victory that he
could not stay to finish it.the camp and field, and those in
the outposts and raiding parties—and the
ground shook. It was a panic sent by God.[a]
56

57. BARNES, "The earth quaked - This naturally increased the panic to the utmost.
Compare 1Sa_7:10; Jos_10:11; Psa_114:4.
CLARKE, "There was trembling in the host - They were terrified and panic-struck; the
people in general round about, those in the garrison, the spoilers, and the whole country, were
struck with terror; the commotion was universal and most extraordinary. The trembling of the
earth is probably not to be taken literally, but as a metaphor for a great commotion in the
country, though God might have interposed in an extraordinary manner, and produced a real
earthquake; but their being panic-struck was sufficient to produce all the requisite confusion
and dismay.
GILL, "And there was trembling in the host in the field,.... Belonging to Michmash,
where the army lay encamped:
and among all the people; the inhabitants of Michmash, or that attended the army, and
furnished them with provisions, trafficking with them; the common people, as distinguished
from the soldiers:
the garrison; those that were in it, who did not sally out, but perceiving a great slaughter
made of their outer scouts, were seized with a panic:
and the spoilers they also trembled; who had been about the country, ravaging and
plundering it, and were returned with their booty; see 1Sa_13:17.
and the earth quaked; the inhabitants of it thereabout, or the earth itself literally; a real
earthquake was caused at the same time, which increased the terror:
so that it was a very great trembling; both with respect to the numbers that were affected
with it throughout the camp and garrison, and the causes of it; the terrible apprehension they
had of a large army just ready to rush upon them; the earth quaking and opening in various
places, threatening to swallow them up; and perhaps suspicions of treachery among
themselves, they consisting of various nations, and some among them Hebrews; hence they
fell upon and slew one another, 1Sa_14:20, or "a trembling of God" (u); either in the same
sense to which we translate it, as cedars of God, flame of God, &c. that is, large and great
ones; or which came from God; it was he that sent this trembling among them, struck their
minds with fear and dread, so that they were in the utmost consternation, and knew not what
to do, nor which way to take, and had no heart to oppose the enemy, and defend themselves.
K&D, "1Sa_14:15
And there arose a terror in the camp upon the field (i.e., in the principal camp) as well as
among all the people (of the advanced outpost of the Philistines); the garrison (i.e., the army
that was encamped at Michmash), and the spoilers, they also trembled, and the earth quaked,
sc., with the noise and tumult of the frightened foe; “and it grew into a trembling of God,”
i.e., a supernatural terror miraculously infused by God into the Philistines. The subject to the
57

58. last ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ ְ‫ַתּ‬‫ו‬ is either ‫ה‬ָ‫ד‬ ָ‫ֲר‬‫ח‬, the alarm in the camp, or all that has been mentioned before,
i.e., the alarm with the noise and tumult that sprang out of it.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:15
Trembling. I.e. "terror," "fright." In the host. Hebrew, "in the camp," i.e. the main
camp at Michmash, contrasted with the field, i.e. the open country, in which the
soldiers were foraging for supplies. The people. I.e. the camp followers, as opposed
to the soldiers. All these were terrified by the garrison rushing down the pass, with
tidings of the attack magnified by their fears, and who communicated the alarm to
the spoilers, who, having now for a fortnight met with no resistance, had probably
discontinued all measures of precaution. The earth quaked. This may be taken
literally, but is more probably a poetical description of the widespread terror and
confusion which prevailed far and near. So it was a very great trembling.
Literally, "and it became a terror of God;" but the name of the deity (Elohim, not
Jehovah) is constantly used in Hebrew to express vastness.
WHEDON, " 15. Trembling — Fear, consternation, and horror.
The earth quaked — Because of the vast multitude rushing to and fro, and
beating one another down. Perhaps, also, an earthquake.
A very great trembling — Rather, as the margin, a trembling of God; a
supernatural terror infused by God into the hearts of the Philistines,
WHEDON, " (15) And there was trembling in the host.—The rest of the outpost
garrison, panic-stricken, escaped to the other camp of the main body of the host,
spreading dismay as they fled.
And the earth quaked . . .—To add to the dire confusion, an earthquake was felt,
which completed the discomfiture of the Philistines; they perceived that some
Divine power was fighting against them, and all the stories of the unseen Helper
of the Hebrews would flash across their minds. Some would explain the
earthquake as a poetical description of the extreme terror and confusion which
prevailed far and near, but the literal meaning is far the best. The Eternal fought
for Jonathan and Israel that day, and the powers of nature were summoned to
the young hero’s aid, as they had been before, when Pharaoh pursued the people
at the Red Sea (Exodus 14:26-27), as when Joshua fought the Canaanites at
Beth-horon (Joshua 10:11), and as when Barak smote Sisera at Kishon (Judges
5:21).
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:15. The consequence of this bold deed: panic fear among
the Philistines. The success of Jonathan’s deed and this consequence are to be
explained by supposing that the outposts of the Philistines did not think it
possible that the two men could get up, and, when they did, feared that a body of
Israelites were behind them, since they could not see down the steep declivity.
58

59. The camp of the field [Heb.: in the camp (or host) in the field—Tr.] is the whole
camp of the Philistines; the terror, which had seized all the people of the
outposts, now took possession of the principal camp also. The spoilers also, the
body of plunderers, trembled. There are many examples in military history of
the contagious power of such fright, extending from a few widely out. And the
earth quaked is not to be understood of an earthquake, but of the trembling of
the ground under the fearful uproar of the Philistines.—And became a terror of
God. The phrase “and became” refers to the before-described disaster of the
Philistines, all this grew into a “terror of God,” that Isaiah, the Philistines
recognized herein a mighty help of the God of Israel, by which they had been
thrown into this terror. [The natural rendering is “the earth quaked and became
a terror of God,” that Isaiah, the trembling earth became the sign of the wrathful
intervention of God (comp. Vulg.); a miraculous earthquake seems to be here
described. Others regard the divine name as a superlative addition, and render
“a great (a panic) terror” (Gesen, al.) like “cedars of God” Psalm 80:11, but this
is not probable in this prose narrative.—Tr.]
PETT, " YHWH Brings About The Defeat Of The Philistines (1 Samuel
14:15-23).
We must not underestimate the beliefs of ancient peoples in omens. This comes
out in that regularly battles were decided by champions being selected from both
sides, with the winner reducing the other side to pure terror as they recognised
that the gods were against them. We have an example of this later in the case of
Goliath in 1 Samuel 17. Thus this defeat of the outpost by Jonathan and his
armourbearer would be seen by the Philistines generally as an omen. In those
days that could well be enough to paralyse them with fear and make them
tremble. It may, however, be that we are intended to see that YHWH also
introduced an earthquake in order to shake things up.
1 Samuel 14:15
‘And there was a trembling in the camp, in the field, and among all the people.
The garrison, and the spoilers, they also trembled, and the earth quaked, so
there was an exceeding great trembling.’
It is difficult to be sure here whether the trembling in question indicates an
earthquake, or whether it is simply caused by the impression made on the
Philistines by the news that a number of Israelites (additional to those that they
were watching) had first challenged and then routed their outpost. This news
resulted in a panic which we are no doubt to see as brought on by YHWH
(compare 2 Kings 7:6; Exodus 15:14), and the result was that the Philistines were
soon in turmoil, making the ground tremble. For such panic among the
59

60. superstitious Philistines compare 1 Samuel 17:31. They appear to have laid great
store by omens. Once they received what appeared to be a bad omen the
Philistines appear to have lost all heart. Furthermore the story of what YHWH
had done among them when they had captured the Ark, no doubt considerably
magnified, was probably still remembered among them as a folk tale.
16 Saul’s lookouts at Gibeah in Benjamin saw
the army melting away in all directions.
BARNES, "Multitude - The word is in 1Sa_14:19 (margin) rendered tumult. It
must have the same meaning here. The sentence is obscure and probably corrupt;
perhaps it means, “and behold the tumult! and it went on” (increased) “melting away
and beating down.”
CLARKE, "The watchmen of Saul - Those who were sent out as scouts to
observe the motions of the army.
Melted away - There was no order in the Philistine camp, and the people were
dispersing in all directions. The Vulgate has, Et ecce multitudo prostrata, “And
behold the multitude were prostrate;” many lay dead upon the field, partly by the
sword of Jonathan and his armor-bearer, and partly by the swords of each other,
1Sa_14:20.
GILL, "And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin looked,.... The
city of Gibeah was built on an hill, from where it had its name; and these watchmen
or sentinels of Saul were set by him no doubt in the highest part of it, whereby they
could overlook the army of the Philistines as they lay encamped, and could observe
their motions, and give notice accordingly; and it being now broad day light, could
see the condition they were in:
and, behold, the multitude melted away; like snow gradually, and yet apace;
they could discern their numbers lessening more and more, through the slaughter of
many made among them by one another, and the flight of others; and they went on
beating down one another; they could perceive they fled with great precipitation,
throwing one another down in running, tumbling over one another, and trampling on
60

61. each other which were in their way.
HENRY, "We have here the prosecution and improvement of the wonderful
advantages which Jonathan and his armour-bearer gained against the Philistines.
I. The Philistines were, by the power of God, set against one another. They melted
away like snow before the sun, and went on beating down one another (1Sa_14:16),
for (1Sa_14:20) every man's sword was against his fellow. When they fled for fear,
instead of turning back upon those that chased them, they reckoned those only their
enemies that stood in their way, and treated them accordingly. The Philistines were
very secure, because all the swords and spears were in their hands. Israel had none
except what Saul and Jonathan had. But now God showed them the folly of that
confidence, by making their own swords and spears the instruments of their own
destruction, and more fatal in their own hands than if they had been in the hands of
Israel. See the like done, Jdg_7:22; 2Ch_20:23.
II. The Israelites were hereby animated against them.
1. Notice was soon taken of it by the watchmen of Saul, those that stood sentinel at
Gibeah, 1Sa_14:16. They were aware that the host of the enemy was in great
confusion, and that a great slaughter was made among them, and yet, upon search,
they found none of their own forces absent, but only Jonathan and his servant (1Sa_
14:17), which no doubt greatly animated them, and assured them that it could be no
other than the Lord's doing, when there was no more of man's doing than what those
two could do against a great host.
JAMISON, "the watchmen of Saul ... looked — The wild disorder in the
enemies’ camp was described and the noise of dismay heard on the heights of
Gibeah.
COFFMAN, "SAUL AND OTHERS AID IN ROUTING THE PHILISTINES
"And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin looked; and behold, the
multitude was surging hither and thither. Then Saul said to the people who were
with him, "Number, and see who has gone from us." And when they had
numbered, behold, Jonathan and his armor-bearer were not there. And Saul said
to Ahijah, "Bring hither the ark of God." For the ark of God at that time went
with the people of Israel. And while Saul was talking to the priest, the tumult in
the camp of the Philistines increased more and more; and Saul said to the priest,
"Withdraw your hand." Then Saul and all the people who were with him rallied
and went into the battle; and behold, every man's sword was against his fellow,
and there was very great confusion. Now the Hebrews who had been with the
Philistines before that time and had gone up with them into the camp, even they
also turned to be with the Israelites who were with Saul and Jonathan. Likewise,
when all the men of Israel who had hid themselves in the hill country of Ephraim
heard that the Philistines were fleeing, they too followed hard after them in the
battle. So the Lord delivered Israel that day; and the battle passed beyond
61

62. Bethaven."
"Bring hither the ark of God" (1 Samuel 14:18). The Septuagint (LXX) in this
place reads "the ephod" instead of the "the ark of God," and some scholars
prefer that reading. It appears to us that Willis is correct in his observation that,
"Saul's bringing the ark from Kiriath-jearim to Gibeah in a time of crisis is no
more out of harmony with the statements in 1 Samuel 7:2 and in 2 Samuel 6:2
than David's taking the ark out of the tent he had made for it (2 Samuel 6:17), so
that it could accompany Joab and his army in the siege and conquest of Rabbah
(2 Samuel 11:11)."[15]
"Withdraw your hand" (1 Samuel 14:19). Saul was here in the process of
making an inquiry of the divine will; but he rashly decided that he did not need
any word from God, rallied his troops and joined the battle. "Had he now
waited, he doubtless would have avoided the errors into which he promptly
fell."[16]
"The Hebrews who had been with the Philistines" (1 Samuel 14:21). When the
Israelites forsook Saul and left him with only 600 men, this verse indicates that
large numbers of them had joined the Philistines; but when it was evident that
Israel was winning a great victory, they promptly changed sides again and
turned against the Philistines. Also, all of those Israelites who had been hiding in
the holes, caves, cisterns, etc., poured out of their hiding places and joined in the
pursuit of the enemy.
"The battle passed beyond Bethaven" (1 Samuel 14:23). Perhaps due to
uncertainties in the text, some scholars would change the name of this place; but
Porter stated that, "Some prefer Beth-horon or Bethel, but certainty is
impossible."[17]
WHEDON, " 16. The watchmen of Saul — Who were stationed where they could
observe all the movements of the Philistine army.
In Gibeah — We are not to suppose that all the watchmen here referred to were
stationed in one spot, but that they were placed on different heights north and
northeast of Gibeah; and, being sent out from Saul’s headquarters, they there
made their reports. So we need not alter the reading Gibeah.
62

63. The multitude melted away — Dissolved, and perished by killing one another.
Their swords were turned against each other, (1 Samuel 14:20,) for Jehovah
interposed as in the days of Gideon, (Judges 7:22,) and set his seal to the faith of
the youthful hero Jonathan.
They went on beating down one another — This, probably, gives the best sense
of the Hebrew, ‫והלם‬ ˂‫יל‬‫,ו‬ and it (that is, the multitude) went and smote. Gesenius
renders: “They went on and were scattered, that is, dispersed themselves more
and more.” Others, with the Septuagint, take ‫הלם‬ as an adverb, hither, and,
supplying its correlate, render, went hither and thither.
ELLICOTT, " (16) And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin
looked . . .—The distance between the outposts of the little Israelite army and the
vast Philistine host was only about two miles, but a deep ravine or chasm lay
between them. The watchmen of Saul were well able to see the scene of dire
confusion in the outposts, a confusion which they could discern was rapidly
spreading through the more distant camp of the main body.
The Hebrew words, vay‫ח‬leh vahălom, in the last clause of the verse, have been
variously rendered; the Rabbinical interpretation is the best: “magis magisque
pangebatur”—“were more and more broken up.” This takes hălom as an
infinitive absolute. The LXX. considers this word an adverb, and translates
enthen hai enthen, hither and thither, and does not attempt to give any rendering
for vay‫ח‬leh.
HAWKER, "Verse 16-17
(16) ¶ And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin looked; and, behold, the
multitude melted away, and they went on beating down one another. (17) Then
said Saul unto the people that were with him, Number now, and see who is gone
from us. And when they had numbered, behold, Jonathan and his armourbearer
were not there.
Probably, the watchmen upon the walls were enabled by somewhat more than
mere outward discovery, to discern the hand of the Lord in this. The history of
Israel furnished out instances of divine interposition, for the delivery of his
people. Watchmen upon the walls of Zion, like the ministers of the gospel of
Jesus, are supposed, by prayer, to keep up communication with heaven. Isaiah
62:6-7.
63

64. BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:16-17. Behold the multitude melted away — Were
discomfited and scattered; so that fewer and fewer were seen in a company
together. They went on beating down one another — Not being able in this
confusion to distinguish their friends from their enemies. Then said Saul,
Number now, &c. — Saul, upon the report of the watchmen concerning the
seeming confusion in the army of the Philistines, concluded that some of his
people had gone out unknown, and attacked them. He therefore ordered them to
be numbered, to see who were missing.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:16. Gibeah of Benjamin is not the present Jeba (Then.),
which rather answers to Geba. Though the former was farther from the
Philistine camp, we need not be surprised that Saul’s watchmen could see
thither, since from their elevated position they could with sharp eyes see what
was going on at that distance (nearly five Eng. miles), or, if not, could go
nearer.—And behold, the multitude or the tumult—though ‫מוֹן‬ַ‫ה‬ may here mean
“multitude” (Gesen. s. v.), it is better to render “tumult,” since the narrator has
in his eye the crowd thrown into confusion by Jonathan’s attack. This
consideration sets aside one of Thenius’ reasons for here also following the free
translation of the Sept.;—dispersed hither and thither. It is better to supply
“hither” )‫ים‬‫ֲל‬‫ה‬ before ‫ים‬‫ֲל‬‫ה‬ַ‫ו‬), which might easily have fallen out from
homœophony; or (with the Rabb. and Ges.) read the Inf. Abs. and render “were
more and more broken up.” [For another view see “Text. and Grammat.”—Tr.]
1 Samuel 14:17. Saul could explain the affair only as an Israelitish attack. The
numbering ordered by him showed that Jonathan and his armor-bearer were
missing.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:16
‘And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin looked, and, behold, the host
of men melted away, and they went hither and thither.’
The result was that before the astonished eyes of Saul’s watchmen in Gibeah the
Philistine army ‘melted away’ and ‘went on beating down’ or ‘went hither and
thither’. They were in total panic. ‘Went on beating down’ may suggest that in
their panic the Philistines were striking each other down (compare 1 Samuel
14:20).
K&D, "
Flight and defeat of the Philistines. - 1Sa_14:16. The spies of Saul at Gibeah saw how the
multitude (in the camp of the Philistines) melted away and was beaten more and more. The
words ‫ֲ˄ם‬‫ה‬ַ‫ו‬ ˂ֶ‫ל‬ֵ‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ are obscure. The Rabbins are unanimous in adopting the explanation
magis magisque frangebatur, and have therefore probably taken ‫ֲ˄ם‬‫ה‬ as an inf. absol.
‫˄ום‬ָ‫,ה‬ and interpreted ‫ַם‬‫ל‬ָ‫ה‬ according to Jdg_5:26. This was also the case with the
Chaldee; and Gesenius (Thes. p. 383) has adopted the same rendering, except that he
has taken ‫ַם‬‫ל‬ָ‫ה‬ in the sense of dissolutus, dissipatus est. Others take ‫ֲ˄ום‬‫ה‬ as adverbial
(“and thither”), and supply the correlate ‫ֲ˄ם‬‫ה‬ (hither), so as to bring out the meaning
64

65. “hither and thither.” Thus the lxx render it ἔνθεν καὶ ἔνθεν, but they have not
translated ˂ֶ‫ל‬ֵ‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ at all.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:16
The watchmen, etc. Condor says (’Tent Work,’ 2:115), "The watchmen of Saul in
Gibeah of Benjamin must have seen dearly across the chasm the extraordinary
conflict of two men against a host, as the ’multitude melted away, and they went on
beating down one another.’ The noise in the host was also, no doubt, clearly heard at
the distance of only two miles, and the army would have crossed the passage with
comparatively little difficulty by the narrow path which leads down direct from Geba
to Michmash, west of the Philistine camp. Thence the pursuit was towards Bethel,
across the watershed, and headlong down the steep descent of Aijalon—that same
pass where the first great victory of Joshua had been gained, and where the valiant
Judas was once more, in later times, to drive back the enemies of Israel to the
plains." The multitude. The Hebrew is, "And behold the tumult was reeling and
going … and thither." Of course hither has dropped out of the text before and thither.
The Septuagint and Vulgate both read "hither and thither." Tumult means the din
made by a confused mass of people, and so the crowd itself. Melted away does not
give the exact meaning. The Philistines were not dispersing, but were reeling, moving
to and fro purposeless, and in confusion. It may mean, however, to shake or melt
with terror, as in Isa_14:31, where it is rendered art dissolved.
17 Then Saul said to the men who were with
him, “Muster the forces and see who has left
us.” When they did, it was Jonathan and his
armor-bearer who were not there.
CLARKE, "Number now - Saul perceived that the Philistines were routed, but
could not tell by what means; supposing that it must be by some of his own troops,
he called a muster to see who and how many were absent.
GILL, "Then said Saul unto the people that were with him,.... To some of
the officers, particularly the muster master:
65

66. number now, and see who is gone from us: for he concluded that this agitation
and confusion in the host of the Philistines were occasioned by an enterprise of some
of his men, who by some stratagem or another had thrown them into this disorder:
and when they had numbered: which was soon done, being but six hundred men
in all:
behold, Jonathan and his armourbearer were not there; from whence it
might be inferred, that this commotion the Philistines were in was occasioned by an
onset of theirs on the outer guards or sentinels of their garrison or army, which had
alarmed them.
JAMISON, "Then said Saul unto the people that were with him,
Number now, and see who is gone from us — The idea occurred to him that it
might be some daring adventurer belonging to his own little troop, and it would be
easy to discover him.
K&D, "1Sa_14:17
Saul conjectured at once that the excitement in the camp of the Philistines was
occasioned by an attack made by Israelitish warriors, and therefore commanded the
people: ‫ָא‬‫נ‬‫דוּ־‬ְ‫ק‬ ִ‫,פּ‬ “Muster (number) now, and see who has gone away from us;” and
“Jonathan and his armour-bearer were not there,” i.e., they were missing.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:17, 1Sa_14:18
Number now. On hearing from the watchmen that fighting was seen on the other
side of the ravine, Saul commands the roll to be called, that he may learn who has
made the attack, and finds only his son and the armour bearer missing. Uncertain
what their absence might mean, he said unto Ahiah, Bring hither the ark of
God. The Syriac, Vulgate, and Chaldee support this reading, but the Septuagint has
ephod, and there can be no doubt that this is the right reading; for the verb rendered.
Bring hither is never used of the ark, but only of the ephod; nor was the ark used for
making inquiry of God, but the ephod with the breastplate inserted in it. The rest of
the verse is a gloss added by some scribe struck at this strange mention of the ark,
which we know was still at Kirjath-jearim. It is itself corrupt and ungrammatical,
being, "For the ark of God was in that day and the children of Israel." Still both the
reading ark and the gloss are very ancient, being found in the versions, except the
Septuagint, as above.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:17. Then said Saul—number now, &c.— Though, Saul
must easily have missed Jonathan, he could not suppose that he would fall upon
the Philistines without a number of resolute persons to assist him. But when he
found that his armour-bearer alone attended him, desirous to enquire into the
reason of the matter, he consults with the high-priest, (1 Samuel 14:18.) ordering
him to bring the ark of God (or, rather as the LXX have it, the ephod, which
appears to be the true reading; see Houbigant's note). But while he was doing so,
the tumult increasing, and it being evident that the Philistines were routed, Saul
66

67. found it necessary to lose no longer time, but hasted immediately to make the
best of this wonderful victory, 1 Samuel 14:20. Josephus assures us, that Saul did
not attempt any thing upon this occasion till Ahiah promised him victory in the
name of the Lord.
PETT,"1 Samuel 14:17
‘Then Saul said to the people who were with him, “Muster now, and see who has
gone from us.” And when they had mustered, behold, Jonathan and his
armourbearer were not there.”
When Saul heard the news of the Philistine panic he recognised something of
what must have happened (he had been fighting Philistines for years) and he
called for a muster in order to discover which of his men were no longer there.
The result of the muster was that they discovered that Jonathan and his
armourbearer were missing. As we know from verse 1, no one knew that they
had gone.
18 Saul said to Ahijah, “Bring the ark of God.”
(At that time it was with the Israelites.)[b]
BARNES, "For “the ark,” some read “the ephod,” owing to the improbability of
the ark being with Saul at this time, and from the verb “Bring hither” being never
applied to the ark, but regularly to the ephod 1Sa_23:9; 1Sa_30:7. Moreover, not the
ark, but the ephod with Urim and Thummim, was the proper instrument for
inquiring of the Lord. If, however, the Hebrew text is correct, they must have brought
the ark into Saul’s camp from Kirjath-jearim 1 Sam. 7, possibly to be safe from the
Philistines.
CLARKE, "Bring hither the ark of God - He wished to inquire what use he
should make of the present favorable circumstances, and to proceed in the business
as God should direct.
67

68. GILL, "And Saul said unto Ahiah, bring hither the ark of the Lord,.... That
he, the high priest, might put on the ephod, with the Urim and Thummim, and
inquire by them of the Lord before it, concerning the affair of Jonathan, what he had
done, and the agitation that was in the host of the Philistines; so the Septuagint
version, "bring the ephod", of which, with the Urim and Thummim, Kimchi
interprets it; and ask, whether it was right for him to go out unto them, or continue
where he was:
for the ark of God was at that time with the children of Israel; and so it
always was, except a few months it was in the hands of the Philistines; so it was at
Kirjathjearim, where it was last. Jarchi thinks a word is wanting, and to be supplied
thus,"the ark of God was there at that time with the children of Israel,''at Gibeah;
perhaps it might be removed first to Gilgal, when Saul and Samuel were there, and
when they came to Gibeah it was brought along with them; but the last words may be
considered as a distinct clause, and, literally tendered, are, "and the children of
Israel": which Abarbinel accounts for thus, and Saul said this:
bring hither the ark of the Lord; and the children of Israel said so likewise,
joined with him in it: though the ark had been with Saul, and the people, some time,
and also the high priest, yet we do not find that Saul in all his straits and difficulties
consulted the Lord before; but perceiving something extraordinary was doing, and
might turn to his advantage, he begins to inquire.
HENRY, ". Saul began to enquire of God, but soon desisted. His spirit had not
come down so far as to allow him to consult Samuel, though, it is probable, he was
near him; for we read (1Sa_13:15) that he had come to Gibeah of Benjamin; but he
called for the ark (1Sa_14:18), desiring to know whether it would be safe for him to
attack the Philistines, upon the disorder they perceived them to be in. Many will
consult God about their safety that would never consult him about their duty. But,
perceiving by his scouts that the noise in the enemy's camp increased, he
commanded the priest that officiated to break off abruptly: “Withdraw thy hand
(1Sa_14:19), consult no more, wait no longer for an answer.” He was very unwise
indeed if (as some think) he forbade him to lift up his hands in prayer; for when
Joshua was actually engaged with Amalek Moses continued still to lift up his hands.
It is rather a prohibition to his enquiring of the Lord, either, (1.) Because now he
thought he did not need an answer, the case was plain enough. And yet the more
evident it was that God did all the more reason he had to enquire whether he would
give him leave to do any thing. Or, (2.) Because now he would not stay for it; he was
in such haste to fight a falling enemy that he would not stay to make and end of his
devotions, nor hear what answer God would give him. A little thing will divert a vain
and carnal mind from religious exercises. He that believeth will not make haste, such
haste as this, nor reckon any business so urgent as not to allow time to take God
along with him.
JAMISON, "Saul said unto Ahiah, Bring hither the ark of God — There is
no evidence that the ark had been brought from Kirjath-jearim. The Septuagint
version is preferable; which, by a slight variation of the text, reads, “the ephod”; that
is, the priestly cape, which the high priest put on when consulting the oracle. That
68

69. this should be at hand is natural, from the presence of Ahiah himself, as well as the
nearness of Nob, where the tabernacle was then situated.
WHEDON, " 18. Bring hither the ark of God — In his excitement and alarm on
finding Jonathan and his armourbearer gone, Saul is about to commit as
grievous a blunder as did the elders of Israel in a former war with the Philistines.
1 Samuel 4:3.
For the ark of God was at that time with the children of Israel — That is, it was
at Kirjath-jearim, (1 Samuel 7:1,) and in the possession of the Israelites, from
whom it had not been taken since its return from the land of the Philistines. The
Hebrew text ‫ישׂראל‬‫י‬‫,ובנ‬ and the children of Israel, gives no sense, and must be an
error of the copyist for ‫י‬‫לבנ‬ or ‫י‬‫,בבנ‬ to or among the children of Israel. This need
not be understood as meaning that the ark was with Saul’s six hundred at
Gibeah, but, as explained above, in the possession of the Israelites. This seems to
us the most satisfactory way of explaining this verse as it stands in the present
Hebrew text. But there are grave reasons for doubting the integrity of this text,
and for adopting the reading of the Septuagint, which has ephod instead of ark.
The ephod, not the ark, was used for inquiring of God, and the expression, bring
hither the ark, is strange in this connexion, but bring hither the ephod is
common. See 1 Samuel 23:9; 1 Samuel 30:7. The Septuagint reads: Bring hither
the ephod, for he (Ahiah) bore the ephod in that day before Israel.
ELLICOTT, " (18) And Saul said unto Ahiah . . .—The LXX. renders here,
“And Saul said to Ahijah, Bring hither the ephod; for he bore the ephod in those
days before the children of Israel.” This is a statement easily to be understood.
Saul was in doubt what to do under the present emergency. Should he—seeing
the panic that was evidently increasing in the Philistine camp, and knowing
nothing of the cause, only that his son and the armour-bearer were missing—
should he risk his little force, and, leaving his strong position, attack that great
host of apparently panic-stricken enemies? So he sent for the high priest Ahijah,
and bade him consult the Urim and Thummim in his ephod.
But the Hebrew and all the versions read as in our English Version, “Bring
hither the Ark of God” What does this mean? Was the Ark, then, with that little
band of Saul? We never before, or after, find the slightest hint that the sacred
coffer ever left the “city of woods” (Kiriath-yearim) until David bore it to Zion.
Then, again, the word preceding “Bring hither” is never used in connection with
the Ark. No question or oracle could be asked of the Ark or by the Ark. The
Urim and Thummim, whatever these mysterious objects were alone were used to
give answers to questions solemnly asked by king and people, and this Urim and
69

70. Thummim were connected, not with the Ark, but with the high-priestly ephod.
On the whole, the reading of the LXX. probably represents the original Hebrew.
The present Hebrew text, with the word “Ark,” is, however, clearly of extreme
antiquity; the second part of the verse is most likely an explanatory gloss of some
ancient scribe. Josephus’ account of this transaction shows us that he had before
him a text corresponding to the LXX. His words are, “He bid the priest take the
garment of his high priesthood and prophesy” (Antiq., 6 § 3). Maurer prefers the
present Hebrew text, for he says, At that supreme moment of danger Saul
wanted not the advice of an oracle, but rather the help and encouragement which
the presence of the sacred Ark would give to his handful of soldiers. But this
would rather degrade Saul to the level of the superstitious Hophni and Phinehas,
the wicked sons of Eli. who, it will be remembered, exposed and lost the sacred
Ark in the fatal battle in which they perished. Saul, with all his faults, was a far
nobler type of man than those profligate, though brave, priests.
HAWKER, "Verse 18-19
(18) And Saul said unto Ahiah, Bring hither the ark of God. For the ark of God
was at that time with the children of Israel. (19) And it came to pass, while Saul
talked unto the priest, that the noise that was in the host of the Philistines went
on and increased: and Saul said unto the priest, Withdraw thine hand.
I cannot omit remarking to the Reader, in the history of Saul, how alike,
unmoved by affliction or prosperity, this man's heart appears to have been
towards the Lord. He set up indeed an enquiry, in commanding the priest to
bring the ark; but receiving further conviction that the army of the Philistines
were in distress, whatever the cause was which induced it, he waits not for
direction from the Lord. Alas! to what a sad degree of degeneracy is the heart
capable of ripening void of grace!
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:18-19. Saul said, Bring hither the ark of God — Finding
only Jonathan and his armour-bearer missing, Saul did not know what to
conclude, and therefore called in all haste for Ahiah the priest, to inquire of the
Lord concerning it, and in what manner he and the people with him were to act.
But before the priest had performed his office, the rout and flight of the
Philistines were perceived so plainly that Saul called to the priest to desist, or, as
it is expressed, to withdraw his hand, as there was no occasion for further
inquiry, it being plain what the matter was, and what they had to do.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:18. Bring hither the ark of God. A change of text (Keil)
after the Sept. so as to read: “Bring the ephod, for he wore the ephod at that time
before Israel,” on the ground that the ark had been placed in Kirjath-jearim,
and was not used in asking questions of God, is suspicious, because the ark,
70

71. which was thought to be connected with God’s presence, was often taken along
to war. Comp. 1 Samuel 4:4-5; 2 Samuel 11:11; 2 Samuel 15:24-25. Why could
they not, in accordance with this established custom, have taken it from its usual
place in decisive battles, and afterwards carried it back? But it is not said that
Saul wished to inquire of God at the ark. He wished first to advance with it
against the enemy. But, when he saw that the tumult increased in their camp,
and that they were already as good as beaten, he desisted.[FN8] [If Saul had not
wished to inquire of God by the ark, he would not have said “bring hither,” (but
“carry forward”), nor “withdraw thy hand.” It seems better, therefore, to read
ephod, whether we adopt the whole reading of the Sept. or not.—Tr.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:18
‘And Saul said to Ahijah, “Bring here the ark of God.” For the ark of God was
at that time with the children of Israel.’
In his excitement Saul then called to Ahijah to bring there the ark of God. His
aim was probably in order for it to lead them into battle (compare 1 Samuel
4:4-5; Numbers 10:35-36; Joshua 3:3), so as to increase the panic among the
Philistines. He would know that it had led Israel through the wilderness, and in
his present state he wanted a talisman on his side. Probably not realising it he
was, by this, linking himself with the defeated army in 1 Samuel 14:4. It may well
be that he was not aware that it was no longer in the Tabernacle, for his
relationship with Ahijah appears to be a new one, and only the priests may have
been sure where it was. Or, being desperate to spur YHWH to act for him he
may have had in mind that it be brought from its quiet backwater. But it is quite
likely that he did not know the full details of the situation, probably simply
knowing that it was ‘somewhere’ and assuming that Ahijah could lay his hands
on it. The writer then explains that it was in fact at that time with the children of
Israel, but by that he was probably simply reminding his readers that it had been
returned by the Philistines.
There is something very ominous about this call for the Ark, for we have heard it
before, when it was by a God-rejected Israel (1 Samuel 4:3). It is thus being made
clear to us that there is in the heart of Saul something of the foolishness of those
earlier people.
LXX changes ‘Ark’ to ‘ephod’ but the Hebrew texts and most of the other
versions do not support the change. The view of LXX was that Saul was wanting
to consult YHWH through the ephod. But it is quite possible that someone who
had been busy fighting all his life and had previously depended on Samuel as a
71

72. kind of talisman, should look for an equally powerful replacement and saw it in
terms of the Ark, on which he expected his new priest to be able to lay his hands.
(And Kiriath-yearim was not all that far from Michmash). The point is that
without Samuel’s guidance and help Saul was almost as superstitious as the
Philistines.
K&D, "1Sa_14:18
Saul therefore resolved to ask God, through the priest Ahiah, what he should do;
whether he should go out with his army against the Philistines or no. But whilst he
was talking with the priest, the tumult in the camp of the Philistines became greater
and greater, so that he saw from that what ought to be done under the circumstances,
and stopped the priest's inquiring of God, and set out with his people without delay.
We are struck, however, with the expression in 1Sa_14:18, “Bring hither the ark of
God,” and the explanation which follows, “for the ark of God was at that time with
the children of Israel,” inasmuch as the ark was then deposited at Kirjath-jearim, and
it is a very improbable thing that it should have been in the little camp of Saul.
Moreover, in other cases where the high priest is spoken of as inquiring the will of
God, there is no mention made of the ark, but only of the ephod, the high priest's
shoulder-dress, upon which there were fastened the Urim and Thummim, through
which inquiry was made of God. And in addition to this, the verb ‫ה‬ ָ‫ישׁ‬ִ‫גּ‬ַ‫ה‬ is not really
applicable to the ark, which was not an object that could be carried about at will;
whereas this verb is the current expression used to signify the fetching of the ephod
(vid., 1Sa_23:9; 1Sa_30:7). All these circumstances render the correctness of the
Masoretic text extremely doubtful, notwithstanding the fact that the Chaldee, the
Syriac, and Arabic, and the Vulgate support it, and recommend rather the reading
adopted by the lxx, προσάγαγε τὸ Ἐφούδ· ὅτι αὐτὸς ἦρεν τὸ Ἐφοὺδ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ
ἐκείνῃ ἐνώπιον Ἰσραήλ, which would give as the Hebrew text, ‫ל‬ ֵ‫א‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫שׂ‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫פ‬ִ‫ל‬ ‫הוּא‬ַ‫ה‬ ‫ום‬ֹ‫יּ‬ַ‫בּ‬ ‫וד‬ֹ‫פ‬ ֵ‫א‬ָ‫ה‬
‫א‬ ֵ‫שׂ‬ֹ‫נ‬ ‫הוּא‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫כּ‬ ‫וד‬ֹ‫פ‬ ֵ‫א‬ָ‫ה‬ ‫ה‬ ָ‫ישׁ‬ִ‫גּ‬ַ‫.ה‬ In any case, ְ‫וב‬'‫ל‬ ֵ‫א‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫שׂ‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ני‬@ at the end of the verse should be read ‫שׂ‬ִ‫י‬
‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫ב‬ִ‫ל‬ or ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫פ‬ִ‫,ל‬ since ‫וּ‬ gives no sense at all.
19 While Saul was talking to the priest, the
tumult in the Philistine camp increased more
and more. So Saul said to the priest, “Withdraw
your hand.”
72

73. BARNES, "Withdraw thine hand - i. e., “Desist from what thou art about.”
Saul in his impatience to join the battle would not wait for the answer from God,
which he had desired Ahijah to inquire for; just as later 1Sa_14:35 he would not wait
to finish the altar which he had begun to build. Had he now waited he would
doubtless have avoided the error into which he fell.
CLARKE, "While Saul talked unto the priest - Before he had made an end of
consulting him, the increasing noise of the panic-struck Philistines called his
attention; and finding there was no time to lose, he immediately collected his men
and fell on them.
GILL, "And it came to pass, while Saul talked with the priest,.... With Ahiah
about bringing the ark, and inquiring before it:
that the noise that was in the host of the Philistines went on, and
increased; the shrieks and cries of those that were beat down and trampled upon,
and were bruised and wounded; and indeed the cry of the whole host, being alarmed
with the enemy being upon them, or among them; and it seems that not only their
motions could be seen, but the noise of them heard at this distance:
and Saul said unto the priest, withdraw thine hand; from putting on the
ephod, or opening the breastplate of Urim and Thummim, or placing the ark in a
proper position, to inquire before it, or from lifting up both hands in prayer for
direction. Saul by the noise he heard concluded the army of the Philistines was
routed, and therefore there was no need to consult the Lord, and he had no leisure
for it; no time was to be lost, the advantage was to be taken directly, and the enemy
pursued, to complete the victory. The Jews look upon this as a piece of profaneness
in Saul, as no doubt it was, and reckon it one of the sins for which his kingdom was
not prolonged (o).
JAMISON, "Withdraw thine hand — The priest, invested with the ephod,
prayed with raised and extended hands. Saul perceiving that the opportunity was
inviting, and that God appeared to have sufficiently declared in favor of His people,
requested the priest to cease, that they might immediately join in the contest. The
season for consultation was past - the time for prompt action was come.
K&D, "1Sa_14:19
“It increased more and more;” lit. increasing and becoming greater. The subject ‫וגו‬
‫ון‬ֹ‫מ‬ָ‫ה‬ֶ‫ה‬ְ‫ו‬ is placed absolutely at the head, so that the verb ˂ֶ‫ל‬ֵ‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ brev eh is appended in the
form of an apodosis. ˃ ְ‫ָד‬‫י‬ ‫ף‬ֹ‫ס‬ֱ‫א‬, “draw thy hand in” (back); i.e., leave off now.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:19
Withdraw thine hand. Saul, impatient of delay, cannot wait till the will of God is
made known to him. There would have been no real loss of time, and he might have
73

74. been saved from the errors which marred the happiness of the deliverance. But this
precipitancy very well shows the state of Saul’s mind.
SBC, "And it came to pass, while Saul talked with the priest,.... With Ahiah
about bringing the ark, and inquiring before it:
that the noise that was in the host of the Philistines went on, and
increased; the shrieks and cries of those that were beat down and trampled upon,
and were bruised and wounded; and indeed the cry of the whole host, being alarmed
with the enemy being upon them, or among them; and it seems that not only their
motions could be seen, but the noise of them heard at this distance:
and Saul said unto the priest, withdraw thine hand; from putting on the
ephod, or opening the breastplate of Urim and Thummim, or placing the ark in a
proper position, to inquire before it, or from lifting up both hands in prayer for
direction. Saul by the noise he heard concluded the army of the Philistines was
routed, and therefore there was no need to consult the Lord, and he had no leisure
for it; no time was to be lost, the advantage was to be taken directly, and the enemy
pursued, to complete the victory. The Jews look upon this as a piece of profaneness
in Saul, as no doubt it was, and reckon it one of the sins for which his kingdom was
not prolonged (o).
ELLICOTT, "(19) Withdraw thine hand.—The instinct of the general, as we
should expect from the character of Saul, soon got the better of his first desire
for some Divine guidance. His watchful eye saw that the confusion in the
Philistine camp was increasing; now was the moment for his little compact force
to throw itself into the mel‫י‬e; so he at once bids Ahijah, the priest of the Lord, to
put up the Urim and Thummim, and no longer to seek higher counsel, for the
hour was come to fight rather than to pray. This has been the general
interpretation of Saul’s action here. Wordsworth quotes Bishop Andrewes,
saying, “There are some who with Saul will call for the Ark, and will presently
cry ‘Away with it !’ that is, will begin their prayers, and break them off in the
midst on every occasion.” And Bishop Hall: “Saul will consult the Ark;
hypocrites, when they have leisure, will perhaps be holy. But when the tumult
was aroused, Saul’s piety decreased. ‘Withdraw thine hand,’ he said; the Ark
must give place to arms.’”
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:19. And the tumult. … and it increased more and more is
a broken construction, the subject being first put absolutely, and the predicate-
sentence put as relative-sentence. Withdraw thy hand; that Isaiah, from bringing
the ark = desist. Instead ( 1 Samuel 14:20) of “were assembled, called together”
(Niph.), read with Sept. (Alex.), Vulg, Syr, Arab, “shouted” (Qal), for there was
no need of an assembly, as they were already there (Then.), and besides, what is
the meaning of “and Saul was called together and all the people,” since Saul was
the assembler? Translate: And Saul and all the people shouted (raised the war-
cry) and advanced to the battle. From this war-cry of the advancing host under
74

75. Saul that which follows is easily explained. In consequence of the terror thereby
produced, the confusion in the Philistine army was very great. That every man’s
sword was against his fellow in such confusion (comp. Judges 7:22; 2 Chronicles
20:22-23) is explained by what is related in 1 Samuel 14:21-22. There were
Hebrews in the host of the Philistines. By this name, the usual one among foreign
nations, the Philistines called the Israelites in their midst. The Art. (the Hebrews)
refers to the exacter definition in the relative sentence. And the Hebrews were
with the Philistines, as formerly, who had gone up with them to the camp. [It is
better to insert who (‫)אשר‬ after “ Hebrews,” as in Eng. A. V.—Tr.]. Bunsen
supposes that these were prisoners, who had hitherto been compelled to fight
against their countrymen. Or, they may have been levies from the part of the
land which the Philistines held. To render “divided out roundabout among the
Philistines” gives no good sense; the idea of “roundabout” is inappropriate to the
whole situation. It is therefore better to read,[FN9] with Sept, Vulg, Chald, Syr,
Thenius, Buns, “turned.” The otherwise insuperable difficulty in the Infin. thus
vanishes, and we render: “these also turned to be with Israel;” that Isaiah, went
over to Israel. This, of course, they could not do without turning their arms
against their oppressors. In addition to these ( 1 Samuel 14:22) came all the
Israelites who had been in hiding on the mountains of Ephraim; when they
heard of the flight of the Philistines, they too joined in the pursuit.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:19
‘And it came about, while Saul talked to the priest, that the tumult that was in
the camp of the Philistines went on and increased, and Saul said to the priest,
“Withdraw your hand.”
In the end, however, he did not proceed with his request, because as he spoke
with the priest the tumult among the Philistines grew more apparent and Saul
therefore recognised the necessity of seizing the opportunity. The result was that
he told Ahijah not to go ahead with what he had requested, and himself
prepared to mobilise his troops. It is probable that he also sent swift messengers
to the Israelites hiding in the hills. Even this hesitation is probably designed to
bring out his present inadequacy. Without YHWH’s help and guidance he was
nothing.
20 Then Saul and all his men assembled and
75

76. went to the battle. They found the Philistines in
total confusion, striking each other with their
swords.
BARNES, "Assembled themselves - See marg. Many versions give the sense “shouted,”
which is far preferable, and only requires a different punctuation.
GILL, "And Saul, and all the people that were with him, assembled themselves,.... The
six hundred men that were with him, unless we can suppose the 1000 that had been with
Jonathan in Gibeah were here still, see 1Sa_13:2.
and they came to the battle; to the field of battle, the place where the army of the Philistines
had lain encamped:
and, behold, every man's sword was against his fellow; taking one another for Hebrews, or
treacherous and disaffected persons; so that, though the Israelites had neither swords nor
spears, they needed none, for the Philistines destroyed one another with their own swords;
and there was a
very great discomfiture; noise, tumult, confusion, slaughter, and destruction.
HENRY, " He, and all the little force he had, made a vigorous attack upon the enemy;
and all the people were cried together (so the word is, 1Sa_14:20), for want of the silver
trumpets wherewith God appointed them to sound an alarm in the day of battle, Num_10:9.
They summoned them together by shouting, and their number was not so great but that they
might soon be got together. And now they seem bold and brave when the work is done to
their hands. Our Lord Jesus had conquered our spiritual enemies, routed and dispersed them,
so that we are cowards indeed if we will not stand to our arms when it is only to pursue the
victory and to divide the spoil.
JAMISON, "Saul and all the people — All the warriors in the garrison at Gibeah, the
Israelite deserters in the camp of the Philistines, and the fugitives among the mountains of
Ephraim, now all rushed to the pursuit, which was hot and sanguinary.
ELLICOTT, " (20) Assembled themselves.—In the margin of the English
Version we find “were cried together,” that is, “were assembled by the trumpet
call.” The Syriac and Vulg., however, more accurately render the Hebrew
76

77. shouted, that is, raised the war-cry of Israel.
Every man’s sword was against his fellow.—The statement in the next verse (21)
explains this. Profiting by the wild confusion which reigned now throughout the
Philistine host, a portion of their own auxiliaries—unwilling allies, doubtless—
turned their arms against their employers or masters. From this moment no one
in the panic-stricken army could rightly distinguish friend from foe. In such a
scene of confusion the charge of Saul, at the head of his small but well-trained
soldierly band, must have done terrible execution. Shouting the well-known war-
cry of Benjamin, it penetrated wedge-like into the heart of the broken Philistine
host.
HAWKER, "Verses 20-23
(20) And Saul and all the people that were with him assembled themselves, and
they came to the battle: and, behold, every man's sword was against his fellow,
and there was a very great discomfiture. (21) Moreover the Hebrews that were
with the Philistines before that time, which went up with them into the camp
from the country round about, even they also turned to be with the Israelites that
were with Saul and Jonathan. (22) Likewise all the men of Israel which had hid
themselves in mount Ephraim, when they heard that the Philistines fled, even
they also followed hard after them in the battle. (23) So the LORD saved Israel
that day: and the battle passed over unto Bethaven.
The close of this account of the battle, left no room to question, but that this
salvation was of the Lord. How sweet is it to remark in all the spiritual victories
of the Lord's people, that the Lord's arm alone bringeth salvation!
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:20-21. There was a very great discomfiture — Namely,
in the army of the Philistines; which, it is likely, consisted of various nations, and
in the confusion into which they were thrown, they fell upon one another, not
distinguishing friends from enemies. The Hebrews that were with the
Philistines — Having gone with their army, either by constraint, as servants, or
in policy, to gain their favour and protection. They also turned to be with the
Israelites — In the midst of this battle they went over to their own countrymen.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:20
‘And Saul and all the people who were with him were gathered together, and
came to the battle, and, behold, every man’s sword was against his fellow, and
there was a very great discomfiture.’
77

78. Gathering his troops ready for battle Saul advanced on the enemy and came ‘to
the battle’ where it was immediately apparent that they were busy fighting each
other. For there he found huge ‘discomfiture and turmoil’ (compare for the idea
Judges 7:22; 2 Chronicles 20:23). As so often in Israel’s history YHWH had
defeated them almost on His own (with the assistance of a man of faith).
K&D. "1Sa_14:20
“And (i.e., in consequence of the increasing tumult in the enemy's camp) Saul had himself,
and all the people with him, called,” i.e., called together for battle; and when they came to the
war, i.e., to the place of conflict, “behold, there was the sword of the one against the other, a
very great confusion,” in consequence partly of terror, and partly of the circumstance alluded
to in 1Sa_14:21.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:20
Saul and all the people … assembled themselves. Margin, were cried together, i.e.
summoned by trumpet note. The Syriac and Vulgate, however, make the verb active, and
translate, "And Saul and all the people with him shouted and advanced to the battle."
Discomfiture. Rather, "dismay," "consternation," as in 1Sa_5:9.
21 Those Hebrews who had previously been
with the Philistines and had gone up with them
to their camp went over to the Israelites who
were with Saul and Jonathan.
CLARKE, "The Hebrews that were with the Philistines - We may understand such as
they held in bondage, or who were their servants. Instead of Hebrews the Septuagint read, ‫ן‬̔‫י‬
‫,הןץכןי‬ the slaves; from which it is evident that, instead of ‫עברים‬ Ibrim, Hebrews, they
found in their text ‫עבדים‬ abadim, servants. But this reading is not countenanced by
any other version, nor by any MS. yet discovered.
78

79. GILL, "Moreover, the Hebrews that were with the Philistines before that
time,.... Who either were their servants and bondsmen they brought along with
them, or such in whose cities they dwelt, or had taken as they came along, and forced
into their army; or it may be some of them were renegades from the Israelites,
deserters, who for safety and subsistence betook themselves to them as the stronger
party. The Greek version reads,"the servants that were with the Philistines:"
which went up with them into the camp from the country round about;
either willingly or by force; the words, "from the country", are not in the text,
wherefore some observe, as Kimchi and Abarbinel, that this respects their being
round about the camp, and that they were not within it, but without it, that if
possible they might escape fighting against the Israelites:
even they also turned to be with the Israelites that were with Saul and
Jonathan; who were now joined; when they saw the dread and confusion in the
camp of the Philistines, and them destroying one another, and the Israelites
prevailing over them, victorious and pursuing, they took part with them, and assisted
them in completing the victory.
HENRY, " Every Hebrew, even those from whom one would least have expected it,
now turned his hand against the Philistines. (1.) Those that had deserted and gone
over to the enemy, and were among them, now fought against them, 1Sa_14:21. Some
think, they were such as had been taken prisoners by them, and now they were goads
in their sides. It rather seems that they went in to them voluntarily, but, now that
they saw them falling, recovered the hearts of Israelites, and did valiantly for their
country.
K&D, "1Sa_14:21-22
“And the Hebrews were with the Philistines as before (yesterday and the day
before yesterday), who had come along with them in the camp round about; they
also came over to Israel, which was with Saul and Jonathan.” ‫יב‬ ִ‫ב‬ָ‫ס‬ means
distributed round about among the Philistines. Those Israelites whom the Philistines
had incorporated into their army are called Hebrews, according to the name which
was current among foreigners, whilst those who were with Saul are called Israel,
according to the sacred name of the nation. The difficulty which many expositors
have found in the word ‫ות‬ֹ‫י‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ‫ל‬ has been very correctly solved, so far as the sense is
concerned, by the earlier translators, by the interpolation of “they returned:” ‫בוּ‬ ָ‫ת‬
(Chald.), ̓‫ו‬‫נוףפס‬́‫ב‬‫צחףבם‬ (lxx), reversi sunt (Vulg.), and similarly the Syriac and
Arabic. We are not at liberty, however, to amend the Hebrew text in this manner, as
nothing more is omitted than the finite verb ‫יוּ‬ָ‫ה‬ before the infinitive ‫ות‬ֹ‫י‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ‫ל‬ (for this
construction, see Gesenius, Gramm. §132, 3, Anm. 1), and this might easily be left
out here, since it stands at the beginning of the verse in the main clause. The literal
rendering would be, they were to be with Israel, i.e., they came over to Israel. The fact
that the Hebrews who were serving in the army of the Philistines came over to Saul
and his host, and turned their weapons against their oppressors, naturally
heightened the confusion in the camp of the Philistines, and accelerated their defeat;
and this was still further increased by the fact that the Israelites who had concealed
79

80. themselves on the mountains of Ephraim also joined the Israelitish army, as soon as
they heard of the flight of the Philistines (1Sa_14:22).
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:21, 1Sa_14:22
Round about, even. All the versions by a very slight alteration change this into
turned, which the A.V. is forced to supply. With this necessary correction the
translation is easy: "And the Hebrews who were previously with the Philistines, and
had gone up with them into the camp, turned to be with the Israelites who were with
Saul and Jonathan." It appears, therefore, that certain districts of the Israelite
territory were so completely in the power of the Philistines that they could compel
the men to go with them, not perhaps as soldiers, as is our custom in India, but as
drivers and servants. These now turned upon their masters, and were reinforced by
the Israelites who had taken refuge in Mount Ephraim. It is noteworthy that these
subject "Hebrews" retain the name of contempt given them by their masters.
WHEDON, " 21. The Hebrews that were with the Philistines — Those who had
deserted Saul’s army and gone over to them, and those whom they had taken
captive during this last invasion. Instead of Hebrews, the Septuagint reads
slaves; and it is altogether probable that in their wars and conquests the
Philistines had captured and made slaves of many of the Hebrews. These, seeing
the confusion of the Philistines, turned against them and made the confusion
worse confounded.
Before that time — Before the time of this assault of Jonathan. Literally the
Hebrew is, yesterday and the third day. Compare Joshua 3:4, note.
ELLICOTT, "(21) Moreover the Hebrews that were with the Philistines.—These
Israelites were, most likely, prisoners who had been compelled to fight against
their countrymen, or were levies raised in those parts of the land more
immediately under Philistine influence. These, we read, took the first
opportunity to go over to Saul. Other Israelites—probably the men of whole
villages, who had been compelled, as the result of the late Philistine successes, to
desert their homesteads, and seek a precarious living in the hills—joined in the
pursuit of the now flying Philistine armies. This is the meaning of the words of
the 22nd verse, which speaks of “the men of Israel which had hid themselves in
Mount Ephraim.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:21. Moreover, the Hebrews, &c.— Our translators have
well expressed here the sense of the text. But it seems hard to allow them the
liberty of inserting so many words as they have done, which are not in the
Hebrew. To make out the sense they have put in the words that, and from the
country, and turned. As to the first, I make no doubt but that the word ‫אשׁר‬
80

81. asher, that or who, is here implied, as the Vulgate, Latin, and the LXX represent
it. The other two insertions, from the country, and turned, will be altogether
needless, if, instead of ‫יב‬‫סב‬ sabib, we read, as the Vulgate and LXX plainly did,
‫סבבו‬ sabebu. Then the place must be rendered, the Hebrews who were with the
Philistines before that time, who went up with them to the camp, they also turned
to be with the Israelites. It may be further noted, that the LXX in the beginning
of the verse read ‫ים‬‫עבד‬ abadim, slaves, instead of ‫ים‬‫עבר‬ ibrim, Hebrews. Whether
the LXX or the present Hebrew copies are here to be preferred, I cannot say. If
the true reading is Hebrews, still they were slaves to the Philistines, whom they
had made captive before.
REFLECTIONS.—The terror of the Philistines was soon observed by the
sentinels in Gibeah, who, to their astonishment, beheld them melting like snow,
and falling one on another. Tidings are instantly brought to Saul, who calls over
the muster-roll, that he may see who is absent, and Jonathan and his armour-
bearer are wanting. Hereupon,
1. Saul bids Ahiah bring the ark, and consult God about what he should do in
the case; but while he was talking with him, the noise increasing, and the flight of
the Philistines being evident, he bids him desist, being in haste to pursue. Note;
(1.) In all our proceedings, to enquire of God's word is the surest way to succeed.
(2.) They who are impatient to run before they are sent, will be in danger of
making more haste than good speed.
2. They immediately follow the flying hosts, nor needed sword or spear, for the
Philistines fell faster by the hands of each other. Not only the six hundred men
who were with Saul assembled, but the deserters and prisoners turned upon the
fugitives; and those who had refused to fight, and fled to the mountains, dare
now pursue. Thus the Lord saved Israel, and the discomfiture here was very
great, because it was his doing. Note; (1.) All our salvation must be ascribed to
God's free grace and mercy alone. (2.) The Lord Jesus has conquered for us; let
us not then, weak as we are, fear to pursue and seize the prey.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:21
‘Now the Hebrews who were with the Philistines as previously, and that went up
with them into the camp, from the country round about, even they also turned to
be with the Israelites who were with Saul and Jonathan.’
81

82. “The Hebrews.” This may refer to Habiru mercenaries hired by the Philistines
(compare David later), or to renegade Israelites who had joined up with the
Philistines for political advantage, or to forced levies taken from the occupied
territories who had had no choice about the matter. But whichever they were
they could not resist turning to help the Israelites, whom they no doubt saw as
more like themselves. The arrogance of the Philistines towards them may well
have already disaffected them, and anyway, the advantage clearly now lay with
the Israelites.
22 When all the Israelites who had hidden in the
hill country of Ephraim heard that the
Philistines were on the run, they joined the
battle in hot pursuit.
CLARKE, "The men - which had hid themselves - See 1Sa_13:6.
The Vulgate and the Septuagint add here, And there were with Saul about ten thousand
men; but this is supported by no other authority.
GILL, "Likewise all the men of Israel which had hid themselves in Mount Ephraim,....
In the caves and rocks, thickets and pits there, see 1Sa_13:6 when
they heard that the Philistines fled; now being delivered from their fears, and thinking
themselves safe, ventured out of their lurking places:
even they also followed hard after them in the battle; they joined the pursuers who came
their way, and stuck to them, and closely pursued the flying army of the Philistines.
According to Josephus (p), the army of Saul was now increased to 10,000.
82

83. HENRY, "Those that had fled their colours, and hid themselves in the mountains,
returned to their posts, and joined in with the pursuers (1Sa_14:22), hoping by their great
zeal and officiousness, now that the danger was over and the victory sure, to atone for their
former cowardice. It was not much to their praise to appear now, but it would have been more
their reproach if they had not appeared. Those that are remiss and faint-hearted indeed that
will not act in the cause of God when they see it victorious, as well as righteous. Thus all
hands were at work against the Philistines, and every Israelite slew as many as he could,
without sword or spear; yet it is said (1Sa_14:23), it was the Lord that saved Israel that day.
He did it by them, for without him they could do nothing. Salvation is of the Lord.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:22
‘In the same way all the men of Israel who had hidden themselves in the hill-
country of Ephraim, when they heard that the Philistines fled, even they also
followed hard after them in the battle.’
The news of the Philistine panic also reached the ears of the general Israelite
army which had taken refuge in the hills, presumably through messengers from
Saul. And when they learned that the Philistines were in flight they too joined in
and chased hard after any of the Philistines who were still in the hill country.
Everyone in Israel had suddenly become a Jonathan.
23 So on that day the Lord saved Israel, and the
battle moved on beyond Beth Aven.
GILL, "So the Lord saved Israel that day, &c. And a wonderful salvation it was, that two
men should throw such a vast army into confusion, which issued in the utter rout and
destruction of them; this only could be of the Lord, to whom it is justly ascribed, and was the
effect of his sovereign good will and pleasure, and of his unmerited goodness; a free favour
bestowed on an undeserving prince, who had behaved ill to his prophet at Gilgal, and now to
him and his high priest at Gibeah:
and the battle passed over unto Bethaven; the men of battle or war; those that made war, as
83

84. the Targum, these pursued and went as far as Bethaven, or rather "passed Bethaven" (q); they
not only, went as far as that, but "from" it, as Ben Gersom and Abarbinel interpret it; they
passed that place, and went on from thence in pursuit of the Philistines; for their camp at
Michmash was eastward from this place, and had it on the east, 1Sa_13:5.
JAMISON, "So the Lord saved Israel that day: and the battle passed over unto
Beth-aven — that is, “Beth-el.” It passed over the forest, now destroyed, on the central ridge
of Palestine, then over to the other side from the eastern pass of Michmash (1Sa_14:31), to
the western pass of Aijalon, through which they escaped into their own plains.
ELLICOTT, "(23) So the Lord saved Israel . . .—The identical words used at the
Red Sea, after the deliverance of the people from Egypt. So the battle rolled
westward through Beth-aven, past city and village, over Mount Ephraim. It was
a decisive victory, crushing in its results to the Philistines, who were driven back
so effectually as not to re-appear till the close of Saul’s reign. The king was now
at liberty to develop the military character of the people; and till the disaster
which closed his life and reign, his various campaigns against the idolatrous
nations who surrounded Israel generally appear to have gone on from victory to
victory.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:23. The Lord saved Israel that day — Their deliverance
was evidently effected by him, and that by means very extraordinary, and such
as could have produced no such effect without his almighty power working
thereby. The battle passed over unto Beth-aven — That is, the warriors that
were engaged in the battle, and were pursuing the Philistines.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:23 1) affirms that this fortunate achievement was due to
the help of the Lord, and2) states the direction which the battle took. The battle
passed over to Bethaven. Between this statement that the fight moved
northeast[FN10] from Michmash to Bethaven, and that in 1 Samuel 14:31, that
the Philistines were smitten that day from Michmash to Ajalon [west], an
insoluble contradiction† has been discovered, and it has been proposed to read
Bethhoron (which lay west of Michmash) instead of Bethaven. But such a
contradiction cannot be admitted, because the movements in such a battle are so
fluctuating. Here in 1 Samuel 14:23 we have an account of the battle which
continued, and passed, not far from Michmash indeed, over to Bethaven in a
northeasterly direction; in 1 Samuel 14:31 is an account of the completed battle,
and the final result is given, which is naturally this, that the Philistines, drawn by
the Israelites from their native land towards Bethaven, fled, the greater part of
them at least, westward, and were beaten as far as Ajalon. Bunsen: “In general
the flight of the Philistines was naturally westward ( 1 Samuel 14:31), yet no
exception can on that account be taken to our passage.”
84

85. PETT, "1 Samuel 14:23 a
‘So YHWH saved Israel that day.’
The result was that YHWH saved Israel that day, and the Philistines were driven
back in the direction of Beth-aven. From there they would flee down the pass of
Beth-horon to Aijalon and thence down to Philistia. So the account which began
with the parlous state of a helpless Israel ends with the Philistines in full flight
leaving Israel, at least for the time being, a free country. And it was all because
of YHWH. YHWH had again saved His people.
It should, of course, be noted that the description that we have of what happened
is very truncated so that we only get the gist of something that actually took
place over many hours, and at the heart of it from now on will be Saul and his
six hundred. It is thus they who will immediately now be involved and will be
affected by Saul’s rash oath. How far ‘the Hebrews’ joined in the actual pursuit
(if at all) we do not know. The remainder of the Israelites would clearly come in
at the tail end, and would probably deal with stragglers and some who had taken
refuge in the hills. From their own point of view they would enjoy some of the
credit, but the main chase would be by Saul’s men. All would, however,
recognise that they owed it all to YHWH. All they had done was follow up on His
working.
PETT, "Verses 23-31
Saul’s Men Are Hindered By A Rash Oath Made By Saul, While Jonathan Who
Knew Nothing Of It Breaks The Oath (1 Samuel 14:23-31 a).
The contrast between the spiritually dead ritualist and the true man of faith
continues. Jonathan the man of faith has enabled YHWH to act on behalf of His
people. Now we discover that Saul, the spiritually dead ritualist, has put a curse
on anyone who eats any food before he, Saul, has been avenged on his enemies,
thus bringing Jonathan, the man of faith, who has been concerned for YHWH’s
honour and as YHWH’s instrument in defeating the Philistines, into unconscious
error. Not only was this unfair on Jonathan but it was also something which
would prevent the victory from being the great success that it should have been,
and would even put Jonathan’s life at risk. And all because of Saul’s folly.
85

86. Analysis.
a And the battle passed over by Beth-aven (1 Samuel 14:23 b).
b And the men of Israel were distressed that day, for Saul had adjured the
people, saying, “Cursed be the man who eats any food until evening comes, and I
be avenged on my enemies.” So none of the people tasted food (1 Samuel 14:24).
c And all the people came into the forest, and there was honey on the ground,
and when the people had come to the forest, behold, the honey dropped, but no
man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath (1 Samuel
14:25-26).
d But Jonathan did not hear when his father charged the people with the oath,
which was the reason why he put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand,
and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes
were enlightened (1 Samuel 14:27).
c Then answered one of the people, and said, “Your father strictly charged the
people with an oath, saying, “Cursed be the man who eats food this day.” (1
Samuel 14:28).’
b And the people were faint. Then Jonathan said, “My father has troubled the
land. See, I pray you, how my eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a little
of this honey. How much more, if it had been that the people had eaten freely
today of the spoil of their enemies which they found? For now has there been no
great slaughter among the Philistines” (1 Samuel 14:29-30).
a And they smote of the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon (1 Samuel
14:31 a).
Note that in ‘a’ the course of the battle is described, and in the parallel the
continuing course of the battle. In ‘b’ we are informed of the people’s distress as
86

87. a result of Saul’s oath, and that its purpose was in order to gain vengeance for
him on the Philistines, and in the parallel that the people were faint because of
that oath, with the result that there was no great slaughter among the Philistines.
In ‘c’ no man ate of the honey for fear of the oath, and in the parallel why they
have not eaten is explained to Jonathan. Centrally in ‘d’ the hero of faith whose
trust really was in YHWH breaks the oath unwittingly and is benefited by it.
1 Samuel 14:23 a
‘So YHWH saved Israel that day.’
The result was that YHWH saved Israel that day, and the Philistines were driven
back in the direction of Beth-aven. From there they would flee down the pass of
Beth-horon to Aijalon and thence down to Philistia. So the account which began
with the parlous state of a helpless Israel ends with the Philistines in full flight
leaving Israel, at least for the time being, a free country. And it was all because
of YHWH. YHWH had again saved His people.
It should, of course, be noted that the description that we have of what happened
is very truncated so that we only get the gist of something that actually took
place over many hours, and at the heart of it from now on will be Saul and his
six hundred. It is thus they who will immediately now be involved and will be
affected by Saul’s rash oath. How far ‘the Hebrews’ joined in the actual pursuit
(if at all) we do not know. The remainder of the Israelites would clearly come in
at the tail end, and would probably deal with stragglers and some who had taken
refuge in the hills. From their own point of view they would enjoy some of the
credit, but the main chase would be by Saul’s men. All would, however,
recognise that they owed it all to YHWH. All they had done was follow up on His
working.
1 Samuel 14:23-24 (23b-24)
‘And the battle passed over by Beth-aven.’
87

88. The course of the battle is now described and taken up again in verse 31a.
Bethaven was near Bethel and Ai, and was on course for the pass that would lead
down to Aijalon, from where the Philistines could make their way home.
Jonathan Eats Honey
24 Now the Israelites were in distress that day,
because Saul had bound the people under an
oath, saying, “Cursed be anyone who eats food
before evening comes, before I have avenged
myself on my enemies!” So none of the troops
tasted food.
CLARKE, "Saul had adjured the people - He was afraid, if they waited to refresh
themselves, the Philistines would escape out of their hands, and therefore he made the taking
any food till sunset a capital crime. This was the very means of defeating his own intention;
for as the people were exhausted for want of food, they could not continue the pursuit of their
enemies: had it not been for this foolish adjuration, there had been a greater slaughter of the
Philistines, 1Sa_14:30.
GILL, "And the men of Israel were distressed that day,.... By reason of the following
order Saul gave with an oath, forbidding any to taste meat till evening, when the people were
faint and weary, which is the common sense of interpreters; but Jarchi interprets it, the men
of Israel were ready, forward, and hasty, and drew nigh to fight with the Philistines, and so
refers it to the persons before mentioned, who came out of their lurking places; and this sense
88

89. is approved of by Abarbinel: "for", or "and Saul had adjured", or "did adjure the people"; or
willed them, signified to them his will and pleasure, which would not have been so much
amiss, had he not annexed a curse to it, as follows:
saying, cursed be the man that eateth any food until the evening: or "bread", which
comprehends all food, and among the rest honey; the design of which was, that no time might
be lost, and that he might make the victory over the Philistines, and their destruction, as
complete as possible; though it may seem a little too hard and severe upon the people, and
too imperious in him, as well as imprudent; since a little refreshment would have animated
and enabled them to have pursued their enemies with more ardour and rigour; and yet by the
lot afterwards made, it seems to have been countenanced by the Lord:
that I may be avenged on mine enemies; who long tyrannised over the people of Israel,
more or less for many years, and lately had sadly spoiled and plundered them:
so none of the people tasted any food; so observant were they of, and so obedient to the
order of their king, and so much awed by the oath or imprecation annexed to it; though they
were faint and hungry, and had an opportunity of refreshing themselves as follows, which
was no small temptation to disobedience.
HENRY, "We have here an account of the distress of the children of Israel, even in the
day of their triumphs. Such alloys are all present joys subject to. And such obstructions does
many a good cause meet with, even when it seems most prosperous, through the
mismanagement of instruments.
I. Saul forbade the people, under the penalty of a curse, to taste any food that day, 1Sa_
14:24. Here we will suppose, 1. That as king he had power to put his soldiers under this
interdict, and to bind it on with a curse; and therefore they submitted to it, and God so far
owned it as to discover, by the lot, that Jonathan was the delinquent that had meddled with
the accursed thing (though ignorantly), on which account God would not be at that time
enquired of by them. 2. That he did it with a good intention, lest the people, who perhaps had
been kept for some time at short allowance, when they found plenty of victuals in the
deserted camp of the Philistines, should fall greedily upon that, and so lose time in pursing
the enemy, and some of them, it may be, glut themselves to such a degree as not to be fit for
any more service that day. To prevent this, he forbade them to taste any food, and laid
himself, it is likely, under the same restraint. And yet his making this severe order was, (1.)
Impolitic and very unwise; for, if it gained time, it lost strength, for the pursuit. (2.) It was
imperious, and disobliging to the people, and worse than muzzling the mouth of the ox when
he treads out the corn. To forbid them to feast would have been commendable, but to forbid
them so much as to taste, though ever so hungry, was barbarous. (3.) It was impious to
enforce the prohibition with a curse and an oath. Had he no penalty less than an anathema
wherewith to support his military discipline? Death for such a crime would have been too
much, but especially death with a curse. Though superiors may chide and correct, they may
not curse their inferiors; our rule is, Bless, and curse not. When David speaks of an enemy he
had that loved cursing perhaps he meant Saul, Psa_109:17, Psa_109:18.
JAMISON, "Saul had adjured the people — Afraid lest so precious an opportunity of
effectually humbling the Philistine power might be lost, the impetuous king laid an anathema
on any one who should taste food until the evening. This rash and foolish denunciation
distressed the people, by preventing them taking such refreshments as they might get on the
march, and materially hindered the successful attainment of his own patriotic object.
89

90. K&D, "Saul's precipitate haste. - 1Sa_14:24. The men of Israel were pressed (i.e.,
fatigued) on that day, sc., through the military service and fighting. Then Saul adjured the
people, saying, “Cursed be the man that eateth bread until the evening, and (till) I have
avenged myself upon mine enemies.” ‫ל‬ ֶ‫א‬ֹ‫,י‬ fut. apoc. of ‫ֶה‬‫ל‬‫ֹא‬‫י‬ for ‫ֶה‬‫ל‬ֲ‫א‬ַ‫י‬, from ‫ָה‬‫ל‬ ָ‫,א‬ to swear,
Hiphil to adjure or require an oath of a person. The people took the oath by saying
“amen” to what Saul had uttered. This command of Saul did not proceed from a
proper attitude towards the Lord, but was an act of false zeal, in which Saul had more
regard to himself and his own kingly power than to the cause of the kingdom of
Jehovah, as we may see at once from the expression ‫וגו‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫מ‬ַ‫קּ‬ִ‫,נ‬ “till I have avenged
myself upon mine enemies.” It was a despotic measure which not only failed to
accomplish its object (see 1Sa_14:30, 1Sa_14:31), but brought Saul into the
unfortunate position of being unable to carry out the oath (see 1Sa_14:45). All the
people kept the command. “They tasted no bread.” ‫ם‬ַ‫ﬠ‬ָ‫ֹא־ט‬‫ל‬ְ‫ו‬ is not to be connected
with ‫י‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫מ‬ַ‫קּ‬ִ‫ַנ‬‫ו‬ as an apodosis.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:24
The men of Israel were distressed that day. The word is that used in 1Sa_13:6
of the state of terror and alarm to which the Israelites were reduced by the Philistine
invasion; here it refers to their weariness and faintness for want of food. For Saul
had adjured the people. Hebrew, "had made the people swear." He had recited
before them the words of the curse, and made them shout their consent. His object
was to prevent any delay in the pursuit; but in his eagerness he forgot that the
strength of his men would fail if their bodily wants were not supplied. But though
worn out and fainting, the people faithfully keep the oath put to them.
COFFMAN, "SAUL'S PAGAN OATH AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
"And the men of Israel were distressed that day; for Saul laid an oath on the
people, saying, "Cursed be the man who eats food until it is evening and I am
avenged on my enemies." So none of the people tasted food. And all the people
came into the forest; and there was honey on the ground. And when the people
entered the forest, behold, the honey was dropping, but no man put his hand to
his mouth; for the people feared the oath. But Jonathan had not heard his father
charge the people with the oath; so he put forth the tip of the staff that was in his
hand, and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth; and his
eyes became bright. Then one of the people said, "Your father charged the
people with an oath, saying, `Cursed be the man who eats food this day.'" And
the people were faint. Then Jonathan said, "My father has troubled the land; see
how my eyes have become bright because I tasted of a little of this honey. How
much better if the people had eaten freely today of the spoil of their enemies
which they found; for now the slaughter among the Philistines has not been
great."
"Cursed be the man who eats food until it is evening and I am avenged on mine
90

91. enemies" (1 Samuel 14:24). The will of God and God's honor were of no concern
of Saul in this pagan oath, Note the egotism: "and I am avenged on my enemies."
In this abbreviated account, not all of the oath was repeated. One finds the rest
of it in 1 Samuel 14:44, "God do so to me and more also, you shall surely die."
One finds the exact words of this oath on the lips of the pagan Jezebel (1 Kings
19:2); and Jezebel herself couldn't have said it any better than Saul did.
In this connection, we cannot understand how any scholar could write that, "So
far from Saul's oath being, rash, or arbitrary, it was the logical expression of his
carefulness for divine things."[18]
"The honey was dropping" (1 Samuel 14:26). This does not mean that the honey
was dropping out of the trees, but that it was being dropped by the Philistines in
their headlong flight, as explained by the words, "the spoil of their enemies
which they (the Israelites) found" (1 Samuel 14:30).
"And his eyes became bright" (1 Samuel 14:27). "This is a Hebrew idiom that
simply means `he was refreshed.'"[19]
The direct results of Saul's stupid pagan oath was that his men became fatigued,
and from hunger were unable to exploit the opportunity to destroy the
Philistines. The great majority of them escaped (1 Samuel 14:30). Also, when the
evening finally came, and the curse was lifted, the people were so hungry that
they slaughtered animals for meat but did not take time to bleed it perfectly as
God's law commanded, consequently bringing the whole army into sin against
God. No greater disaster for Israel could be imagined. Then, in addition to all
that, Saul found himself compelled to condemn Jonathan to death.
WHEDON, " 24. Were distressed — Fatigued; tired out by the arduous fighting.
For
Saul had adjured the people — This rendering implies that Saul had made his
adjuration before the battle; but in the Hebrew the letter translated for is the
conjunction and, ( ‫ו‬ ) and indicates that Saul made the adjuration after he saw
the distress of the people. He perceived that his men were faint, but feared that
any delay might turn the tide of battle.
SAUL’S HASTY ADJURATION, 1 Samuel 14:24-46.
91

92. Here again we meet with a display of the rash and impetuous spirit of Saul. He
wished to make the most of his opportunity, and inflict the greatest possible
disasters on his enemy; but his oath not only failed to accomplish this object, but
even led to his own confusion when the people interfered and rescued Jonathan
from his curse. Had the victors been permitted to eat freely of the spoil, they
would in all probability have been able to have made the defeat of these dreaded
enemies tenfold more deadly and disastrous.
ELLICOTT, " (24) And the men of Israel were distressed that day.—The LXX.,
between the 23rd and 24th verses, has a somewhat long addition: “And the whole
people was with Saul, about ten thousand men; and the battle spread in the
whole city, in the mountains of Ephraim; and Saul committed a great error.”
The number 10,000 is not an improbable one, as the original small force which
had kept with Saul and Jonathan had been joined by the Hebrew auxiliaries in
the Philistine camp, and also by many of the fugitives from the villages around.
They were, we read, “distressed,” that is, were wearied out by the long pursuit
on the Ephraim hills.
For Saul had adjured the people.—Better, And Saul, &c.; that is, the king was so
intent upon his vengeance—so bent upon pursuing to the uttermost these
Philistines who so long had defied his power, and who had brought him so low—
that he grudged his soldiers the necessary rest and refreshment, and, with a
terrible vow, devoted to death any one who should on that day of blood slack his
hand for a moment, even to take food.
HAWKER, "Verses 24-46
(24) ¶ And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the
people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening, that I may
be avenged on mine enemies. So none of the people tasted any food. (25) And all
they of the land came to a wood; and there was honey upon the ground. (26) And
when the people were come into the wood, behold, the honey dropped; but no
man put his hand to his mouth: for the people feared the oath. (27) But Jonathan
heard not when his father charged the people with the oath: wherefore he put
forth the end of the rod that was in his hand, and dipped it in an honeycomb,
and put his hand to his mouth; and his eyes were enlightened. (28) Then
answered one of the people, and said, Thy father straitly charged the people with
an oath, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food this day. And the people
were faint. (29) Then said Jonathan, My father hath troubled the land: see, I
pray you, how mine eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a little of this
honey. (30) How much more, if haply the people had eaten freely today of the
spoil of their enemies which they found? for had there not been now a much
greater slaughter among the Philistines? (31) And they smote the Philistines that
92

93. day from Michmash to Aijalon: and the people were very faint. (32) And the
people flew upon the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them
on the ground: and the people did eat them with the blood. (33) Then they told
Saul, saying, Behold, the people sin against the LORD, in that they eat with the
blood. And he said, Ye have transgressed: roll a great stone unto me this day.
(34) And Saul said, Disperse yourselves among the people, and say unto them,
Bring me hither every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay them here,
and eat; and sin not against the LORD in eating with the blood. And all the
people brought every man his ox with him that night, and slew them there. (35)
And Saul built an altar unto the LORD: the same was the first altar that he built
unto the LORD. (36) ¶ And Saul said, Let us go down after the Philistines by
night, and spoil them until the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them.
And they said, Do whatsoever seemeth good unto thee. Then said the priest, Let
us draw near hither unto God. (37) And Saul asked counsel of God, Shall I go
down after the Philistines? wilt thou deliver them into the hand of Israel? But he
answered him not that day. (38) And Saul said, Draw ye near hither, all the chief
of the people: and know and see wherein this sin hath been this day. (39) For, as
the LORD liveth, which saveth Israel, though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall
surely die. But there was not a man among all the people that answered him. (40)
Then said he unto all Israel, Be ye on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will
be on the other side. And the people said unto Saul, Do what seemeth good unto
thee. (41) Therefore Saul said unto the LORD God of Israel, Give a perfect lot.
And Saul and Jonathan were taken: but the people escaped. (42) And Saul said,
Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan was taken. (43) Then
Saul said to Jonathan, Tell me what thou hast done. And Jonathan told him, and
said, I did but taste a little honey with the end of the rod that was in mine hand,
and, lo, I must die. (44) And Saul answered, God do so and more also: for thou
shalt surely die, Jonathan. (45) And the people said unto Saul, Shall Jonathan
die, who hath wrought this great salvation in Israel? God forbid: as the LORD
liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath wrought
with God this day. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not. (46) Then
Saul went up from following the Philistines: and the Philistines went to their own
place.
There is, no doubt, somewhat of obscurity in this passage. Saul's whole conduct
was wrong. In a false mistaken zeal for Israel, he brings the people under an
heavy curse, if they partook of any food, until the battle was over. In this, we
hear of no consultation with the Lord, no direction from him: and yet the Lord
gives a decided answer, in pointing out the offender, in the person of Jonathan.
And yet on the other hand, the eyes of Jonathan were so enlightened in eating of
the honey, that from this refreshment, his ability to pursue the victory was
93

94. certainly increased. Perhaps the sense of the passage is, that the most highly
favored servants of the Lord, may be brought into trouble; and, like Jonathan,
though evidently raised up of the Lord, for the deliverance of his people, may
suffer persecution from those on whom they have the highest claims of favor.
And probably, as Saul in his carnal state, was every day more and more
departing from God, he was permitted to fall under the dreadful oath he had
taken for another, so as ultimately to become the victim of it himself. The sequel
of Saul's history, too plainly shows this. And the sin, which by his rashness, he
led the people into, when in their extreme hunger, they eat the blood with their
food, seems to have been one of those things which aggravated his transgressions.
See Genesis 9:4. and the note in the Commentary on Genesis 9:4.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:24. The men of Israel were distressed that day — With
hunger, and weakness, and faintness, and all by reason of the following rash and
inconsiderate oath, whereby Saul had foolishly adjured them, and to which, it is
probable, they had consented. Saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food
until evening — Saul’s intention in putting this oath was undoubtedly to save
time, lest the Philistines should gain ground of them in their flight. But the event
showed it was a false policy; for the people were so faint and weak for want of
food, that they were less able to follow and slay the Philistines than if they had
stopped to take a moderate refreshment. That I may be avenged of mine
enemies — As Saul’s intention was good, so the matter of the obligation was not
simply unlawful, if it had not been so rigorous in excluding all food, and in
obliging the people to it under pain of an accursed death, which was a
punishment far exceeding the fault..
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:24. And the men of Israel were distressed, &c.—
Houbigant renders this verse in the following manner: On the same day, after
the Israelites were assembled together, Saul bound them by the following oath,
saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food before the evening, until I be
avenged of mine enemies. Therefore none of the army took any food. In
consequence of this rash oath, whereof Jonathan, as being absent, was ignorant,
he became subject to the curse. The people, for want of refreshment, were so
faint that they could not pursue the enemy, and make the utmost of this great
victory (1 Samuel 14:30-31.); and at the same time, through their great hunger,
became transgressors of the law of God, 1 Samuel 14:33. See the note on chap. 1
Samuel 13:13.
CONSTABLE, "Saul's selfishness 14:24-35
Saul's improper view of his role as Israel's king comes through clearly in 1
Samuel 14:24. The Philistines were not Saul's enemies as much as God's enemies.
This was holy war (cf. Judges 16:28), but Saul viewed the battle too personally.
His selfish desire to win for his own glory led him to issue a foolish command.
94

95. Perhaps Saul had "sworn the army to a vow that they would fast until God
intervened on their behalf (1 Samuel 14:24-30)." [Note: Ibid.]
An oath was an extremely serious matter in the ancient Near East (1 Samuel
14:26; cf. Judges 14:8-9). One did not violate a king's oath without suffering
severe consequences. Jonathan saw the folly of Saul's oath clearly because he
wanted God's glory (1 Samuel 14:29-30). The Hebrew word translated
"troubled" (1 Samuel 14:29, 'akar) is the same one from which "Achan" and
"Achor" come (Joshua 7:25-26). Saul, not Jonathan, had troubled Israel, as
Achan had, by his foolish command (1 Samuel 14:24).
Aijalon (1 Samuel 14:31) stood about 17 miles west of Michmash. 1 Samuel
14:32-34 illustrate the confusion that resulted from Saul's misguided oath. The
Mosaic Law forbade eating meat with the blood not drained from it (Leviticus
17:10-14). The great stone (1 Samuel 14:33) served as a slaughtering table where
the priests carefully prepared the meat for eating.
Saul was not entirely insensitive to Yahweh and His will. We can see this in his
concern to observe the ritual dietary law (1 Samuel 14:33) and his desire to
honor God for the victory (1 Samuel 14:35; cf. Exodus 17:14-16). However, Saul
may have built this altar simply to make amends for his legal infringement, not
to express gratitude for the day's victory. [Note: Gordon, p. 140.] There are
many examples of spiritually sensitive Israelites building altars to God (e.g., 1
Samuel 7:17; Genesis 12:8; Judges 6:24; 2 Samuel 24:25; 1 Chronicles 21:18).
The writer's note that this was the first altar that Saul built reflects the king's
general lack of commitment to Yahweh.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 14:24-31. Saul’s rash order. Between 1 Samuel 14:23 and 1
Samuel 14:24 the Sept. has: “And the whole people was with Saul about ten
thousand men, and the battle spread in the whole city in the mountains of
Ephraim. And Saul committed a great error” (that day and adjured). This is an
explanatory addition to the original text with whose curtness it does not
harmonize. It is not in itself improbable that the original six hundred men should
grow to this large body in the course of the battle, and that the fight should
extend over the mountains of Ephraim is to be expected from the dispersed
condition of the Philistines, and is even indicated in the end of 1 Samuel 14:23.
The phrase “in the whole city” has arisen from a misreading of the following
word “wood” (‫יער‬‫—.)ב‬The Masoretic text is short, sharp, and to the point,
corresponding to Saul’s position and conduct as here described.—And the men
95

96. of Israel were distressed that day. In 1 Samuel 13:6 the same word (‫)נגשׁ‬ is used
to express the oppressed condition of the Israelites. Here it is Saul that presses
and drives the people in the pursuit of the Philistines. The word means
“harassed, wearied out,” and Thenius’ objection that one does not see by whom
or by what the Israelites were pressed, explains itself.—The wearied condition of
the people made Saul fear that the pursuit of the Philistines would thereby be
interrupted, and the honor of the day for him diminished. And Saul adjured the
people.[FN11]—He made them swear an oath—bound them by an oath. Cursed
be the man that eateth food until evening and I be avenged on my enemies.—
Saul’s passionate zeal, spurred on by selfishness, self-will and personal desire for
revenge causes him to lose sight of the command of nature, to act cruelly towards
his brave warriors, and over and beyond to injure his cause. “Blind zeal only
hurts.” Berlenb. Bible: “In this prohibition there was a secret pride and misuse
of power, for he desired to force, as it were, a complete victory, and then
appropriate the glory of it to himself.” The people kept the oath even under the
strongest temptation to break it.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:24
‘And the men of Israel were distressed that day, for Saul had adjured the people,
saying, “Cursed be the man who eats any food until evening comes, and I be
avenged on my enemies.” So none of the people tasted food.’
Meanwhile the men who should have been rested and invigorated, to say nothing
of being exultant, were instead distressed. Note especially the contrast of ‘that
day’ with the reference to ‘that day’ in the previous verse. In 1 Samuel 14:23 it
was a victorious ‘that day’. It was YHWH’s day of salvation. Here it is a
distressed ‘that day’. And it is all due to Saul’s foolishness. It is because he has
put a curse on any of his band who partake in food until the Philistines have
been utterly routed and he himself has gained his own personal vengeance. Note
that his thought was not on the good of his faithful followers, but on his own
personal aggrandisement and satisfaction, regardless of the effects on them. It
was, of course, an act of desperation. Feeling that YHWH was not with him he
was trying every desperate means of altering the situation by religious
manoeuvring. First he would place this curse, and then later he would consider
calling on the Ark of God in order that it might lead them forward. But if only
he had realised it there was only one sensible option open to him and that was
full repentance, for Scripture constantly makes clear that full and genuine
repentance regularly alters such a situation (compare 2 Chronicles 33:11-13;
Jonah 3:5-10). But such repentance does not go along with a craving for personal
vengeance. If we feel sorry for Saul we should recognise that he had no sorrow
96

97. for sin, but simply a desire to come out of affairs looking good and feeling
satisfied.
Saul’s purpose in his curse would seem to have been twofold. Firstly it was
because he believed that religious fasting would somehow gain him the extra
support of YHWH, and secondly it was in order to ensure that his hungry troops
concentrated solely on killing the Philistines rather than on turning aside to food
to satisfy their hunger. But while it actually made no difference to the most
important events of the day, its actual effect would be to render his men
inefficient and unable to pursue the enemy to the end, on the long chase back to
Philistia. So we discover that Saul had moved from following the living prophetic
beliefs of Samuel, to the dead ideas of the religious ascetics who made much of
such ritual, and Israel would suffer for it. We can compare Isaiah 58 which
depicts similar attitudes towards fasting. It is being made clear that he was
following dead ritual because he was no longer spiritually attuned and obedient,
and that the reason for it was because Samuel was no longer with him because of
his disobedience. The writer has already indicated the same thing in his attitude
to the Ark of God (verse 18). Having lost his contact with YHWH he has to
resort to religious gimmicks.
It will be noted again that his curse is not said to be in order to further YHWH’s
purposes. It is rather so as to enable Saul to get what he wants, personal
vengeance on his enemies. It indicates how far he has fallen from his true calling.
Here is a man who has lost his way.
BI 24-52, "And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people.
Great issues hang on a King’s rash word
One little sentence, spoken in a moment of passion by King Henry the Second, brought a
lifetime of remorse and penance and humiliation, and made him responsible for a murder
which his calmer soul abhorred. He had been hearing of repetitions of troubles brought about
by his great Chancellor, a Becket, and in a moment of exasperated temper exclaimed, “Of the
cowards that eat my bread, is there none will rid me of this turbulent priest?” Too soon, and
toe eagerly, the hasty words were acted upon. The anger of the moment was responsible for a
deed which the lifetime of remorse and humiliation could nor undo. (Footsteps of Truth.)
Saul’s wilfulness
That Saul was now suffering in character under the influence of the high position and great
power to which he had been raised, is only too apparent from what is recorded in these
verses. No doubt he pays more respect that he has been used to pay to the forms of religion.
But how are we to explain his increase of religiousness side by side with the advance of
moral obliquity and recklessness? Why should he be more careful in the service of God while
he becomes more imperious in temper, more stubborn in will, and more regardless of the
97

98. obligations alike of king and father? The explanation is not difficult to find. The
expostulation of Samuel had given him a fright. The announcement that the kingdom would
not be continued in his line, and that God had found a worthier man to set over His people
Israel, had moved him to the quick. There could be no doubt that Samuel was speaking the
truth. Saul had begun to disregard God’s will in his public acts, and was now beginning to
reap the penalty. He felt that he must pay more attention to God’s will. If he was not to lose
everything, he must try to be more religious. There is no sign of his feeling penitent in heart.
He is not concerned in spirit for his unworthy behaviour toward God. He feels only that his
own interests as king are imperilled. It is this selfish motive that makes him determine to be
more religious. Alas, how common has this spirit been in the history of the world! Louis XIV
has led a most wicked and profligate life, and he has ever and anon qualms that threaten him
with the wrath of God. To avert that wrath, he must be more attentive to his religious duties.
He must show more favour to the Church, exalt her dignitaries to greaser honour, endow her
orders and foundations with greater wealth. But that is not all. He must use all the arms and
resources of his kingdom for ridding the Church of her enemies. For twenty years he must
harass the Protestants. What the magnificent monarch did on a large scale, millions of
obscurer men have done on a small. It is a sad truth that terror and selfishness have been at
the foundation of a great deal of that which passes current as religion. But it is all because
what he calls religion is no religion; it is the selfish bargain-making spirit, which aims no
higher than deliverance from pain; it is not the noble exercise of the soul, prostrated by the
sense of guilt, and helpless through consciousness of weakness, lifting up its eyes to the hills
whence cometh its help, and rejoicing in the grace that freely pardons all its sin through the
blood of Christ, and in the gift of the Holy Spirit that renews and sanctifies the soul. The first
thing that Saul does, in the exercise of this selfish spirit, is to impose on the people an
obligation to fast until the day be overse Jonathan was a true man of God. He was in far
nearer fellowship with God than his father, and yet so far from approving of the religious
order to fast which his father had given, he regards it with displeasure and distrust. Godly
men will sometimes be found less outwardly religious than some other men, and will greatly
shock them by being so. God had given a wonderful deliverance that day through Jonathan.
Jonathan was as remarkable for the power of faith as Saul for the want of it. At worst, it was
but a ceremonial offence, but to Jonathan it was not even that. But Saul was too obstinate to
admit the plea. By a new oath, he devoted his son to death. Nothing could show more clearly
the deplorable state of his mind. In the eye of reason and of justice, Jonathan had committed
no offence. He had given signal evidence of the possession in a remarkable degree of the
favour of God. He had laid the nation under inconceivable obligations. All these pleas were
for him; and surely in the king’s breast a voice might have been heard pleading, Your son,
your firstborn, “the beginning of your strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency
of power”! Is it possible that this voice was silenced by jealousy, jealousy of his own son,
like his after-jealousy of David? What kind of heart could this Saul have had when in such
circumstances he could deliberately say, “God do so, and more also, for thou shalt surely die,
Jonathan”? But, “the Divine right of kings to govern wrong” is not altogether without check.
A temporary revolution saved Jonathan It was one good effect of excitement. In calmer
circumstances, the people might have been too terrified to interfere. So the people rescued
Jonathan, that he died not. Evidently the military spirit ruled in Saul, but it did not bring
peace nor blessing to the kingdom. Once off the right rail, Saul never got on it again; rash and
restless, he doubtless involved his people in many a disaster, fulfilling all that Samuel had
said about taking from the people, fulfilling but little that the people had hoped concerning
deliverance from the hand of the Philistines. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)
Acting from mere impulse
We have to propose the question, “What, in recording this passage, did the Holy Spirit mean
that we should learn from it?“ We shall not be long in perceiving that there is brought before
98

99. us, chiefly, one more painful defect, in Saul’s general conduct, and that the consequences
associated with that defect are very distinctly described: it is one, too, which is fat from being
uncommon. In codes of laws drawn up by man this defect is not indeed set down by name,
and signalised as a sin, though humanity bleeds under its effects, but it is condemned, and
justly so, by that “commandment” which is “exceeding broad.” We refer to the habit of
inconsiderateness—the habit of acting from mere impulse, of allowing merely momentary
feeling to sway, without pausing to ask whither the act which we perform, or the step on
which we decide, will lead us, and how it will affect other persons besides ourselves. It, is
truly a melancholy instance which this chapter describes. To pronounce a curse at, all was
presumptuous, where there was no direct command of God to be infringed; and more, what
personal pain it inflicted—what actual disadvantages it involved—what further mischief it
would have done, if the matter had been left in the King of Israel’s hand! How different all
would have been, if, instead of following the mere impulse of an excited mind, he had
thought for a moment, and, when prompted to issue his decree, had paused to ask. How will
this affect my people? how will it operate in the end? But where, in this imperfect world, can
we turn our eyes without meeting scenes and circumstances which cause us, involuntarily, to
say within ourselves, “What a difference there would have been here if there had been more
of reflection and less of mere impulse.”
I. We may gather a suggestion or two from this part of Saul’s history, for our own caution
and admonition.
1. Let us remember that this inconsiderateness, this acting from mere impulse, is
commonly the result of an overweening regard to self. It was not Saul who commenced
this engagement, but he could not bear not to have the most prominent place in the affair,
and he must do something to make himself both seen and felt—he must make his
authority evident, though the result of his decree would inevitably be the misery of his
people all that day. His love for his own dear self, and the manner in which all his
thoughts centred around that favourite object, are discernible in the very words of the
imprecation, “Cursed be the man that, eateth any food until evening, that I may be
avenged on mine enemies.” Let us make the interests of others the object of our regard in
all we undertake. Never let us think of ourselves without, at the same time, thinking of
others too. The habit of attaching importance to others’ convenience, to others’ comforts,
to others’ feelings, will, under God, prove a great preservative against acting from mere
impulse.
2. This habit, which we condemn, even though it may involve no serious consequences to
others, is manifestly wrong, because it is decidedly atheistic. It affords no room for God;
it makes no reference to Him. “In all thy ways acknowledge Him” is a command which
needs no other basis than the simple fact that there is a God, and that we are His feeble
and dependent creatures. Nehemiah was in the habit of associating God with everything,
of putting Him in His proper place: Saul allowed Him perpetually to be out of sight.
Hence the difference between the practice of the two men. The one acted deliberately,
because he acted prayerfully; the other acted from impulse, because it was no part of his
habit to recognise his dependence upon God.
3. Acting from impulse, while it often results in the infliction of mischief on others, is not
less to be deprecated on account of the injury which hasty and intemperate men occasion
to themselves, and chiefly in this respect—the bitter and enduring bondage into which
their thoughtlessness often brings them. Think, then, before you act; pray, before you put
your purpose into practice. Consider others as well as yourselves. Direct design to do
wrong has slain its thousands; but the inconsiderateness of mere impulse has slain its tens
of thousands. “None of us liveth to himself.”
II. The narrative allows us to draw some few general inferences as to the character of Saul’s
personal religion at this time.
99

100. 1. It leads us to perceive how strangely partial his religion was in its operation. Saul’s
religion was not of a very deep character; it was of that order which allows its professor
to be vastly more affected by the neglect of something outward and formal than by the
indulgence, within himself, of a wrong and impious state of mind. It puts us in mind of
that most thorough manifestation of hypocrisy, of which the New Testament contains the
record, when the accusers and betrayers of Jesus shrunk back with sanctimonious step
from the threshold of the judgment hall and would not set foot within it, “lest they should
be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.” And yet, though their consciences
would not allow them to do this, the very same consciences, when Pilate came out to
them, and declared that Jesus was innocent, presented no obstacle to their murderous cry,
“Crucify him:—not this man, but Barabbas.”
2. Even in the discharge of properly religious duties Saul was tardy and dilatory; and
when, at last he was found doing that which was right he appeared to act, quite as much
as when he did wrong, from mere impulse. That it should never have entered his mind to
build an altar to God before, this was the point on which the Spirit of God directed that
the sacred historian should pronounce emphatically. How keenly significant is that
parenthetical sentence—“The same was the first altar which he built to the Lord!” It
seems to say to us, God notices when you build the first altar, when you first set it up,
whether it be in the secret chamber or in the family. He knows the date of each secret
religious transaction, keeps account when it was done, add how long an interval
transpired before it was entered upon.
3. It was of a kind which allowed him to put God on one side, when he was too busy to
attend to Him. Real, religion will ever put God first—first, as the Object whose glory is
sought; and first, as the Being on whose aid we must, in the spirit of humble dependence,
rely. The multiplication of duties and engagements in this busy world may sometimes
press heavily upon the religious professor; but at such seasons they really serve as tests
of character. If he be truly what he professes to be, his sincerity will be seen in this, that
he will not allow his busiest cares to interfere with fellowship with God.
4. It does not appear to have been characterised by the slightest self-suspicion, end there
is constantly to be detected throughout a singular want of humility. It never seems to
have entered his thoughts that he could, by any possibility, have been in the wrong; but
he was most ready to suppose that anyone else might be to blame. In the right direction of
the lots as they were cast, it was the evident design of God to bring out to view the evil of
Saul inconsiderateness. He was the only culpable person, and God made that fact evident.
Now, one would have thought; that if anything could have brought him to a sense of his
error, it would have been the discovery that his rash decree and oath had implicated his
own son, Jonathan, in liability to suffering and death. But, no! he did not see it; he would
not see it. Our indignation rises when we hear him say, “God do so and more also: for
thou shalt surely die, Jonathan;” and we are ready to exclaim, “What! another oath? Has
not one done mischief enough? cannot you see it? do you not feel it?” Nothing can
exceed the hardening influence of that professed religion which leaves a man
unsuspicious and ignorant of himself. (J. A. Muller.)
The rash oath
Though Samuel could not spare time to seek the mind and will of God, he would follow the
devices of his own heart, and lean to his own understanding. He made a rash vow. He stands
here as a warning to me and you When we have been very much pressed with business or
hurried with distress, how short have we been in prayer! how remiss in seeking the Lord!
And then, when our conscience was a little uneasy, we have tried to quiet it with some
foolish resolutions, thereby bringing ourselves into bondage and sin. As if the more to expose
100

101. the folly of Saul’s vow, the wearied and worn Israelites come to a wood where delicious food
was ready to drop into their mouths; they might almost have eaten as they ran. Ah, Israel!
how kindly would your heavenly, your rejected King, have supplied and refreshed you, while
the king whom you have chosen does but distress and oppress you. A soldier of Jesus knows
what it is after climbing some craggy rock, and after many a hard struggle with his enemies,
to get a taste of that precious word which is sweeter than honey to his mouth (Psa_119:103).
His downcast eyes are lightened—he again sees him who is invisible—he is satisfied with
marrow and fatness, and praises his God with joyful lips. The poor people became extremely
faint for want of food; and as soon as ever the set time was expired, they flew upon the spoil,
and, ravenous as they were, did eat, with the blood, thus breaking a direct command of God,
while they had so scrupulously kept the commandment of a man God had commanded them
not to eat the blood of the sacrifices: probably this command was given to keep up a lively
remembrance that it was blood, even the blood of Jesus only, that could atone for sin. Saul
puts a stop to this, and, with a further show of devotion,—builds an altar unto the Lord Alas,
poor Saul! thou art not the only one of whom it will be said, “He did many things, but left
undone the one thing needful.” Though this oath of Saul was so rash and foolish, yet how
sacred is an oath with our God. Though only one, and he the well beloved Jonathan, had
broken it and that too ignorantly, still God must avenge a broken oath. Oh, righteous Father!
what a warning, what a word of comfort is here! Poor swearer! it has a dark side for thee.
Will God thus remember, thus take notice of a curse? And wilt thou dare to curse thyself, thy
wife, thy children, thy neighbour, thy cattle, thine eyes, thy limbs, and then say, “Tush, God
hath forgotten?” Instead of profiting by the trouble that his rash oath had already brought,
upon the people, Saul adds yet another, saying, “As the Lord liveth, which sayeth Israel,
though it be in Jonathan, my son he shall surely die.” The people, wiser than the headstrong
king, rescue the well-beloved Jonathan, giving him, in a few words, as high a character as can
be given of a worm. “He hath wrought with God.” To walk with God, and to work with God,
should just form the summary of a believer’s life and occupation. It is not confined to one or
two of his children, but this honour have all his saints. (Helen Plumptre.)
Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening.
A bad saving of time
It is plain enough, this refusing the people time for eating that they might swiftly pursue, was
really a pernicious saving of time; was really a hindrance rather than a help. For, through lack
of food, the people became so exhausted that they could not pursue. This bad saving of time
is but an illustration of the sort of time-saving many of us are frequently at in these last years
of the nineteenth century! How frequently young people make such bad saving of time when
they refuse themselves the food of preparation for future service, by using the time of their
youth in too great devotion to other things. The young man in business whose attention is on
the simple getting through anyhow with his duty, is making this bad saving of time. The
young woman whose chief care is society rather than thoroughness and deftness in the
knowledges and services that specially belong to women, is making such bad saving of her
time. They set Michael Angelo at carving a statue in snow. Lost time for the great sculptor,
for the statue being finished could only melt. Such as these are carving statues out of snow,
and poor ones at that.
2. How frequently people make such bad saving of time when, like Saul refusing to let
the people take time for eating, they refuse to take time for the duty next them, and use
that time in dreaming about or dreading the duty.
3. How frequently people make bad saving of time by refusing to seize the present time
for becoming Christians, using the time meanwhile for the pursuit of other things.
(Wayland Hoyt, D. D.)
101

102. 25 The entire army entered the woods, and
there was honey on the ground.
BARNES, "All they of the land - literally, all the land, probably meaning all those
named in 1Sa_14:21-22, who now flocked to the wood as a rendezvous.
CLARKE, "There was honey upon the ground - There were many wild bees in that
country, and Judea is expressly said to be a land flowing with milk and honey.
GILL, "And all they of the land came to a wood,.... Which lay between Bethaven and
Aijalon; by whom are meant not all the inhabitants of the land of Israel, but all that came
with Saul and Jonathan, and that joined them in the pursuit:
and there was honey upon the ground; which dropped upon it, as in the following verse, or
where it was produced by bees; for Aristotle (r) reports, that bees in some places make their
combs upon the ground; this was wild honey, which Diodorus Siculus (s) speaks of as
common in Arabia, and which perhaps John the Baptist ate of, Mat_3:4. Jarchi says, this was
the honey of canes, or sugar canes, which grew in the land of Israel; and affirms from Nathan
an Ishmaelite, that in the Ishmaelitish or Arabic language they call honey, sugar; but neither
of these can be proved.
HENRY 27-29, "The people observed his order, but it had many inconveniences attending
it. 1. The soldiers were tantalized; for, in their pursuit of the enemy, it happened that they
went through a wood so full of wild honey that it dropped from the trees upon the ground, the
Philistines having perhaps, in their flight, broken in upon the honeycombs, for their own
refreshment, and left them running. Canaan flowed with honey, and here is an instance of it.
They sucked honey out of the rock, the flinty rock (Deu_32:13); yet, for fear of the curse,
they did not so much as taste the honey, 1Sa_14:25, 1Sa_14:26. Those are worthy of the
name of Israelites that can deny themselves and their own appetites even when they are most
craving, and the delights of sense most tempting, for fear of guilt and a curse, and the table
becoming a snare. Let us never feed ourselves, much less feast ourselves, without fear. 2.
102

103. Jonathan fell under the curse through ignorance. He heard not of the charge his father had
given; for, having bravely forced the lines, he was then following the chase, and therefore
might justly be looked upon as exempted from the charge and intended in it. But it seems it
was taken for granted, and he himself did not object against it afterwards, that it extended to
him, though absent upon so good an occasion. He, not knowing any peril in it, took up a piece
of a honey-comb, upon the end of his staff, and sucked it (1Sa_14:27), and was sensibly
refreshed by it: His eyes were enlightened, which began to grow dim through hunger and
faintness; it made his countenance look pleasant and cheerful, for it was such as a stander-by
might discern (1Sa_14:29): See how my eyes have been enlightened. He thought no harm, nor
feared any, till one of the people acquainted him with the order, and then he found himself in
a snare. Many a good son has been thus entangled and distressed, in more ways than one, by
the rashness of an inconsiderate father. Jonathan, for his part, lost the crown he was heir to
by his father's folly, which, it may be, this was an ill omen of.
JAMISON, "all they of the land came to a wood; and there was honey — The honey is
described as “upon the ground,” “dropping” from the trees, and in honeycombs - indicating it
to be bees’ honey. “Bees in the East are not, as in England, kept in hives; they are all in a wild
state. The forests literally flow with honey; large combs may be seen hanging on the trees as
you pass along, full of honey” [Roberts].
K&D, "1Sa_14:25
“And all the land (i.e., all the people of the land who had gathered round Saul: vid., 1Sa_
14:29) came into the woody country; there was honey upon the field.” ‫ַר‬‫ﬠ‬ַ‫י‬ signifies here a
woody district, in which forests alternated with tracts of arable land and meadows.
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:25
And all they of the land. Hebrew, "the whole land," or, as we should say, the
whole country, which had risen to join in the pursuit. Honey upon the ground.
The wild bees in Palestine fill fissures in the rocks (Deu_32:13; Psa_81:16) and
hollow trees with honey, till the combs, breaking with the weight, let it run down
upon the ground. A similar abundance of honey was found by the early settlers in
America.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:25. All they of the land — The six hundred that were
with Saul, and who were now engaged in the pursuit of the Philistines, are
chiefly intended here. Many others, however, from different parts of the
neighbouring country, had begun to flock in, and join them as soon as they
understood that their enemies fled. There was honey upon the ground — Which
had dropped, as was usual, from the hollow trees, or the clefts of rocks, where
bees were wont to make their combs in that country, as they also use to do in
many others, and even upon the very ground.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:25. And the whole land came into the wood.—The “land”
103

104. is put for the people, as appears from 1 Samuel 14:26. Comp. Jeremiah 22:29.
The honey which they found in the forest on the ground flowing (‫שׁ‬ַ‫ב‬ ְ‫דּ‬ ˂ֶ‫ל‬ֵ‫)ה‬ was
not that honey-like substance which is found on the leaves of certain bushes and
taken off them, but real honey from bees who built on trunks of trees or in clefts
of rocks, which, as Schultz (Leistungen, V:133) has seen in the wilderness of
Judea, often flows in streams on the ground from the over-full and pressed
honey-structure (comp. Deuteronomy 32:13; Judges 14:8; Psalm 81:17).
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:25-26
‘And all the people came into the forest, and there was honey on the ground, and
when the people had come to the forest, behold, the honey dropped, but no man
put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath.’
The result of the curse was that when, on passing through the forest while on the
chase, his men found energy giving food readily available, they were unable to
take advantage of it because of their fear of the oath.
Canaan is elsewhere described as a ‘land of milk and honey’. At this time there
were wild bees in abundance in the forests, and they would make their nests in
the trees and some of the honeycombs would hang down from the trees full of
honey, and would seemingly even drip honey. Travellers have described seeing
such things in hot countries.
26 When they went into the woods, they saw the
honey oozing out; yet no one put his hand to his
mouth, because they feared the oath.
BARNES, "The honey dropped - Rather, “Behold a stream of honey.” The
same thing may be seen in Spain, where in woody and rocky ground copious streams
of honey are often found.
104

105. CLARKE, "The honey dropped - It seems to have dropped from the trees on
the ground. Honey dews, as they are called, are not uncommon in most countries;
and this appears to have been something of this kind. I have seen honey in
considerable quantity on the trees and long grass in the fields, and have often eaten
of it.
GILL, "And when the people came into the wood, behold, the honey
dropped,.... Either from trees, which produced it; so Diodorus Siculus (t) speaks of
trees in some countries which produce honey; or from the sugar canes, as Jarchi; or
rather from the honeycombs which were framed in trees by bees; so Hesiod (u)
speaks of bees making their nests or combs in trees. Ben Gersom thinks that bee
hives were placed here in rows by the wayside, from whence the honey flowed; or
"went" (w), or there was a going of it; perhaps the combs being pressed by the
Philistines as they fled: the land of Canaan was a land flowing with milk and honey:
but no man put his hand to his mouth; that is, took not any of the honey and
ate it, though it was so near at hand, and there was plenty of it:
for the people feared the oath: Saul adjured them by, or the imprecation he
made on the person that should eat any food that day.
K&D, "1Sa_14:26
When the people came into the wood and saw a stream of honey (or wild or wood
bees), “no one put his hand to his mouth (sc., to eat of the honey), because they
feared the oath.”
PULPIT, "1Sa_14:26
The honey dropped. More correctly, "Behold, a stream (or a flowing) of honey."
WHEDON, "26. The honey dropped — Kitto quotes Mr. Roberts as saying:
“Bees in the East are not, as in England, kept in hives; they are all in a wild state.
The forests literally flow with honey; large combs may be seen hanging in the
trees as you pass along, full of honey.” Dr. Thomson says: “I have explored
densely wooded gorges in Hermon and in southern Lebanon where wild bees are
still found both in trees and in the clefts of the rocks.”
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:26-27. And when the people were come into the wood,
&c.— Wild honey, which was part of St. John Baptist's food in the wilderness,
may give us an idea of the great plenty of it in those deserts; and that
consequently, by taking the hint of nature, and enticing the bees into hives and
105

106. larger colonies, a much greater increase might be made of it, Accordingly
Josephus (Bell. Jud. lib. 5: cap. 4.) calls Jericho ‫קשסבם‬ ‫יפפןפסןצןם‬‫לוכ‬ a country
fertile in honey. We find, moreover, that wild honey is often mentioned in
Scripture. 1 Samuel 14:25-26. Deuteronomy 32:13. Psalms 81:16. Job 20:17.
Diodorus Siculus, lib. 19: speaks of the ‫יןם‬‫בדס‬ ‫י‬‫לוכ‬ wild honey, that dropped from
the trees; which some have taken, perhaps too hastily, for a honey-dew only, or
some liquid kind of manna: whereas bees are known to swarm, as well in the
hollow trunks, and upon the branches of trees, as in the clifts of rocks: honey,
therefore, may be equally expected from both places. See Dr. Shaw's Travels, p.
337. Jonathan, who was ignorant of his father's adjuration, being weary with the
fatigue of the pursuit, eats some of the wild honey which abounded in the present
wood; and his eyes were enlighted, i.e. his spirits and strength, which were quite
exhausted by long abstinence from food, so that he could scarcely see, were
restored to him, and he became fresh and lively to proceed in the pursuit of the
enemy: for it is a fact, that famine and fatigue, by weakening the spirits, dim the
sight; and as all meat and drink refreshes and enlivens, so wine and honey, in a
remarkable degree, produce this effect; for their spirits are both very subtile,
and quickly diffuse themselves through the human frame. See Bishop Patrick,
and Vossius de Orig. et Prog. Idol. lib. 4: cap. 69.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:27. Jonathan, however, had not heard the oath of his
father. He dips his staff into the honey and eats, in accordance with the haste of
the pursuit—that Isaiah, into the honey-comb (Sept.: ‫ךחס‬‫;ןם‬ Vulg.: favum, the
comb, not the liquid honey), which presented itself; into the comb, not the liquid
honey, because only in this way could he get enough with the tip of his staff.
Instead of “saw” (Kethib) read “were enlightened” (Qeri); see a similar
transposition in Heb. in 2 Samuel 24:20, comp. 2 Samuel 5:16. The word
describes the bodily and mental refreshment, the reviving of soul, which shows
itself straightway in the eyes.
27 But Jonathan had not heard that his father
had bound the people with the oath, so he
reached out the end of the staff that was in his
hand and dipped it into the honeycomb. He
raised his hand to his mouth, and his eyes
106

107. brightened.[c]
BARNES, "Were enlightened - i. e., he was refreshed, when he was faint.
CLARKE, "His eyes were enlightened - Hunger and fatigue affect and dim
the sight; on taking food, this affection is immediately removed. This most people
know to be a fact.
GILL, "But Jonathan heard not when his father charged the people with
the oath,.... Which charge was given, either before he came from Gibeah, before he
came to Jonathan, or while pursuing, when Jonathan was with another party either
fighting or pursuing:
wherefore he put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand: the staff
with which he walked, or rather the spear which he carried in his hand, and fought
his enemies with:
and dipped it in an honeycomb; or sugar cane, as Jarchi; or in wood honey, as
the margin of our Bibles; but best, in the honeycomb, as the word is rendered, Son_
5:1 and so the Targum, into the nest of honey (x):
and he put his hand to his mouth; first he took the honey off of the top of his
rod, and then put it to his mouth and ate it:
and his eyes were enlightened: which before were dim and dull through want of
food, which is a common case; but became brisk and lively on eating the honey,
nourishment being presently communicated, and he refreshed with it, and his spirits
revived; and which quickly appeared in the briskness and sparkling of his eyes: honey
being of a subtle nature, gives immediate refreshment and rigour; hence this phrase
is frequently used by Jewish writers (y) for refreshment, after hunger, fatigue, and
weariness; and which virtue is ascribed by them to fine bread, wine, oil, and
particularly to honey.
HENRY, "1Sa_14:27
But Jonathan, who had not heard his father's oath, dipped (in the heat of pursuit,
that he might not have to stop) the point of his staff in the new honey, and put it to
his mouth, “and his eyes became bright;” his lost strength, which is reflected in the
eye, having been brought back by this invigorating taste. The Chethibh ‫תראנה‬ is
probably to be read ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ֶ‫א‬ ְ‫ר‬ ִ‫,תּ‬ the eyes became seeing, received their power of vision
again. The Masoretes have substituted as the Keri ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ְ‫ר‬ֹ‫א‬ ָ‫,תּ‬ from ‫ור‬ֹ‫,א‬ to become bright,
107

108. according to 1Sa_14:29; and this is probably the correct reading, as the letters might
easily be transposed.
WHEDON, "27. His eyes were enlightened — Languor and faintness of the body
show themselves in the eye, and this was the case with Jonathan and the people.
But this refreshing taste of wild honey reinvigorated Jonathan, and caused his
eyes to sparkle with returning strength. There is some confusion here in the
pointed Hebrew text. The Keri, after the analogy of ‫ארו‬ in 1 Samuel 14:29, and
with many codices, and the Syriac, Arabic, Chaldee, and Vulgate, read ‫,תארנה‬
from ‫,אור‬ to become bright. But if we adhere to the Kethib we should change the
pointing thus — ‫תראנה‬ . In either case the meaning is substantially the same.
ELLLICOTT, " (27) He put forth the end of the rod.—Most likely, with the
point of his staff took up a piece of the honeycomb. Jonathan in that hurried
battle and pursuit had heard nothing of his father’s rash oath, and was, no
doubt, owing to his exertions in the earlier part of that eventful day, worn out
with fatigue and hunger.
And his eyes were enlightened.—This simply means that the natural dimness
caused by extreme exhaustion passed away when his long fast was broken;
literally, his eyes became bright. Hence the Talmud comments: “Whoever suffers
from the effects of intense hunger, let him eat honey and other sweet things, for
such eatables are efficacious in restoring the light of one’s eyes . . . Thus we read
of Jonathan, “See, I pray you, how my eyes have been enlightened because I
tasted a little of this honey” (1 Samuel 14:27).—Treatise Yoma, fol. 83,
Colossians 2.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:27
‘But Jonathan did not hear when his father charged the people with the oath,
which was the reason why he put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand,
and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes
were enlightened.’
Jonathan, however, had not been there when the oath was made, and knew
nothing about it, and so he did take advantage of the honey, and was, as a result,
physically strengthened. The last point is important. The writer does not see
Jonathan as culpable.
108

109. 28 Then one of the soldiers told him, “Your
father bound the army under a strict oath,
saying, ‘Cursed be anyone who eats food today!’
That is why the men are faint.”
BARNES, "And the people were faint - Read, “are faint,” the words are part of
the man’s complaint.
GILL, "Then answered one of the people, and said,.... To Jonathan, who
might direct and encourage the people to do as he had done, at least so he did by his
example, if not by words; the latter is not improbable: and therefore one of the men
that came along with Saul, and had now joined Jonathan, and who heard what Saul
had said, replied:
thy father straitly charged the people with an oath; gave them a strict charge,
with an oath or imprecation annexed to it:
saying, cursed be the man that eateth any food this day; that is, until the
evening, as in 1Sa_14:24.
and the people were faint; which is either the observation of the writer of the
book; or it may be the words of the man, imputing the faintness of the people to this
adjuration of Saul restraining them from food; or as taking notice how strictly the
people observed it, though they were hungry, faint, and weary.
K&D, "1Sa_14:28-30
When one of the people told him thereupon of his father's oath, in consequence of
which the people were exhausted (‫ם‬ָ‫ﬠ‬ָ‫ה‬ ‫ַף‬‫ﬠ‬ָ‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ belongs to the man's words; and ‫ַף‬‫ﬠ‬ָ‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ is the
same as in Jdg_4:21), Jonathan condemned the prohibition. “My father has brought
the land (i.e., the people of the land, as in 1Sa_14:25) into trouble (‫ַר‬‫כ‬ָ‫ﬠ‬, see at Gen_
34:30): see how bright mine eyes have become because I tasted a little of this honey.
How much more if the people had eaten to-day of the booty of its enemies, would
not the overthrow among the Philistines truly have then become great?” ‫י‬ ִ‫כּ‬ ‫ף‬ ַ‫,א‬ lit. to
this (there comes) also that = not to mention how much more; and ‫ה‬ ָ‫ַתּ‬‫ﬠ‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫כּ‬ is an
emphatic introduction of the apodosis, as in Gen_31:42; Gen_43:10, and other
passages, and the apodosis itself is to be taken as a question.
109

110. PULPIT, "1Sa_14:28
And the people were faint. There is great diversity of opinion whether this be
part or not of the speech of the man who informed Jonathan of the oath forced on the
people by Saul. It makes, perhaps, the better sense if regarded as the continuation of
the history, and inserted to justify Jonathan’s disapproval of his father’s hasty
command. The fight rendering is were weary, as in the margin and Jdg_4:21.
ELLICOTT, "(28) Then answered one of the people.—Most probably, in reply
to Jonathan’s pointing out the plentiful supply of honey, and inviting the soldiers
near him to refresh themselves with it. The words “and the people were faint,” at
the close of the verse, should be rendered, and the people are faint; they were
part of the speech of the soldier who was telling Jonathan of his father’s rash
oath,
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:28
‘Then answered one of the people, and said, “Your father strictly charged the
people with an oath, saying, “Cursed be the man who eats food this day.” And
the people were faint.’
Seeing Jonathan’s action one of Saul’s men pointed out to him that he was
breaking his father’s oath. And the writer then takes the opportunity to draw
out the fact that because of that oath the people were faint. He is stressing Saul’s
folly, not Jonathan’s.
29 Jonathan said, “My father has made trouble
for the country. See how my eyes brightened
when I tasted a little of this honey.
BARNES, "Hath troubled - The same word as was applied to Achan Jos_7:25,
and gave its name to the valley of Achor. This additional reference to Joshua is
remarkable (compare 1Sa_14:24).
110

111. CLARKE, "Then said Jonathan, my father hath troubled the land,.... The
people of the land, as the Targum, the soldiers in his army; afflicted and distressed
them, and made them uneasy in their minds, like troubled waters; the Arabic version
is,"my father hath sinned against the people;''hath done them injury by forbidding
them to eat. This was not wisely said by Jonathan; how much soever his father was to
be blamed, it did not become him as a son thus to reflect upon him, and it might have
tended to mutiny and sedition:
see, I pray you, how mine eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a
little of this honey; the benefit he received by it was very visible; it might easily be
discerned that he was greatly refreshed with it, and his spirits invigorated by it; it
was to be seen in the cheerfulness of his countenance, and the briskness of his eyes:
and he suggests it would have had the same effect upon the people, had they eaten of
it, as he had done.
GILL, "Then said Jonathan, my father hath troubled the land,.... The
people of the land, as the Targum, the soldiers in his army; afflicted and distressed
them, and made them uneasy in their minds, like troubled waters; the Arabic version
is,"my father hath sinned against the people;''hath done them injury by forbidding
them to eat. This was not wisely said by Jonathan; how much soever his father was to
be blamed, it did not become him as a son thus to reflect upon him, and it might have
tended to mutiny and sedition:
see, I pray you, how mine eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a
little of this honey; the benefit he received by it was very visible; it might easily be
discerned that he was greatly refreshed with it, and his spirits invigorated by it; it
was to be seen in the cheerfulness of his countenance, and the briskness of his eyes:
and he suggests it would have had the same effect upon the people, had they eaten of
it, as he had done.
HENRY, "See how my eyes have been enlightened. He thought no harm, nor feared
any, till one of the people acquainted him with the order, and then he found himself
in a snare. Many a good son has been thus entangled and distressed, in more ways
than one, by the rashness of an inconsiderate father. Jonathan, for his part, lost the
crown he was heir to by his father's folly, which, it may be, this was an ill omen of.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:29-30
‘Then Jonathan said, “My father has troubled the land. See, I pray you, how my
eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a little of this honey. How much
more, if it had been that the people had eaten freely today of the spoil of their
enemies which they found? For now has there been no great slaughter among the
Philistines.”
Jonathan also draws out the fact of Saul’s folly. He points out how his strength
111

112. has been restored by eating the honey, while the failure to do so by Saul’s men
has resulted in the chase not being as effective as it should have been. Had they
only been able to restore themselves by eating the honey, and by taking
advantage of provisions that the fleeing Philistines had dropped, they would have
been fighting fit. But now they were weak and faint. So the writer wants us to
recognise that Saul’s break with Samuel and resultant folly has brought failure
in the midst of triumph.
30 How much better it would have been if the
men had eaten today some of the plunder they
took from their enemies. Would not the
slaughter of the Philistines have been even
greater?”
GILL, "How much more, if haply the people had eaten freely today of the
spoil of their enemies which they found?.... That is, had they been, allowed eat
freely of the provisions, of bread, wine, &c. they found in the enemy's camp, they
would have been much more refreshed and strengthened than it could be supposed
he was with eating a little honey; if that had had such an effect upon him, of what
service would a full meal have been to the people?
for had there not been now a much greater slaughter among the
Philistines? the people would have had more strength to smite them, and would
have pursued them with greater ardour and swiftness, and so have made a greater
slaughter among them than they had; he intimates that Saul's end would have been
better answered by suffering the people to eat, than by forbidding them.
HENRY 30-34, "The soldiers were faint, and grew feeble, in the pursuit of the
Philistines. Jonathan foresaw this would be the effect of it; their spirits would flag,
and their strength would fail, for want of sustenance. Such is the nature of our bodies
that they soon grow unfit for service if they be not supplied with fresh recruits. Daily
work cannot be done without daily bread, which our Father in heaven graciously
gives us. It is bread that strengthens man's heart; therefore Jonathan reasoned very
well, If the people had eaten freely, there would have been a much greater slaughter
(1Sa_14:30); but, as it was, they were very faint, too much fatigued (so the Chaldee),
112

113. and began to think more of their meat than of their work. 4. The worst effect of all
was that at evening, when the restraint was taken off and they returned to their food
again, they were so greedy and eager upon it that they ate the flesh with the blood,
expressly contrary to the law of God, 1Sa_14:32. Two hungry meals, we say, make the
third a glutton; it was so here. They would not stay to have their meat either duly
killed (for they slew the cattle upon the ground, and did not hang them up, as they
used to do, that the blood might all run out of them) or duly dressed, but fell greedily
upon it before it was half boiled or half roasted, 1Sa_14:32. Saul, being informed of
it, reproved them for the sin (1Sa_14:33): You have transgressed; but did not, as he
should have done, reflect upon himself as having been accessory to it, and having
made the Lord's people to transgress. To put a stop to this irregularity, Saul ordered
them to set up a great stone before him, and let all that had cattle to kill, for their
present use, bring them thither, and kill them under his eye upon that stone (1Sa_
14:33), and the people did so (1Sa_14:34), so easily were they restrained and
reformed when their prince took care to do his part. If magistrates would but use
their power as they might, people would be made better than they are with more ease
than is imagined.
ELLICOTT, " (29) My father hath troubled the land.—In other words, “My
father’s ill-considered vow has done-grave harm to us in Israel. Had he not
weakened the people, by hindering them from taking the needful refreshment,
our victory would have been far more complete. Utter exhaustion has prevented
us from following up our victory.”
31 That day, after the Israelites had struck
down the Philistines from Mikmash to Aijalon,
they were exhausted.
BARNES, "Aijalon. - The modern Yalo. It lies upon the side of a hill to the south
of a fine valley which opens from between the two Bethhorons right down to the
western plain of the Philistines, exactly on the route which the Philistines, when
expelled from the high country about Michmash and Bethel, would take to regain
their own country. Aijalon would be 15 or 20 miles from Michmash.
CLARKE, "They smote the Philistines - from Mishmash to Aijalon - The
113

114. distance Calmet states to be three or four leagues.
GILL, "And they smote the Philistines that day from Michmash to
Aijalon,.... Michmash was the place where the camp of the Philistines was when
Jonathan first attacked them, and from whence they fled, and they were pursued by
the Israelites that day as far as Aijalon. There was a city of this name in the tribe of
Dan, famous for the moon standing still in a valley adjoining to it, in the time of
Joshua, Jos_10:12 and another in the tribe of Zebulun, Jdg_12:12, but they both
seem to be at too great a distance to be the place here meant, which rather seems to
be Aijalon in the tribe of Judah, 2Ch_11:10 according to Bunting (z), it was twelve
miles from Michmash:
and the people were very faint; as they might well be, with pursuing the enemy
so many miles, and doing so much execution among them, without eating any food.
JAMISON, "And they smote the Philistines that day from Michmash to
Aijalon,.... Michmash was the place where the camp of the Philistines was when
Jonathan first attacked them, and from whence they fled, and they were pursued by
the Israelites that day as far as Aijalon. There was a city of this name in the tribe of
Dan, famous for the moon standing still in a valley adjoining to it, in the time of
Joshua, Jos_10:12 and another in the tribe of Zebulun, Jdg_12:12, but they both
seem to be at too great a distance to be the place here meant, which rather seems to
be Aijalon in the tribe of Judah, 2Ch_11:10 according to Bunting (z), it was twelve
miles from Michmash:
and the people were very faint; as they might well be, with pursuing the enemy
so many miles, and doing so much execution among them, without eating any food.
K&D, "Result of the battle, and consequences of Saul's rashness. - 1Sa_14:31. “On
that day they smote the Philistines from Michmash to Ajalon,” which has been
preserved in the village of Y‫ג‬lo (see at Jos_19:42), and was about three geographical
miles to the south-west of Michmash; “and the people were very faint,” because Saul
had forbidden them to eat before the evening (1Sa_14:24).
COFFMAN, "THE PEOPLE EAT MEAT WITH THE BLOOD STILL IN IT
"They struck down the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon. And the
people were very faint; the people flew upon the spoil, and took sheep and oxen
and calves, and slew them on the ground; and the people ate them with the
blood. Then they told Saul, "Behold, the people are sinning against the Lord, by
eating with the blood." And he said, "You have dealt treacherously; roll a great
stone to me here." And Saul said, "Disperse yourselves among the people, and
say to them, `Let every man bring his ox or his sheep, and slay them here, and
eat; and do not sin against the Lord by eating with the blood.'" So every one of
the people brought his ox with him that night and slew them there. And Saul
built an altar to the Lord; it was the first altar that he built to the Lord."
114

115. "From Michmash to Aijalon" (1 Samuel 14:31). "Aijalon was fifteen or twenty
miles from Michmash."[20] The Philistines, of course, were fleeing home as fast
as possible; and, if the Israelites had not been suffering from hunger and fatigue
the Philistine casualties would have been far greater.
"Let every man bring his ox or his sheep, and slay them here, and eat" (1 Samuel
14:34). The purpose of Saul here was to see that the animals to be eaten by his
troops were properly bled.
"And Saul built an altar" (1 Samuel 14:35). Saul evidently used that great stone
upon which the animals were slain as part of an altar to the Lord. However, "He
only began to build that altar, but did not finish it (1 Corinthians 27:24), because
of his haste to pursue the Philistines that night."[21]
ELLICOTT, "(31) From Michmash to Aijalon.—The battle and pursuit had
then extended some twenty miles of country. Again the extreme weariness of the
Israelites is mentioned. Aijalon, the modern Y‫ה‬lo, is some eighteen or twenty
miles from Michmash, where the main body of the Philistine army had been
encamped.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:31. See on 1 Samuel 14:23. Ajalon, the present village
Y‫ג‬lo, in the southeast end of a valley extending westward from Bethhoron. Rob.
Later Bib. Res. 188 [Am. ed. III:145—and II:253, 254; 14miles out of Jerusalem,
Smith’s B. D.—Tr.] The mention of the great weariness and exhaustion of the
people concludes the account of Saul’s rash conduct, and leads to the statement
of its consequences.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:31 a
‘And they smote of the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon.’
The detail of the battle is again taken up. From Michmash to Aijalon, a journey
of over twenty miles, partly down a fairly steep pass, there was a continual
slaughtering of the fleeing Philistines. If possible they had to be persuaded not to
return. It would at least keep them at bay for a time.
115

116. 1 Samuel 14:31-32 (31b-32)
‘And the people were very faint, and the people flew on the spoil, and took sheep,
and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground, and the people ate them with
the blood.’
Such was the panic among the Philistines who were in headlong flight, that
Saul’s men, in spite of their weakened state, were still able to continue the chase
and slaughter the stragglers all the way from Michmash to Aijalon, a distance of
nearly twenty miles over rough ground. This is an indication of the quality of
Saul’s men (see 1 Samuel 14:52). They would by now have been able to arm
themselves with proper weapons dropped by the enemy.
But they were naturally very weak after their exertions without food, and thus as
soon as the day ended at sunset, (with the result that the curse ceased to be
active), they were so hungry that they threw themselves eagerly on the spoils left
behind by the Philistines, slew their sheep, oxen and calves, and ate them raw
without being concerned about eating the blood. This was, of course, contrary to
the strict regulations of the Law which forbade the eating of the blood (see
Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:10-14; Deuteronomy 12:16).
PETT, "Verses 31-35
The People Sin By Eating The Blood Of Slain Beasts, And Saul Erects A
Primitive Place For Slaughter (1 Samuel 14:31-35).
A further consequence of Saul’s rash vow is now seen. Having been deprived of
food Saul’s men now sin against YHWH by eating animals with their blood. This
was something strictly forbidden by the Law (Leviticus 17:10-11), and Saul
therefore arranges for a primitive slaughter stone to be set up so that the animals
may be slain properly, and the blood be allowed to pour out on the ground as an
offering to YHWH (see Deuteronomy 12:15-16). If only he had been so keen on
obeying YHWH’s instructions previously, what a difference it would have made.
The writer then, in our view sarcastically, declares that this was the first altar
that Saul built to YHWH, for up to this point Samuel has always been
responsible for such activity. We gain a distinct impression here that what Saul
does is being presented by the writer in such a way that it depicts him as a
116

117. parody of Samuel, so that Saul, who is in fact responsible for the fiasco in the
first place, is being depicted as playing the great prophet in the place of Samuel.
Note that it is sandwiched between two questions asking ‘Is Saul also among the
prophets?’ in 1 Samuel 10:12; 1 Samuel 19:24, the first of which was at a time of
hope when he had just commenced his responsibilities, the other was when he
had demonstrated just what he had become, a vindictive executioner. Here we
get the answer. He might try to make it appear so, but really he is a ‘no, no’.
Analysis.
a And the people were very faint, and the people flew on the spoil, and took
sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground, and the people ate
them with the blood (1 Samuel 14:31-32).
b Then they told Saul, saying, “Behold, the people sin against YHWH, in that
they eat with the blood” (1 Samuel 14:33 a).
c And he said, “You have dealt treacherously. Roll a great stone to me this day”
(1 Samuel 14:33 b).
b And Saul said, “Disperse yourselves among the people, and say to them, ‘Bring
me here every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay them here, and eat,
and sin not against YHWH in eating with the blood” (1 Samuel 14:34 a).
a And all the people brought every man his ox with him that night, and slew
them there. And Saul built an altar to YHWH, the same was the first altar that
he built to YHWH (1 Samuel 14:34-35).
Note that in ‘a’ the people slew the animals on the ground , and ate them with the
blood, and in the parallel they slew the animals on the ‘altar’ that Saul built
(thus not eating them with the blood). In ‘b’ Saul was told that the people were
eating with the blood, and in the parallel he warns them not to eat with the blood
and thus sin against YHWH. Centrally in ‘c’ he rebukes the people for their
misbehaviour (in what is almost like an echo of Samuel) and calls on them to roll
117

118. a stone into place on which the animals can be slain.
1 Samuel 14:31-32 (31b-32)
‘And the people were very faint, and the people flew on the spoil, and took sheep,
and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground, and the people ate them with
the blood.’
Such was the panic among the Philistines who were in headlong flight, that
Saul’s men, in spite of their weakened state, were still able to continue the chase
and slaughter the stragglers all the way from Michmash to Aijalon, a distance of
nearly twenty miles over rough ground. This is an indication of the quality of
Saul’s men (see 1 Samuel 14:52). They would by now have been able to arm
themselves with proper weapons dropped by the enemy.
But they were naturally very weak after their exertions without food, and thus as
soon as the day ended at sunset, (with the result that the curse ceased to be
active), they were so hungry that they threw themselves eagerly on the spoils left
behind by the Philistines, slew their sheep, oxen and calves, and ate them raw
without being concerned about eating the blood. This was, of course, contrary to
the strict regulations of the Law which forbade the eating of the blood (see
Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:10-14; Deuteronomy 12:16).
32 They pounced on the plunder and, taking
sheep, cattle and calves, they butchered them on
the ground and ate them, together with the
blood.
118

119. CLARKE, "The people did eat them with the blood - They were faint
through hunger, and did not take time to bleed the cattle on which they fed. This was
another bad effect of Saul’s rash adjuration.
GILL, "And the people flew upon the spoil,.... Like a swift and ravenous bird,
as the eagle, and which seems to have its name in Greek from this word, see Isa_
46:11. When the evening was come, and they were free from the oath of Saul, and
being extremely hungry, faint, and weary, they were even ravenous for food and with
the greatest haste and eagerness laid hold on what came first to hand:
and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground; and
there they lay in their blood, which in such a position would not run out freely as
when slain and hang up:
and the people did eat them with the blood; they were so hungry they could
not stay the dressing of them, but ate them raw with the blood in them, not being
squeezed or drained out, at least not half boiled or roasted. Some of the Jewish
Rabbins (a) are of opinion(a) See Jarchi in loc.
HENRY32-34, "The worst effect of all was that at evening, when the restraint was
taken off and they returned to their food again, they were so greedy and eager upon it
that they ate the flesh with the blood, expressly contrary to the law of God, 1Sa_
14:32. Two hungry meals, we say, make the third a glutton; it was so here. They
would not stay to have their meat either duly killed (for they slew the cattle upon the
ground, and did not hang them up, as they used to do, that the blood might all run
out of them) or duly dressed, but fell greedily upon it before it was half boiled or half
roasted, 1Sa_14:32. Saul, being informed of it, reproved them for the sin (1Sa_
14:33): You have transgressed; but did not, as he should have done, reflect upon
himself as having been accessory to it, and having made the Lord's people to
transgress. To put a stop to this irregularity, Saul ordered them to set up a great
stone before him, and let all that had cattle to kill, for their present use, bring them
thither, and kill them under his eye upon that stone (1Sa_14:33), and the people did
so (1Sa_14:34), so easily were they restrained and reformed when their prince took
care to do his part. If magistrates would but use their power as they might, people
would be made better than they are with more ease than is imagined.
K&D, 1Sa_14:32
They therefore “fell voraciously upon the booty” - (the Chethibh ‫שׂ‬ ַ‫ע‬ַ ַ‫ו‬ is no doubt
merely an error in writing for ‫ט‬ ַ‫ע‬ַ ַ‫,ו‬ imperf. Kal of ‫יט‬ ִ‫ע‬ with Dagesh forte implic.
instead of ‫ט‬ ַ‫ע‬ָ ַ‫,ו‬ as we may see from 1Sa_15:19, since the meaning required by the
context, viz., to fall upon a thing, cannot be established in the case of ‫ה‬ ָ‫שׂ‬ ָ‫ע‬ with ‫ל‬ ֶ‫.ע‬ On
the other hand, there does not appear to be any necessity to supply the article before
119

120. ‫ל‬ ָ‫ל‬ ָ‫,שׁ‬ and this Keri seems only to have been taken from the parallel passage in 1Sa_
15:19), - “and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground (‫ה‬ ָ‫צ‬ ְ‫ר‬ፍ,
lit. to the earth, so that when they were slaughtered the animal fell upon the ground,
and remained lying in its blood, and was cut in pieces), and ate upon the blood” (‫ם‬ ָ ַ‫ה‬
‫ל‬ ַ‫,ע‬ with which ‫ם‬ ָ ַ‫ה‬ ‫ל‬ ֶ‫,א‬ “lying to the blood,” is interchanged in 1Sa_14:34), i.e., the
flesh along with the blood which adhered to it, by doing which they sinned against
the law in Lev_19:26. This sin had been occasioned by Saul himself through the
prohibition which he issued.
WHEDON, "32. The people flew upon the spoil, and… did eat… with the
blood — This was another unfortunate result of Saul’s hasty oath. So voracious
did the people become by the evening time that, in their haste to satisfy their
hunger, they waited not for proper dressing and cooking, but ate the sheep and
oxen with the blood, thus violating an oft-repeated commandment of the law. See
marginal references. The reading of the Keri ‫יעשׂ‬‫,ו‬ from ‫,עושׂ‬ or ‫ישׂ‬‫,ע‬ to fly upon,
after the analogy of 1 Samuel 15:19, is to be preferred before ‫יעשׂ‬‫ו‬ of the Kethib,
for ‫עשׂה‬ gives in this connexion, no good sense.
ELLICOTT, "(32) And the people flew upon the spoil . . . —No doubt, had the
men of Israel not been so faint for want of food, and utterly weary, many more of
the Philistine host would have fallen: as it was, vast spoil was left behind in the
hurried flight; but it was the beasts that the conquerors greedily seized, their
hunger was so great. “The moment that the day, with its enforced fast, was over,
they flew, like Mussulmans at sunset during the fast of Ramazan, upon the
captured cattle, and devoured them, even to the brutal neglect of the Law
forbidding the eating of flesh which contained blood.”—Stanley. (See Leviticus
17:10-14; Leviticus 19:26.)
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:32. The people flew on the spoil — Like ravenous birds.
They were so faint and hungry that in the evening, when the pursuit was given
over, they seized upon and devoured what was eatable of the spoil, and had not
patience to wait the killing and draining of the blood from the beasts, in the
manner it ought to have been done according to the law. But did eat them with
(or rather in) the blood — Thus they who made conscience of obeying the king’s
commandment, for fear of the curse, made no scruple of transgressing God’s
command.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:32.[FN13] And the people flew upon the prey—that
Isaiah, as soon as it was evening, comp. 1 Samuel 14:24. The same expression in 1
Samuel 15:19. The people slew the animals to the earth, down to the ground, and
then ate “upon (or, over) the blood,” blood being on the bodies because they
were on the ground, and so “with the blood.” On the preposition (‫ל‬ַ‫)ﬠ‬ see Exodus
120

121. 12:8 [Eng. A. V.: “with”], where also it introduces the basis or accompaniments
of the food. The people transgressed the command in Leviticus 19:26 : “Ye shall
not eat on blood” [Eng. A. V.: “with”], that Isaiah, no flesh under which or on
which there is blood. This is an extension of the prohibition of eating blood in
Leviticus 3:17; Leviticus 17:10-11, which is based on the fact that the blood is
conceived of as the seat and bearer of the life.
33 Then someone said to Saul, “Look, the men
are sinning against the Lord by eating meat that
has blood in it.”
“You have broken faith,” he said. “Roll a large
stone over here at once.”
BARNES, "Sin against the Lord - See the marginal reference “u.” But the prohibition
was older than the Law of Moses Gen_9:4. Compare Act_15:20, Act_15:29.
CLARKE, "Roll a great stone unto me - Probably this means that they should set up an
altar to the Lord, on which the animals might be properly slain, and the blood poured out
upon the earth; and a large stone was erected for an altar.
GILL, "Then they told Saul,.... Some that were more conscientious and religious, were
more circumspect, and strictly attended to the laws forbidding the eating of blood, and were
concerned at the indecent behaviour of others, and therefore thought fit to acquaint Saul with
it, to restrain it:
behold, the people sin against the Lord, in that they eat with the blood; by breaking the
laws of God respecting the eating of blood in Gen_9:4, especially in Lev_19:26.
and he said, ye have transgressed; the above laws of God; that is, Saul said to some persons
who were accused of the breach of them, and were ordered to come before him, and did
121

122. come:
roll a great stone unto me this day; pointing, perhaps, at one which lay at some distance
from him, and which he ordered to be rolled to him; this was done, that the creatures might
be slain on it, and their blood drawn out from them, or to offer sacrifice upon, and indeed for
both.
K&D, "1Sa_14:33-34
When this was told to Saul, he said, “Ye act faithlessly towards Jehovah” by transgressing
the laws of the covenant; “roll me now (lit. this day) a large stone. Scatter yourselves among
the people, and say to them, Let every one bring his ox and his sheep to me, and slay here”
(upon the stone that has been rolled up), viz., so that the blood could run off properly upon
the ground, and the flesh be separated from the blood. This the people also did.
ELLICOTT, "(33) Roll a great stone unto me this day.—The object of this was
that the people should kill their beasts upon the stone, and the blood could run
off upon the ground. It was a rough expedient, but it showed the wild soldiers
that their king and general determined that the Law of Moses should be kept
and honoured, even under circumstances of the direst necessity. This scrupulous
care for the “Law of the Lord” at such a time as the evening of the battle of
Michmash shows us what a strange complex character was Saul’s: now
superstitiously watchful lest the letter of the Law should be broken; now
recklessly careless whether or not the most solemn commands of God were
executed.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:33-34. Ye have transgressed — He sees their fault, but
not his own, in giving the occasion of it. Disperse yourselves among the people —
Saul sends out his officers to charge the people that, when any more beasts were
to be killed by or for any of them, they should bring them to a particular place,
where he had fixed a stone for the purpose, and slay them under the inspection
of proper officers.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:33. And he said, Ye have transgressed: roll a great stone
unto me— The people were so extremely faint through want of food, that they
flew upon the spoil, 1 Samuel 14:32 like ravenous birds, and forgot to pour out
the blood upon the ground, according to the precepts of their law: to prevent the
repetition of which, Saul orders a great stone to be rolled, or brought to him, that
an altar might be erected for the sacrificing of peace-offerings, and that the
blood might there be properly poured out. The French version renders this, You
roll a great stone upon me this day; as much as to say, according to a proverbial
manner of speaking, that they would bring upon him and his kingdom the
greatest misfortunes. See Martin's note upon the verse;
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:33. The people’s eating is characterized as a sinning
122

123. against the Lord.[FN14] Saul calls this conduct faithlessness, because the law of
the covenant was transgressed. For now the Sept. has (unnecessarily) hither.
[The ‫יּוֹם‬ַ‫,ה‬ “to-day,” “this day,” is here not well rendered by “now,” which would
be ‫ה‬ ַ‫תּ‬ָ‫;ﬠ‬ the Sept. reading is better.—Tr.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:33
‘Then they told Saul, saying, “Behold, the people sin against YHWH, in that they
eat with the blood.” And he said, “You have dealt treacherously. Roll a great
stone to me this day.” ’
The news of their misdemeanour reached Saul’s ears. ‘The people are sinning
against YHWH by eating blood.’ And his response was immediate. He declared
that a primitive altar must be set up by rolling a large stone into place on which
the animals could be properly slain and the blood allowed to pour out on the
ground (see Deuteronomy 12:15-16). This was not for the offering of sacrifices,
but in order that the beasts might be properly slain.
34 Then he said, “Go out among the men and
tell them, ‘Each of you bring me your cattle and
sheep, and slaughter them here and eat them.
Do not sin against the Lord by eating meat with
blood still in it.’”
So everyone brought his ox that night and
slaughtered it there.
GILL, "And Saul said, disperse yourselves among the people,.... In the
123

124. camp, some one way, and some another, and make proclamation throughout it; this
he said to some of his officers, whom he sent out as heralds, to publish his will and
pleasure:
and say unto them, bring me hither every man his ox, and every man his
sheep, and slay them here; on the great stone he had ordered to roll to the place
where he was:
and eat them; in the same place, being rightly slain, and the blood let out; all this
was to be done, the slaying of the beasts, and eating them, in the presence of Saul,
and under his inspection, that every thing might be done decently, and in order, and
according to the law of God:
and sin not against the Lord, in eating with the blood; as some of them had
done, 1Sa_14:32 and all the people brought every man his ox with him; and his sheep
also, though not expressed, yet to be supplied from the preceding clause: and these
every man brought "with him that night"; the Jewish Rabbins (c) are divided about
these creatures slain, whether for sacrifices or common food; and those that think
sacrifices are meant dispute whether it was lawful to slay them in the night, which
some allow to be lawful, if on a small and private altar, but not upon a large and
public one; but these were slain no doubt for common food, which all agree might be
slain in the night:
and slew them there; before Saul, and on the great stone rolled unto him.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:34. Saul directs his informants to disperse themselves
among the people, and announce that every one should bring his beast to him,
and slay here on the great stone, that there might be no sinful eating.[FN15]
Saul’s command, which speaks for his careful observance of the Law, was
carried out by the people. As every where before, so here the people display
unconditional obedience to Saul. Only by slaughtering on the stone was it
possible to separate the blood from the flesh. When the slaughtering occurred,
the night had already set in. The Sept. reading: “what was in his hand” instead
of “his ox in his hand” [Eng. A. V.: “with him”] is unnecessary.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:34
‘And Saul said, “Disperse yourselves among the people, and say to them, ‘Bring
me here every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay them here, and eat,
and sin not against YHWH in eating with the blood.” And all the people brought
every man his ox with him that night, and slew them there.’
Then Saul commanded that instructions be given to all the people that they bring
their animals to the stone and slay them there in the right manner so as to avoid
directly eating the blood. The people immediately responded. Note the reference
to ‘that night’. The day was now over. (The Israelite day ceased at sunset when a
124

125. new ‘day’ began).
35 Then Saul built an altar to the Lord; it was
the first time he had done this.
BARNES, "And Saul built ... - i. e., of the great stone which they had rolled to
kill the oxen and sheep upon, he began to build an altar to Yahweh (see the margin);
but he did not finish it (compare 1Ch_27:24), in his haste to pursue the Philistines
that night.
CLARKE, "Saul built an altar - And this we are informed was the first he had
built; Samuel, as prophet had hitherto erected the altars, and Saul thought he had
sufficient authority to erect one himself without the prophet, as he once offered
sacrifice without him.
GILL, "And Saul built an altar unto the Lord,.... To offer peace offerings upon,
in thankfulness for the victory obtained over his enemies, or sin offerings to make
atonement for the sin of the people, perhaps both, however the former:
the same was the first altar that he built unto the Lord; for though he had
offered sacrifice at Gilgal, there was an altar ready built for him: or "he began to
build"; he laid the first stone of it, and the builders built upon it; so some others say,
that he was the first of the kings that built an altar to the Lord (d); others, the first of
the judges that built one; though Gideon built one, it was for his own private use, not
for all Israel, as this, so R. Isaiah; but Ben Gersom, and so Abarbinel, refer this to the
great stone Saul ordered to be rolled to him, and take the sense to be, that that began
to be built an altar to the Lord; that was the beginning of one; for he did not now stay
to finish it, being eager on his pursuit of the Philistines, as follows.
HENRY, "On this occasion Saul built an altar (1Sa_14:35), that he might offer
sacrifice, either by way of acknowledgment of the victory they had obtained or by the
way of atonement for the sin they had been guilty of. The same was the first altar
that he built, and perhaps the rolling of the great stone to kill the beasts on reminded
him of converting it into an altar, else he would not have thought of it. Saul was
turning aside from God, and yet now he began to build altars, being most zealous (as
125

126. many are) for the form of godliness when he was denying the power of it. See Hos_
8:14, Israel has forgotten his Maker, and buildeth temples. Some read it, He began
to build that altar; he laid the first stone, but was so hasty to pursue his victory that
he could not stay to finish it.
WHEDON, "35. The same was the first altar that he built — Literally, It he
began to build an altar to Jehovah. Compare margin. This, means, according to
Grotius, that Saul commenced the building of the altar by laying the first stone
himself. Hervey thinks he began to build an altar, but, in his haste to pursue the
Philistines, did not finish it. But the previous sentence states that he did build the
altar, and the previous verse implies that sacrifices were offered on it. The more
probable meaning is the one conveyed by our version — this was the first altar,
or the beginning of Saul’s altar building. The altar of the burnt offerings at
Gilgal (1 Samuel 13:9) had been erected by others. It is very supposable and
probable that Saul built many other altars to Jehovah.
ELLICOTT, "(35) The same was the first altar that he built . . .—More
accurately, as in margin, the same he began to build as an altar. The great
Jewish commentators are divided as to the precise meaning of the old Hebrew
language of this verse. Abarbanel interprets the words, “that King Saul began to
build, but did not finish.” The Midrash prefers to understand the statement as
telling how “Saul began among the kings of Israel the building of altars.” The
more obvious meaning, if we translate as in our English Version, seems to be that
this was the first public acknowledgment King Saul made to God for the mercies
and goodness vouchsafed to him.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:35. Saul built the altar to the Lord as thanksgiving for
this victory over the Philistines. The same he began to build—that Isaiah, he
built this as the first, comp. Gesen. § 142, A1. [Bib. Comm.: “began to build, but
did not finish,” as 1 Chronicles 27:24. So Abarbanel; but, according to the
Midrash, Saul began among the kings the building of altars (Philippson).
Wordsworth: It seems to be implied that this was the first time he had made
acknowledgment to God for his successes.—Tr.] Probably he here used the great
stone which he had caused to be brought. He thus established a place for the
worship of God in commemoration of this victory.
36 Saul said, “Let us go down and pursue the
Philistines by night and plunder them till dawn,
126

127. and let us not leave one of them alive.”
“Do whatever seems best to you,” they replied.
But the priest said, “Let us inquire of God
here.”
BARNES, "Then said the priest ... - Ahijah, with equal courage and faithfulness,
worthy of his office as “the priest,” when every one else yielded to Saul’s humor, proposed
that they should draw near to God to inquire of Him. (Compare 1Ki_22:7.)
CLARKE, "Then said the priest - It is evident that Ahiah doubted the
propriety of pursuing the Philistines that night; and as a reverse of fortune might be
ruinous after such a victory, he wished to have specific directions from the Lord.
GILL, "And Saul said,.... To his son Jonathan, or to some of the principal officers
of his army:
let us go down after the Philistines by night; or tonight, that same night;
which is another hardship he laid his troops under; as he had restrained them from
eating all that day until evening, now he proposed they shall take no sleep that night,
but proceed on in their pursuit of the Philistines, having eaten, and drank, and
refreshed themselves. The Arabic version is, "let us go down to the Philistines"; and
so Noldius (e) chooses to render the words; which I pretty much wonder at, and
especially at what he observes in favour of it, and against the common rendering;
that at this time the Philistines had not turned their backs, so that the Israelites could
not be said to go after them, but were in a camp opposite to them; but that they had
fled, and were pursued, is most certain from 1Sa_14:22,
and spoil them until the morning light; or kill of them, as the Targum, and so
the Arabic version; for spoiling must be meant of killing; for as for the spoil of their
provisions, riches, &c. that had already fallen into their hands, 1Sa_14:30, and this is
confirmed by what follows:
and let us not leave a man of them; great numbers had been slain already, partly
by their falling upon one another, and partly by the swords of Jonathan and his
armourbearer at the first onset, and by Saul and his men in the pursuit of them; and
so intent was Saul in the utter destruction of them, that he was for following and
cutting them off, that none of their prodigious army might return home:
127

128. and they said, do whatsoever seemeth good unto thee; they had religiously
observed his oath, in refraining from food all the day, and now they were as willing to
be obedient to his command in denying themselves refreshing rest in sleep:
then said the priest, let us draw near hither unto God; Ahiah the priest,
Josephus (f) calls him Ahitob, who was present with the ark, agreed to the proposal
of Saul, only moved, that before they set forward they would seek the Lord; perhaps
reflecting upon the abrupt manner in which Saul departed from Gibeah, just as he
was consulting the Lord, and not staying for an answer from him; which the priest
might fear would be resented by him, and therefore proposes first to draw nigh to
God; not to the altar Saul had built, or had just begun to build, but to the ark, with
which the high priest was, and was a symbol of the divine Presence: the Targum
is,"let us draw near hither, and inquire by the word of the Lord.''
HENRY, "Here is, I. Saul's boasting against the Philistines. He proposed, as soon
as his soldiers had got their suppers, to pursue them all night, and not leave a man of
them, 1Sa_14:36. Here he showed much zeal, but little discretion; for his army, thus
fatigued, could as ill spare a night's sleep as a meal's meat. But it is common for rash
and foolish men to consider nobody but themselves, and, so that they might but have
their humour, not to care what hardships they put upon those that are under them.
However, the people were so obsequious to their king that they would by no means
oppose the motion, but resolved to make the best of it, and, if he will go on, they will
follow him: Do whatsoever seemeth good to thee. Only the priest thought it
convenient to go on with the devotions that were broken off abruptly (1Sa_14:19),
and to consult the oracle: Let us draw near hither unto God. Princes and great men
have need of such about them as will thus be their remembrancers, wherever they go,
to take God along with them. And, when the priest proposed it, Saul could not for
shame reject the proposal, but asked counsel of God (1Sa_14:37): “Shall I go down
after the Philistines? And shall I speed?”
K&D, "1Sa_14:36
After the people had strengthened themselves in the evening with food, Saul
wanted to pursue the Philistines still farther during the night, and to plunder among
them until the light (i.e., till break of day), and utterly destroy them. The people
assented to this proposal, but the priest (Ahiah) wished first of all to obtain the
decision of God upon the matter. “We will draw near to God here” (before the altar
which has just been built).
COFFMAN, "THE VIOLATOR OF SAUL'S FOOLISH CURSE WAS
EXPOSED
"Then Saul said, "Let us go down after the Philistines by night and despoil them
until the morning light; let us not leave a man of them." And they said, "Do
whatever seems good to you." But the priest said, "Let us draw near hither to
God." And Saul inquired of God, "Shall I go down after the Philistines? Wilt
thou give them into the hand of Israel"? But he did not answer him that day.
128

129. And Saul said, "Come hither all you leaders of the people; and know and see
how this sin has arisen today, for as the Lord lives who saves Israel, though it be
in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die." But there was not a man among all the
people that answered him. Then he said to all Israel, "You shall be on one side,
and I and Jonathan my son will be on the other side." And the people said to
Saul, "Do what seems good to you." Therefore Saul said, "O Lord God of Israel,
why hast thou not answered thy servant this day? If this guilt is in me or in
Jonathan my son, O Lord, God of Israel, give Urim; but if this guilt is in thy
people Israel, give Thummim." And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the
people escaped. Then Saul said, "Cast the lot between me and my son
Jonathan." And Jonathan was taken."
This would have been an excellent place for Saul to have confessed his foolish sin
in the invocation of that pagan oath and have asked the forgiveness of all the
people; but instead, he decided to pursue the matter to its bloody end.
"Urim ... Thummim" (1 Samuel 14:41). "The Urim and Thummim are
specifically mentioned only eight times in the O.T.: Exodus 28:30; Leviticus 8:8;
Numbers 27:21; Deuteronomy 33:8; 1 Samuel 14:41 (LXX); 28:6; Ezra 2:63 and
Nehemiah 7:65.[22] However, in many other situations described as "casting
lots," or "inquiring of the Lord," they were doubtless used by the High Priest
who wore the ephod.
ELLICOTT, "(36) Let us go down after the Philistines by night.—In the depth of
the night, when the rough feasting on the captured beasts was over, King Saul
would have had the bloody work begun afresh, and would have hurried after the
flying Philistines, and with a wild butchery have completed the great and signal
victory. With the implicit obedience which his soldiers seem ever to have shown
him—whether a vow of total abstinence, or a desperate charge, or a wild night
attack, or a ruthless bloodshed, was enjoined on them by their stern and gloomy
king—the army professed themselves at once ready again to fight. Only one man
in that army flushed with victory dared, with the bravery which alone proceeds
from righteousness, to withstand the imperious sovereign. The high priest,
Ahiah, doubted whether such a wholesale bloodshed as would surely have
resulted from the conquering troops of Saul pursuing a dispersed and
vanquished enemy, was in accordance with the will of God. No command to
exterminate these Philistines had ever been given, and that day, so glorious in the
annals of Israel, was wholly due to the special interposition of the Eternal Friend
of Israel. Ahiah said, “Let us first inquire of the oracles of God”—alluding, of
course, to the jewels of Urim and Thummim on his high-priestly ephod.
129

130. BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:36-37. Let us go down after the Philistines by night —
Having thus refreshed themselves in the evening, Saul proposes to them to renew
the pursuit, hoping to cut off the whole army of the Philistines when they were
asleep in the night. Then said the priest, Let us draw near hither unto God — To
the ark, in order to inquire of God. It is probable he stood before the altar, and
wished to remind them that it was dangerous to undertake any thing without
God’s direction. He answered him not that day — Though the priest, it seems,
often asked an answer, yet he received none.
CONSTABLE, "Saul's blindness to his guilt 14:36-46
Evidently Saul would not have inquired of God if Ahijah (cf. 1 Samuel 14:18)
had not suggested that he do so (1 Samuel 14:36). Probably God did not answer
his prayer immediately because Saul wanted this information to vindicate
himself rather than God (1 Samuel 14:37). Saul thought God did not answer him
because someone had violated his rule (1 Samuel 14:24), which he confused with
God's Law, calling violation of it sin (1 Samuel 14:38; cf. Joshua 7:14). Really,
God did not answer him because Saul was disloyal to Yahweh. The king boldly
vowed that anyone who had sinned, which was only breaking his rule, even
Jonathan, would die (1 Samuel 14:39). God identified Jonathan rather than Saul
as the guilty party. Jonathan had violated the king's command though he had
not violated God's command. Actually, Jonathan was executing God's will.
Jonathan would have had to die if he had broken Yahweh's command, as Achan
did. However, Saul's oath was not on that high a level of authority, though Saul
thought it was, as is clear from his insistence that Jonathan die. The soldiers who
had gone along with Saul's requests thus far (1 Samuel 14:36; 1 Samuel 14:40)
refused to follow his orders when he called for Jonathan's execution (1 Samuel
14:45). They recognized that Saul's rule about abstaining from eating (1 Samuel
14:24) was not divine law. They correctly saw that even though Jonathan had
violated Saul's rule, he had obeyed God's order to drive Israel's enemies out of
the land. Saul's failure to see his role under God and the difference between the
Word of God and his own commands resulted in confusion and disunity. Saul's
preoccupation with Jonathan's eating against his wishes cost him a great victory
over the Philistines.
The writer pointed out the reason for Saul's ultimate failure as Israel's king and
the reason for his own personal destruction in this section (1 Samuel 13:1 to 1
Samuel 14:46). Essentially Saul refused to put the will of God above his own
personal desires. Careful attention to the text shows that Saul showed great
concern about the observance of religious rituals, but he failed to appreciate the
130

131. indispensable importance of submitting his will to Yahweh. He sought to use
God rather than allowing God to use him. He thought he was above the Mosaic
Law rather than under it. He put himself in the position that God alone
rightfully occupied.
To illustrate the seriousness of Saul's sin, suppose two parents have two children.
The first child has a real heart for what pleases his parents. On rare occasions
when this child disobeys his parents, his conscience bothers him, he confesses his
offense to his parents, and he tries to be obedient from then on. This was how
David responded to God. Even though David sinned greatly by committing
adultery and murder, these sins broke his heart, he confessed them to God, and
he returned to following God faithfully. His heart was one with God's. He
wanted to please God and honor God even though he failed miserably
occasionally.
The second child in the family in this illustration really wants to run his own life.
He submits to parental authority when it seems to him to be to his advantage to
do so, but his heart is really not with his parents. He wants to control his own life
and believes he can do a better job of it on his own than by following his parents'
instructions. He thinks, "What's right for me is right." This was Saul's attitude.
Saul never submitted to divine authority unless he felt it was to his advantage to
do so. He always wanted to maintain control over his own life.
Which of these two children has the more serious problem of disobedience? The
second child does. Saul's sin was worse than David's. Even though David
committed a few great sins, God did not cut off his dynasty or his rule
prematurely since he really wanted to glorify God. However, David suffered
severe consequences for his sins even though God forgave him. God did cut off
Saul's dynasty and his rule prematurely because Saul would not yield to
Yahweh's control, which was crucial for Israel's king. Failure to yield control to
God is extremely important, even more important than individual acts of
disobedience (cf. Romans 6:12-13; Romans 12:1-2).
Saul's pride led him to make foolish decisions that limited his effectiveness.
Many believers experience unnecessary confusion and complications in their
lives because they will not relinquish control to God.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:36. He Isaiah, however, not satisfied with the defeat of
131

132. the Philistines, but proposes to spoil them that night till the morning. According
to Jonathan’s statement, indeed, the defeat was not total. Saul rushes on in his
wild desire of revenge, perhaps incited by the consciousness of having committed
a gross folly, and thereby hindered the victory—and this he will now make good.
The people are again ready immediately to carry out his desire. The priest,
however, desires first to have the decision of the Lord. “Hither,” that Isaiah, to
the altar which had been built. [Patrick: because it was dangerous to undertake
any thing without God’s advice. Bib. Comm.: because the priest doubted
whether Saul’s ardor was a righteous one, and bravely stood in its way.—Tr.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:35
‘And Saul built an altar to YHWH, the same was the first altar that he built to
YHWH.’
The writer then adds a note to the effect that this was the first ‘altar’ that Saul
had built to YHWH. The implication is that hitherto he had had Samuel to see to
such things. Now he was on his own. It was not strictly an ‘altar’ in the fullest
sense of the word. The purpose was not in order to offer offerings and sacrifices,
but so that the animals could be slaughtered in the right manner before eating. It
followed the directions in Deuteronomy 12:15-16. But the writer sees it as very
significant. It signified that Samuel was no longer with him.
However genuine Saul might have been the writer was probably being
deliberately sarcastic. In his view it was not Saul’s responsibility to build altars.
His point is therefore so as to emphasise Samuel’s absence. It is Saul’s first altar
because previously he had been able to leave such things to someone else. It is all
of a piece with what has gone before. Saul had called for the Ark, and had made
use of a religious oath. Now he has erected a kind of altar. This will be followed
by a vain consultation of the oracle. They are all acts which mark him as a
religious man. But it was a religion that was all on the outside. It was based
solely on ritual. In the end there was nothing underneath, for what was lacking
was the responsive obedience without which all the rest was useless.
Verses 36-46
Continuation Of The Defeat Of The Philistines By Raiding Their Territory Is
Aborted And Jonathan Is Nearly Executed, And All Due To Saul’s Foolish Curse
132

133. (1 Samuel 14:36-46).
This passage (1 Samuel 14:1-46) began with the depiction of Jonathan, the man
of faith, bringing about the defeat of the Philistines (1 Samuel 14:1-15), and it
now ends with Jonathan, the man of faith, almost being executed because of
Saul’s foolish oath. The whole section is designed to demonstrate Saul’s
downward slide and folly. The writer clearly has little interest in Saul from any
positive viewpoint (although he will shortly very briefly list his attainments), but
is concentrating on how by his foolishness and disobedience he had begun to lose
his hold on the kingship and was proving YHWH’s warning about the dangers
of the appointment of a king to be correct. And as we have seen all this was
shown to be the result of his attitude towards Samuel.
Analysis.
a And Saul said, “Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and take spoil
among them until the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them” (1
Samuel 14:36 a).
b And they said, “Do whatever seems good to you.” Then said the priest, “Let us
draw near here to God” (1 Samuel 14:36 b). And Saul asked counsel of God,
“Shall I go down after the Philistines? Will you deliver them into the hand of
Israel?” But He did not answer him that day (1 Samuel 14:36-37).
c And Saul said, “Draw nigh here, all you chieftains of the people; and know and
see in what this sin has been this day For, as YHWH lives who saves Israel,
though it be in Jonathan my son, he will surely die.” But there was not a man
among all the people who answered him.’
d Then he said to all Israel, “You be on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will
be on the other side.” And the people said to Saul, “Do what seems good to you.
Therefore Saul said to YHWH, the God of Israel, “Show the right.” And
Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped (1 Samuel 14:40-41).
133

134. e And Saul said, “Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son.” And Jonathan
was taken (1 Samuel 14:42).
d Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done.” And Jonathan told
him, and said, “I certainly tasted a little honey with the end of the rod which was
in my hand, and, lo, I must die” (1 Samuel 14:43).
c And Saul said, “God do so and more also, for you shall surely die, Jonathan” (1
Samuel 14:44).
b And the people said to Saul, “Shall Jonathan die, who has wrought this great
salvation in Israel? Far from it. As YHWH lives, there shall not one hair of his
head fall to the ground, for he has wrought with God this day.” So the people
rescued Jonathan, with the result that he died not (1 Samuel 14:45).
a Then Saul went up from following the Philistines, and the Philistines went to
their own place (1 Samuel 14:46).
Note that in ‘a’ Saul aims to follow after the Philistines, and in the parallel he
ceases from following the Philistines as a result of his own folly. In ‘b’ the people
say that Saul may do what seems good to him and the priest suggests consulting
God, and in the parallel the people refuse to let Saul do what he wants, for they
believe that YHWH is on Jonathan’s side because he has ‘wrought with God’. In
‘c’ Saul says that even if the marked man is Jonathan he will surely die, and in
the parallel Saul tells Jonathan that he will surely die. In ‘d’ Saul begins to seek
the culprit, and says to God, ‘show the right’, and in the parallel, believing that
the right has been shown, Saul asks Jonathan what it is that he has done.
Centrally in ‘e’ Jonathan is selected out.
1 Samuel 14:36
‘And Saul said, “Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and take spoil
among them until the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them.” And
they said, “Do whatever seems good to you.” Then said the priest, “Let us draw
134

135. near here to God.” ’
A great victory having been achieved Saul was now eager to follow it up by a
night raid on the fleeing Philistines in order to obtain further spoils and destroy
their army. It was, of course, describing an unachievable ideal in the exultancy of
the moment, but war fever had taken hold of him and at least the spoils might be
achievable. The people, equally excited, were prepared to do whatever he asked.
To them he had achieved a great victory. The Priest, however, was more cautious
and suggested rather that they should draw near to God and seek His guidance.
Had he been with Saul Samuel would not have needed to have hesitated like this.
He would have known the mind of YHWH.
37 So Saul asked God, “Shall I go down and
pursue the Philistines? Will you give them into
Israel’s hand?” But God did not answer him
that day.
BARNES, "Asked counsel - The technical phrase for inquiring of God by Urim
and Thummim, and applied also to inquiry of other oracles.
CLARKE, "He answered him not that day - Why was this answer delayed?
Surely Jonathan’s eating the honey was no sin. This could not have excited God’s
displeasure. And yet the lot found out Jonathan! But did this argue that he had
incurred guilt in the sight of God? I answer: It did not; for Jonathan was delivered,
by the authority of the people, from his father’s rash curse; no propitiation is offered
for his supposed transgression to induce God to pardon it; nor do we find any
displeasure of God manifested on the occasion. See below.
GILL, "And Saul asked counsel of God,.... He agreed to the motion of the high
priest, and asked counsel by Urim and Thummim; the Targum is, as before,"inquired
135

136. by the Word of the Lord:"
shall I go down after the Philistines? pursue after them in their flight to their
own country, which, lying to the sea, was a descent:
wilt thou deliver them into the hand of Israel? what remain of them,
otherwise a victory over them was obtained:
but he answered him not that day; no answer was returned by Urim and
Thummim, so that he was left in suspense whether he should pursue or no; the
Targum is,"he received not his prayer that day;''this was treating him in a righteous
manner; since he would not stay for an answer from the Lord, 1Sa_14:19, the Lord
now will not give him any; though the principal view was, that he might take the step
he did.
HENRY 37-39, "His falling foul on his son Jonathan: and the rest of this
paragraph is wholly concerning him: for, while he is prosecuted, the Philistines make
their escape. We know not what mischief may ensue upon on rash resolve.
1. God, by giving an intimation of his displeasure, put Saul upon searching for an
accursed thing. When, by the priest, he consulted the oracle, God answered him not,
1Sa_14:37. Note, When God denies our prayers it concerns us to enquire what the sin
is that has provoked him to do so. Let us see where the sin is, 1Sa_14:38. For God's
ear is not heavy that it cannot hear, but it is sin that separates between us and him. If
God turns away our prayer, we have reason to suspect it is for some iniquity
regarding our hearts, which we are concerned to find out, that we may put it away,
may mortify it, and put it to death. Saul swears by his Maker that whoever was the
Achan that troubled the camp, by eating the forbidden fruit, should certainly die,
though it were Jonathan himself, that is, though ever so dear to himself and the
people, little thinking that Jonathan was the man (1Sa_14:39): He shall surely die,
the curse shall be executed upon him. But none of the people answered him, that is,
none of those who knew Jonathan had broken the order would inform against him.
K&D, "1Sa_14:37
But when Saul inquired of God (through the Urim and Thummim of the high
priest), “Shall I go down after the Philistines? wilt Thou deliver them into the hand
of Israel?” God did not answer him. Saul was to perceive from this, that the guilt of
some sin was resting upon the people, on account of which the Lord had turned away
His countenance, and was withdrawing His help.
ELLICOTT, " (37) And Saul asked counsel of God.—The same phrase is always
used in the many passages in the Books of Judges, 1 Sam., 2 Sam., 1 Chron.,
Hosea, &c. when God was inquired of by the Urim and Thummim. It may be
styled the technical term of inquiry of the Oracle of the Most High; there are,
however, slight. variations in the English translations of this phrase.
136

137. But he answered him not . . .—When the mysterious gems refused to shine, or in
any way to signify the Divine approbation or disapproval, the high-priestly
questioner seems, as in this instance, to have concluded that some public
transgression had been committed, and that special atonement must be made
before the desired answer could be expected. The sacred gems probably
remained dull and lightless the night was wearing on, and Saul chafed at the
unexpected delay, and in his impetuous anger uttered the wild words on which
we are about to comment.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:37. And Saul asked counsel of God— The people being
ready to go down with Saul, the high-priest advised him first to take counsel of
God; to which he readily consented. The high-priest, doubtless, had his reasons,
as the event shews; for, in consequence of Jonathan's involuntary offence, no
answer could be had that day from the divine oracle.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:37. The inquiry of the Lord was conducted by the high-
priest Ahiah through the Urim and Thummim.[FN16] The Lord shall say
whether the Philistines are to be pursued, and whether He has delivered them
into Israel’s hands. There are therefore two questions: whether further pursuit?
whether happy result? The failure of a divine answer is for Saul a sign that there
is a fault somewhere, on account of which the Lord is silent and does not promise
His help.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:37
‘And Saul asked counsel of God, “Shall I go down after the Philistines? Will you
deliver them into the hand of Israel?” But he did not answer him that day.’
So Saul sought counsel from God, and asked whether they should continue the
chase into Philistine territory. The question was, would God deliver them into
their hands? This question was probably put to God by means of the Urim and
Thummim which could probably give the answers ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘no answer’ (we
are not sure precisely how it worked, but there are indications to this end). In
this particular case he received the response, ‘no answer’.
It is thought that possibly the Urim and Thummim would be tossed down and if
they both ended the same way up the answer was seen as ‘no reply’, while ‘yes’
and ‘no’ would be indicated by which lay one way and which the other.
Note Saul’s assumption that someone must be at fault. He will not believe that
137

138. God will not answer him. (A similar situation arises near the end of his reign (1
Samuel 28:6) which may suggest that here the fault did not really lie with
Jonathan in God’s eyes.
38 Saul therefore said, “Come here, all you who
are leaders of the army, and let us find out what
sin has been committed today.
GILL, "And Saul said, draw ye near hither all the chief of the people,....
Or, the corners of the peoples (g); the princes, as Jarchi interprets it: and so the
Targum, the heads of the people, in allusion to the cornerstones in buildings, which
are the ornament, strength, and cement of them, see Zec_10:4, though Abarbinel
thinks the tribes themselves are meant, which lay encamped everyone in a corner by
themselves, separated from one another; and these he would have brought together;
not the heads only, but everyone, small and great, that it might be seen and known
where the sin lay; but he should have observed, that the tribes of Israel were not now
present with Saul, but a small number of them:
and know and see wherein this sin hath been this day; he concluded, from
having no answer from the Lord, that sin had been committed, which was the cause
of it; but never thought of his own rash oath, which was the cause of the people's
sinning, and had brought his son into danger; nor the sin of the people in eating the
flesh with the blood; nothing ran in his mind but the breach of the oath with which
he had adjured the people, and this he was determined to find out, if possible.
K&D, "1Sa_14:38-39
When Saul perceived, this, he directed all the heads of the people (pinnoth, as in
Jdg_20:2) to draw near to learn whereby (wherein) the sin had occurred that day,
and declared, “As truly as Jehovah liveth, who has brought salvation to Israel, even
if it were upon Jonathan my son, he shall die.” The first ‫י‬ ִⅴ in 1Sa_14:39 is
explanatory; the second and third serve to introduce the words, like ᆋτι, quod; and
the repetition serves to give emphasis, lit., “that even if it were upon my son, that he
shall die.” “And of all the people no one answered him,” from terror at the king's
word.
138

139. ELLICOTT, " (38) Draw ye near hither.—Round that rough unfinished altar, in
the dark night, King Saul hastily summoned his leading officers and the
prominent chiefs of the Israelites who had joined him in the late battle. The word
rendered “chief of the people” (pinnoth) is literally, corner stones (as in Judges
20:2).
He would ask God’s help in the casting of lots, to discover who of these was the
transgressor, whose sin made dumb the Divine Oracle.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:38. Chief (‫ָה‬‫נּ‬ ִ‫פּ‬ “corner,” “point”), the principal men, the
heads of the people ( Judges 20:2), probably the elders ( Numbers 11:30). The
whole people are called by their representatives, to find out “wherein (or
whereby) this sin hath been this day.” There is no need to read (with Then. after
Vulg.: per quem—and Sept.: ἐ‫פ‬ ‫ם‬‫י‬‫)ם‬ “on whom (‫י‬ִ‫מּ‬ַ‫)בּ‬ this sin rests,” instead of
“wherein” )‫ה‬ ָ‫מּ‬ַ‫בּ‬ ). Rather the thing than the person was here first to be regarded,
since the question was of an offence unatoned for,—which, however, indeed,
could not be fixed without at the same time discovering the person.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:38
‘And Saul said, “Draw nigh here, all you chieftains of the people; and know and
see in what this sin has been this day.” ’
Saul did not consider the possibility that this failure to obtain an answer might
lie at his door and immediately assumed that it must be because of sin in the
camp. His mind no doubt went back to the incident of Achan (Joshua 7). So he
called all his chieftains together and demanded of them whether they knew of
any reason why God was not answering. What sin had been committed among
them that day that had resulted in this situation?
39 As surely as the Lord who rescues Israel
lives, even if the guilt lies with my son Jonathan,
he must die.” But not one of them said a word.
139

140. BARNES, "Saul’s rashness becomes more and more apparent. He now adds an
additional oath, to bring down yet further guilt in “taking God’s name in vain” The
expressions in 1Sa_14:36, 1Sa_14:40, indicate the fear in which the people stood of
Saul. None dared to resist his will.
GILL, "For as the Lord liveth, which saveth Israel,.... And had saved them
that day with a great salvation and had wrought a great deliverance for them in
freeing them from the Philistines, who had threatened the ruin of the whole nation.
This is the form of an oath:
though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die; that is, though the sin
should be found in him, or he should be found guilty of the breach of what he had
charged them with an oath to observe, namely, to eat no food that day till evening:
but there was not a man among all the people that answered him; who
knew that Jonathan had tasted of honey, but they would not acquaint him with it;
partly because they knew he did it ignorantly, having no knowledge of his father's
charge and oath, and partly because of their great affection to him, who had been the
instrument of their deliverance and salvation that day.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:39. As the Lord liveth — Here again we have a proof of
Saul’s rashness and folly, and of the violence and impetuosity of his temper. As
he had before adjured the people, and exposed them to an execration uttered
most inconsiderately; so now he lays himself under an execration to put to death,
as it turned out, even his son Jonathan, who had been the first and almost sole
instrument of effecting this glorious deliverance for Israel, and that for no other
fault than tasting a little honey, without knowing that he had thereby exposed
himself to his father’s curse. But not a man answered him — None of those that
saw Jonathan eating informed against him; because they were satisfied that his
ignorance excused him; and from their great love to Jonathan, whom they would
not expose to death for so small an offence.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:39. After the first ‫י‬ִ‫כּ‬ [here=“because,” “for”], which gives
the ground, follows a second and a third, the former introducing the declaration,
the latter resuming it after the parenthesis. The silence of the people is (as
appears from 1 Samuel 14:45) sign of their conviction that Jonathan had done
nothing wrong. [Perhaps, also, sign of their regard for Jonathan. It does not
seem that Saul was here guilty of profanity (Bib. Comm.), since he may have
used the divine name reverently (the expression was very common among the
Israelites), but he is guilty (Bib. Comm.) of further rashness.—Tr.]
140

141. PETT, "1 Samuel 14:39
“For, as YHWH lives who saves Israel, though it be in Jonathan my son, he will
surely die.” But there was not a man among all the people who answered him.’
And he swore that whoever had so sinned would die, even if it should be
Jonathan his own son. Note his words, ‘as YHWH lives who saves Israel’. He still
recognised that their victory was due to YHWH, and still swore by His Name.
The problem was that his life did not live up to his words. However, later the
people will use a similar oath about Jonathan not dying. The writer probably
intends us to see that the people were right.
No one answered Saul. They were feeling that this was not quite right, and no
one was prepared to give Jonathan away. Or perhaps those who were there did
not know what Jonathan had done.
40 Saul then said to all the Israelites, “You
stand over there; I and Jonathan my son will
stand over here.”
“Do what seems best to you,” they replied.
GILL, "Then said he unto all Israel,.... As many of them as were present; not
the principal men only, but the common people; not the officers only, but the
common soldiers in the army:
be ye on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will be on the other side: so
they divided to the right and left, one went one way, and the other the other; there
were two boxes or urns, as Kimchi says, in one of which were the names of Saul and
Jonathan, and in the other Israel; though Abarbinel observes, that such a partition of
them on one side, and the other, is not according to the manner of lots; and he
suspects that Saul knew that Jonathan had tasted of honey, being told it by the man
141

142. that saw him eat it; and who said to him then, "thy father straitly charged", &c. 1Sa_
14:27 but chose this way to make it manifest to the people, and to show what a strict
regard he had to justice:
and the people said unto Saul, do what seemeth good unto thee; they were
very obsequious to him in everything, see 1Sa_14:36.
HENRY 40-42, " Jonathan was discovered by lot to be the offender. Saul would
have lots cast between himself and Jonathan on the one side, and the people on the
other, perhaps because he was as confident of Jonathan's innocency in this matter as
of his own, 1Sa_14:40. The people, seeing him in a heat, durst not gainsay any thing
he proposed, but acquiesced: Do as seemeth good unto thee. Before he cast lots, he
prayed that God would give a perfect lot (1Sa_14:41), that is, make a full discovery of
this matter, or, as it is in the margin, that he would show the innocent. This was with
an air of impartial justice. Judges should desire that truth may come out, whoever
may suffer by it. Lots should be cast with prayer, because they are a solemn appeal to
Providence, and by them we beg of God to direct and determine us (Act_1:24), for
which reason some have condemned games that depend purely upon lot or chance as
making too bold with a sacred thing. Jonathan at length was taken (1Sa_14:42),
Providence designing hereby to countenance and support a lawful authority, and to
put an honour upon the administration of public justice in general, reserving another
way to bring off one that had done nothing worthy of death.
K&D 40-41, "1Sa_14:40-41
In order to find out the guilt, or rather the culprit, Saul proceeded to the lot; and
for this purpose he made all the people stand on one side, whilst he and his son
Jonathan went to the other, and then solemnly addressed Jehovah thus: “God of
Israel, give innocence (of mind, i.e., truth). And the lot fell upon Saul and Jonathan
(‫ד‬ ֵ‫כ‬ ָ ִ‫,י‬ as in 1Sa_10:20-21); and the people went out,” sc., without the lot falling upon
them, i.e., they went out free.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:40. Saul proceeds to decide what was the offence which
prevented the divine answer. The means which Saul here employs reminds us of
how Samuel ( 1 Samuel 10:20-21) by the lot as means of divine decision presented
Saul to the people as the king chosen by the Lord. While in the great double
question in 1 Samuel 14:37 Saul had applied to the Lord by Urim and
Thummim, and by His silence received also an answer, and that a decisive one,
he now, in order to discover the cause of this divine decision, employs the lot, as
is clear from the words “taken” [ 1 Samuel 14:41] and “cast” [ 1 Samuel 14:42]
(comp. 1 Samuel 10:20 sq.), which are never used in connection with Urim and
Thummim. The people, who had not answered him when he swore a second rash
oath in which he recognized the possibility of Jonathan’s guilt and death, now
expressly approved his arrangements, but silently decided for Jonathan’s
innocence and exemption from punishment. Saul ( 1 Samuel 14:41) before the
142

143. casting turns to God with the cry “give (or establish) right.” ‫ים‬ִ‫מ‬ ָ‫,ת‬
“unpunishable,” then “exemption from punishment,” “innocence,” “right,”
“truth.” So Judges 9:16; Judges 9:19; Joshua 24:14. The result of the trial is that
Jonathan is taken, 1 Samuel 14:42.—The Vulgate agrees with the Heb. in 1
Samuel 14:41 only in the beginning and end: “and Saul said to the Lord God of
Israel—and Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people went out.” The
intermediate words agree in part with the Sept, which in 1 Samuel 14:41-42, has
a long paraphrase. In this Then. and Ew. see a part of the original text, reading
‫ים‬ִ‫מּ‬ֻ‫תּ‬ [Thummim] for ‫ים‬ִ‫מ‬ ָ‫,תּ‬ and finding here the complete formula which was
employed in the use of Urim and Thummim. Against which Keil justly remarks,
that there is no sign here of the use of Urim and Thummim, since the words in 1
Samuel 14:41 are provably never used of it, but always of the lot, and it is clear
from passages like 1 Samuel 10:22 and 2 Samuel 5:23 that Urim and Thummim
did not consist merely in answering Yes and No, but God by it gave answers,
which could by no means be gotten by the lot. The Sept. reading Isaiah,
therefore, nothing but a subjective and erroneous opinion of the translators..
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:40
‘Then he said to all Israel, “You be on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will
be on the other side.” And the people said to Saul, “Do what seems good to you.”
Recognising that the failure of the leadership would be the main thing likely to
have an effect on God’s response, Saul decided first of all that he would eliminate
himself and his son. So he called on the people (no doubt represented by their
leaders) and declared that the first lot would determine whether the guilt lay
with himself and Jonathan or whether it lay with the people. The reply of the
people was that he must do what seemed right to him. Compare 1 Samuel 14:36
where they had said a similar thing. But what follows suggest that this time the
words were wrung out of them with reluctance, for in the last analysis they did
not let him do what seemed good to him.
41 Then Saul prayed to the Lord, the God of
Israel, “Why have you not answered your
servant today? If the fault is in me or my son
143

144. Jonathan, respond with Urim, but if the men of
Israel are at fault,[d] respond with Thummim.”
Jonathan and Saul were taken by lot, and the
men were cleared.
BARNES, "Give a perfect lot - The phrase is obscure, but the meaning is
probably as in the margin.
CLARKE, "Lord God of Israel, Give a perfect lot - Both the Vulgate and
Septuagint add much to this verse: And Saul said to the Lord God of Israel, Lord God
of Israel, give judgment. Why is it that thou hast not answered thy servant to-day? If
the iniquity be in me, or Jonathan my son, make it manifest. Or if this iniquity be in
thy people, give sanctification.
GILL, "Therefore Saul said to the Lord God of Israel,.... After the division
was made between him and his son on one side, and the people of Israel on the other,
and everything was ready for the drawing of the lot; Saul put up to God the following
petition, as knowing that though the lot is cast into the lap, the disposing of it is of
the Lord:
give a perfect lot; or man, let it fall upon the guilty person, and let the innocent go
free; the Targum is,"cause it to come in truth;''
let truth and righteousness take place; let the right man be found out, and taken; the
petition seems to be too arrogant and presumptuous, and insinuates as if the Lord
did not always dispose the lot aright:
and Saul and Jonathan were taken; the lot being cast, it fell upon them:
but the people escaped; from the lot, and appeared to be innocent, clear of any
blame; so that it was not the sin they had been guilty of, in eating flesh with the
blood, which was the cause that no answer was returned.
HENRY 41-42, "Jonathan was discovered by lot to be the offender. Saul would
have lots cast between himself and Jonathan on the one side, and the people on the
other, perhaps because he was as confident of Jonathan's innocency in this matter as
of his own, 1Sa_14:40. The people, seeing him in a heat, durst not gainsay any thing
he proposed, but acquiesced: Do as seemeth good unto thee. Before he cast lots, he
prayed that God would give a perfect lot (1Sa_14:41), that is, make a full discovery of
this matter, or, as it is in the margin, that he would show the innocent. This was with
an air of impartial justice. Judges should desire that truth may come out, whoever
144

145. may suffer by it. Lots should be cast with prayer, because they are a solemn appeal to
Providence, and by them we beg of God to direct and determine us (Act_1:24), for
which reason some have condemned games that depend purely upon lot or chance as
making too bold with a sacred thing. Jonathan at length was taken (1Sa_14:42),
Providence designing hereby to countenance and support a lawful authority, and to
put an honour upon the administration of public justice in general, reserving another
way to bring off one that had done nothing worthy of death.
ELLICOTT, " (41) Give a perfect lot.—The rendering in the margin, “show the
innocent,” is a better and more accurate rendering of the Hebrew. “Give a
perfect lot” is the translation given by Rabbi D. Kimchi. Dean Payne Smith
observes that “there are few mistakes of the English Version which have not
some good authority for them, as King James’ translators were singularly well
versed in Jewish literature, while they seem strangely to have neglected the still
higher authority of the ancient versions.”
In the forty-first and in the following verse the LXX. version is lengthened out
with a long paraphrase, which, however, contains no fact of additional interest.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:41-42. Give a perfect lot — Or, Declare the perfect, or
guiltless person. That is, O Lord, so guide the lot, that it may discover who is
guilty in this matter, and who innocent. The people escaped — They were
pronounced guiltless. Jonathan was taken — God so ordered the lot; not that he
approved Saul’s execration, (1 Samuel 14:24,) or his oath that the transgressor
should die, (1 Samuel 14:39,) nor that he would expose Jonathan to death; but
that Saul’s folly might be chastised, when he saw what danger it had brought
upon his eldest and most excellent son; and that Jonathan’s innocence might be
cleared.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:41. Give a perfect lot— There is nothing for lot in the
original, and our Marginal shew the innocent, is rather an explanation than a
version. The following is Houbigant's version: And Saul said unto the Lord God
of Israel, [shew unto us why thou hast not answered thy servant Saul this day. If
this iniquity is in me, or in Jonathan my son, discover it by Urim, or if this
iniquity is in the people,] discover it by Thummim.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:41
‘Therefore Saul said to YHWH, the God of Israel, “Show the right.” And
Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped.’
Then Saul called on ‘YHWH, the God of Israel’ (indicating the seriousness of the
process) to ‘show the right’. In other words to indicate whether they were
innocent or guilty. And when the lot was cast, to Saul’s surprise, and no doubt
horror, the use of the lot indicated that it was either he or his son. The people
145

146. were shown to be free from blame.
42 Saul said, “Cast the lot between me and
Jonathan my son.” And Jonathan was taken.
CLARKE, "And Jonathan was taken - The object of the inquiry most
evidently was, “Who has gone contrary to the king’s adjuration today?” The answer to
that must be Jonathan. But was this a proof of the Divine displeasure against the
man? By no means: the holy oracle told the truth, but neither that oracle nor the God
who gave it fixed any blame upon Jonathan, and his own conscience acquits him. He
seeks not pardon from God, because he is conscious he had not transgressed. But
why did not God answer the priest that day? Because he did not think it proper to
send the people by night in pursuit of the vanquished Philistines. Saul’s motive was
perfectly vindictive: Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and spoil them
unto the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them; that is, Let us burn,
waste, destroy, and slay all before us! Was it right to indulge a disposition of this
kind, which would have led to the destruction of many innocent country people, and
of many Israelites who resided among the Philistines? Besides, was there not a most
manifest reason in the people why God could not be among them? Multitudes of
them were defiled in a very solemn manner; they had eaten the flesh with the blood;
and however sacrifices might be offered to atone for this transgression of the law,
they must continue unclean till the evening. Here were reasons enough why God
would not go on with the people for that night.
GILL, "And Saul said, cast lots between me and Jonathan my son,.....
Which showed his regard strict justice, and that he had no consciousness of guilt in
himself, and should not spare his own son if found guilty:
and Jonathan was taken: the lot fell upon him, which was so directed, that his
ignorance of his father's charge and oath might appear; and that the affection of the
people might be discovered; and that a regard is to be had to the orders and
commands of princes, and obedience to be yielded to them in all in which conscience
is not concerned, though they may be grievous; and to bring Saul to a sense of
rashness in making such an oath, which brought his own son into so much danger.
HENRY, "Providence designing hereby to countenance and support a lawful
authority, and to put an honour upon the administration of public justice in general,
146

147. reserving another way to bring off one that had done nothing worthy of death.
K&D, "1Sa_14:42
When they proceeded still further to cast lots between Saul and his son (‫ילוּ‬ ִ ִ‫,ה‬ sc.,
‫ל‬ ָ‫ּור‬ ; cf. 1Ch_26:14; Neh_11:11, etc.), Jonathan was taken.
(Note: In the Alex. version, vv. 41 and 42 are lengthened out with long
paraphrases upon the course pursued in casting the lots: καᆳ εᅼπε Σαούλ, Κύριε ᆇ
θεᆵς ᅾσραήλ τί ᆋτι οᆒκ ᅊπεκρίθης τሬ δούλሩ σου σήµερονˇ ει ʆ ᅚν ᅚµοᆳ ᅨ ᅚν ᅾωνάθαν τሬ
υᅷሬ µου ᅧ ᅊδικίαˇ κύριε ᆇ θεᆵς ᅾσραήλ δᆵς δήλους· καᆳ ᅚᅊν τάδε εᅺπᇽ δᆵς δᆱ τሬ λαሬ σου
ᅾσραήλ, δός δᆱ ᆇσιότηατ, καᆳ κληροሞται ᅾωνάθαν καᆳ Σαούλ καᆳ ᆇ λαᆵς ᅚξᇿλθε. V. 42:
Καᆳ εᅼπε Σαοᆓλ, βάλλετε ᅊνᆭ µέσον ᅚµοሞ καᆳ ᅊνᆭ µέσον ᅾωνάθαν τοሞ υᅷοሞ µου· ᆉν ᅌν
κατακληρώσηται Κύριος ᅊποθανέτω. Καᆳ εᅼπεν ᆇ λαᆵς πρᆵς Σαούλ, οᆒκ ᅞστι τᆵ ምᇿµα
τοሞτο. Καᆳ κατεκράτησε Σαοᆷλ τοሞ λαοሞ, καᆳ βάλλουσιν ᅊνᆭ µέσον αᆒτοሞ καᆳ ᅊνᆭ
µέσον ᅾωνάθαν τοሞ υᅷοሞ αᆒτοሞ, καᆳ κατακληροሞται ᅾωναθαν. One portion of these
additions is also found in the text of our present Vulgate, and reads as follows: Et
dixit Saul ad Dominum Deum Israel: Domine Deus Israel, da indicium! quid est
quod non responderis servo tuo hodie? Si in me aut in Jonathan filio meo est
iniquitas, da ostensionem; aut si haec iniquitas est in populo tuo, da
sanctitatem. Et deprehensus est Jonathas et Saul, populus autem exivit. The
beginning and end of this verse, as well as v. 42, agree here most accurately with
the Hebrew text. But the words from quid est quod to da sanctitatem are
interpolated, so that ‫ים‬ ִ‫מ‬ ָ‫ת‬ ‫ה‬ ָ‫ב‬ ָ‫ה‬ are translated twice; first in the words da indicium,
and then in the interpolation da ostensionem. This repetition of the same words,
and that in different renderings, when taken in connection with the agreement of
the Vulgate with the Hebrew text at the beginning and end of the verse, shows
clearly enough, that the interpolated clauses did not originate with Jerome, but
are simply inserted in his translation from the Itala. The additions of the lxx, in
which τάδε εᅼπᇽ is evidently only a distortion of ᅧ ᅊδικία, are regarded by Ewald
(Gesch. iii. p. 48) and Thenius as an original portion of the text which has
dropped out from the Masoretic text. They therefore infer, that instead of ‫ים‬ ִ‫מ‬ ָ‫ת‬ we
ought to read ‫ים‬ ִ ֻ (Thummim), and that we have here the full formula used in
connection with the use of the Urim and Thummim, from which it may be seen,
that this mode of divine revelation consisted simply in a sacred lot, or in the use
of two dice, the one of which was fixed upon at the outset as meaning no, and the
other as meaning yes. So much at any rate is indisputable, that the Septuagint
translator took ‫תמים‬ in the sense of thummim, and so assumed that Saul had the
guilty person discovered by resorting to the Urim and Thummim. But this
assumption is also decidedly erroneous, together with all the inferences based
upon it. For, in the first place, the verbs ‫יל‬ ִ ִ‫ה‬ and ‫ד‬ ֵ‫כ‬ ָ ִ‫י‬ can be proved to be never
used throughout the whole of the Old Testament to signify the use of the Urim
and Thummim, and to be nothing more than technical expressions used to
denote the casting of a simple lot (see the passages cited above in the text).
Moreover, such passages as 1Sa_10:22, and 1Sa_2:5, 1Sa_2:23, show most
147

148. unmistakeably that the divine oracle of the Urim and Thummim did not consist
merely in a sacred lot with yes and no, but that God gave such answers through it
as could never have been given through the lots. The Septuagint expansions of
the text are nothing more, therefore, than a subjective and really erroneous
interpretation on the part of the translators, which arose simply from the
mistaken idea that ‫תמים‬ was thummim, and which is therefore utterly worthless.)
WHEDON, "42. Jonathan was taken — But Jonathan had not knowingly
transgressed, and by the victory God had set his approving seal to the young
hero’s Gideon-like faith, and Saul’s oath was rash, unwise, and without divine
counsel; why, then, should the cloud of divine indignation rest upon the people,
and why should the Lord God of Israel designate Jonathan as the offender? We
answer, This taking of Jonathan by lot was not a designation of him as the
special object of the Divine anger, nor did the people so understand it, as we see
from their action in rescuing him from death. But though it convicted him of no
guilt before God, it did show him to be the violator of the king’s oath; and a
solemn oath, made by the anointed king of God’s chosen people, though it be
hasty and unwise, must be vindicated in the eye of the nation as a thing not to be
treated lightly. The taking of Jonathan led to an investigation of the whole
matter of the oath, and resulted in showing that he who violated this oath was
not so guilty before God as he who made it. And this result would further show
that the sin of the people in eating with the blood (1 Samuel 14:33) was a
consequence of Saul’s rash adjuration. The king himself, then, had been the
cause of the trouble, and of Jehovah’s refusal to answer him that day, and with a
fallen countenance and a saddened heart he returned from the pursuit of the
Philistines. They who hold high positions of authority among men should be
exceedingly careful how they deal with solemn oaths. In Israelitish history Saul’s
rash adjuration was the last relic of the age of vows.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:42
‘And Saul said, “Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son.” And Jonathan
was taken.’
Then Saul called for the lot to be cast between him and Jonathan. And the result
was that Jonathan was indicated. This was what we have been waiting for,
because we have known all along what Jonathan has done. But as we know
Jonathan was the hero of the day. And in view of how it had happened
(Jonathan had not known about the vow) it is clear that there is something
wrong here.
148

149. 43 Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what
you have done.”
So Jonathan told him, “I tasted a little honey
with the end of my staff. And now I must die!”
GILL, "Then Saul said to Jonathan, tell me what thou hast done,.... What
sin he had committed, the lot having fallen on him, and found him out:
and Jonathan told him; the whole of the matter, all the truth, without any
reserve:
and said, I did but take a little honey with the end of the rod that was in
mine hand; he speaks of the fact as a trivial thing, as if it was not deserving of
death, though he was willing to submit to it; yet it seems strange he should say
nothing of his ignorance of the charge and oath of Saul, and plead that in excuse of it;
though Josephus (h) makes him to take notice of it: and, "lo, I must die"; am
condemned to die, as the Targum; for which he was prepared and ready, being
willing to testify an entire subjection to his father's authority and will. Josephus (i)
represents him speaking with a generosity and greatness of soul, after this
manner,"death is most sweet to me, which is for the sake of maintaining thy piety
and religion; and after so glorious a victory, it is the greatest consolation to me to
leave the Hebrews conquerors of the Philistines.''
HENRY, "Jonathan ingenuously confesses the fact, and Saul, with an angry curse,
passes sentence upon him. Jonathan denies not the truth, nor goes about to conceal
it, only he thinks it hard that he must die for it, 1Sa_14:43. He might very fairly have
pleaded his invincible ignorance of the law, or have insisted upon his merit, but he
submitted to the necessity with a great and generous mind: “God's and my father's
will be done:” thus he showed as much valour in receiving the messengers of death
himself as in sending them among the Philistines. It is as brave to yield in some cases
as it is in other cases to fight. Saul is not mollified by his filial submission nor the
hardness of his case; but as one that affected to be thought firm to his word, and
much more to his oath; even when it bound him hardest, with another imprecation
149

150. he gives judgment upon Jonathan (1Sa_14:44): “God do so and more also to me if I
do not execute the law upon thee, for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan.” (1.) He passed
this sentence too hastily, without consulting the oracle. Jonathan had a very good
plea in arrest of the judgment. What he had done was not malum in se - bad in itself;
and, as for the prohibition of it, he was ignorant of that, so that he could not be
charged with rebellion or disobedience. (2.) He did it in fury. Had Jonathan been
worthy to die, yet it would have become a judge, much more a father, to pass
sentence with tenderness and compassion, and not with such an air of triumph, like a
man perfectly divested of all humanity and natural affection. Justice is debased when
it is administered with wrath and bitterness. (3.) He backed it with a curse upon
himself if he did not see the sentence executed; and this curse did return upon his
own head. Jonathan escaped, but God did so to Saul, and more also; for he was
rejected of God and made anathema. Let none upon any occasion dare to use such
imprecations as these, lest God say Amen to them, and make their own tongues to
fall upon them, Psa_64:8. This stone will return upon him that rolleth it. Yet we have
reason to think that Saul's bowels yearned toward Jonathan, so that he really
punished himself, and very justly, when he seemed so severe upon Jonathan. God
made him feel the smart of his own rash edict, which might make him fear being
again guilty of the like. By all these vexatious accidents God did likewise correct him
for his presumption in offering sacrifice without Samuel. An expedition so ill begun
could not end without some rebukes.
K&D, "1Sa_14:43-44
When Saul asked him what he had done, Jonathan confessed that he had tasted a
little honey (see 1Sa_14:27), and resigned himself to the punishment suspended over
him, saying, “Behold, I shall die;” and Saul pronounced sentence of death upon him,
accompanying it with an oath (“God do so,” etc.: vid., Rth_1:17).
COFFMAN, "SAUL CONDEMNS HIS SON JONATHAN TO DEATH
Then Saul said to Jonathan, "Tell me what you have done." And Jonathan told
him, "I tasted a little honey with the tip of the staff that was in my hand; here I
am, I will die." And Saul said, "God do so to me and more also; you shall surely
die, Jonathan." Then the people said to Saul, "Shall Jonathan die, who has
wrought this great victory in Israel? Far from it! As the Lord lives, there shall
not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he has wrought with God this
day." So the people ransomed Jonathan, that he did not die. Then Saul went up
from pursuing the Philistines; and the Philistines went to their own place."
"Here I am, I will die" (1 Samuel 14:43). Josephus wrote that Jonathan also
said:
150

151. "I do not desire you, father, to spare me. Death will be to me very acceptable,
when it proceeds from thy piety, and after a glorious victory; for it is the greatest
consolation to me that I leave the Hebrews victorious over the Philistines."[23]
"God do so to me and more also" (1 Samuel 14:44). We have already noted the
pagan nature of this godless oath which so effectively marred and nullified what
would have been the greatest victory in Israel's history. To us it appears that
there is no possible justification for Saul's disastrous oath. These words perfectly
fit the pagan mouth of Jezebel, but had no place whatever in the mouth of "The
Lord's Anointed"!
"Saul's oath did not proceeds from a proper attitude toward the Lord but was
an act of false zeal in which Saul had more regard to himself than to the cause of
the kingdom of God ... Saul issued that prohibition (in the oath) without divine
authority ... And when the people pronounced Jonathan innocent and ransomed
him, declaring that "Jonathan had wrought with God," it was a divine verdict.
Saul could not have failed to recognize then, that it was not Jonathan but he
himself who had sinned, and through his arbitrary and despotic command had
brought guilt upon Israel, on account of which God had given him no reply."[24]
"Saul went up from pursuing the Philistines; and the Philistines went to their
own place" (1 Samuel 14:46). It appears from this that Saul at last recognized
himself as the chief sinner in that episode, and he therefore gave up the pursuit
of the Philistines. In the words of Jonathan, My father (Saul) has troubled the
land (1 Samuel 14:29).
ELLICOTT, " (43, 44) Lo, I must die.—These wild and thoughtless vows are
peculiarly characteristic of this half-barbaric period. We have already observed
that the age now closing had been peculiarly the age of vows. A similar terrible
oath, equalling Saul’s in its rashness, had been taken by Jephthah. It is
noticeable that not only Saul, who vowed the vow, but Jonathan, its victim, were
convinced that the vow, though perhaps hastily and rashly made, must be kept.
“Against both these,” says Erdman in Lange with great force “rises the people’s
voice as the voice of God, the question (in 1 Samuel 14:45), ‘Shall Jonathan die?
‘and the answer,’ Far be it,’ expresses the sorrowful astonishment and the
energetic protest of the people, who were inspired by Jonathan’s heroic deed and
its brilliant result. . . . Over against Saul’s oath the people set their own: ‘As the
Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground.’ Probably Saul
151

152. was not unwilling in this awful question, when his son’s life trembled in the
balance, to submit his will for once to the people’s.”
“Take then no vow at random: ta’en in faith,
Preserve it; yet not bent, as Jephthah once,
Blindly to execute a rash resolve,
Whom better it had suited to exclaim,
‘I have done ill than to redeem his pledge
By doing worse.”—Dante, Paradise, .
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:43 sq. Jonathan thinks death unavoidable: Lo, I must
die.—Saul confirms this with an oath: “God do so and more also,” comp. 1
Samuel 3:17. Both hold the erroneous opinion that a sinful promise or oath must
be kept. That the lot fell on Jonathan meant only, as a divine disposition, that the
person was discovered on whom, according to Saul’s opinion, rested the fault, by
reason of which God’s answer to his question was silence. Against both rises the
people’s voice as the voice of God. The question [ 1 Samuel 14:45] “Shall
Jonathan die?” and the answer: “Far be it,” express the sorrowful astonishment
and the energetic protest of the people who were inspired by Jonathan’s heroic
deed and its brilliant result. But the decisive fact for the people was the firm
conviction that God was with him and carried out through him this deed of
deliverance. Over against Saul’s oath the people set their own: “As the Lord
liveth, there shall not a hair of his head fall to the ground.” To the second
“wrought” ( 1 Samuel 14:45) supply the object of the first: “this great salvation.”
“And the people rescued him,” not, as Ewald says, by putting another to die in
his stead, but solely by their energetic protest, in the face of which Saul is obliged
to let his oath go unfulfilled. For a similar intervention of the people see
Liv8:35.—[Patrick: They did not rescue him by force and violence, but by their
petition to Saul and the reason they gave for it. Josephus saith that “by their
prayers and vows to God they delivered him.” They were too forward indeed to
152

153. swear directly against Saul’s oath; but of the two, his being the most rash, God
was pleased to annul it, and absolve him from it.—Wordworth: Observe the
humiliation to which Saul is reduced by his disobedience.—Kitto: The
enlightened consciences and generous enthusiasm of the people.—Tr.]
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:43
‘Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done.” And Jonathan told
him, and said, “I certainly tasted a little honey with the end of the rod which was
in my hand, and, lo, I must die.” ’
Meanwhile Saul demanded that Jonathan tell him what he had done, and
Jonathan, now knowing of the oath, admitted that he had eaten a little honey
from the end of the staff that he was carrying, and recognised that as a result he
must die. No one seems to have queried the circumstances. A rash oath may have
been uttered by the king, but the consequences had to follow. Such was the
power and responsibility of kings. We are, however, probably justified in
thinking that to YHWH the culprit was not Jonathan but Saul.
44 Saul said, “May God deal with me, be it ever
so severely, if you do not die, Jonathan.”
CLARKE, "And Saul answered - thou shalt surely die, Jonathan - To save
thy rash oath! So must John Baptist’s head be taken off at the desire of an impure
woman, because a Herod had sworn to give her whatever she might request!
Unfeeling brute! However, the king was Judge. But what said the people, who were
the Jury?
GILL, "And Saul answered, God do so and more also,.... A form of an oath
imprecating evils upon him more and greater than he chose to mention, see the like
form in Rth_1:17, though Abarbinel thinks this is not the form of an oath, but an
asseveration of a curse that would befall him; as that God would not answer him
when he inquired of him, and that he would add to do so again and again, if he died
153

154. not:
for thou shall surely die, Jonathan; such words from a father must be very
striking to a son, and argue a want of paternal affection in Saul, that could call his
son by his name, and deliver such a speech unto him in so strong a manner.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:44-45. Thou shalt surely die, Jonathan — This again
was most rashly spoken. Saul, however, seems to have been influenced by a real
fear of God, and certainly is to be commended for having a greater regard to his
oath than to his kindred and natural affection. The people said, Shall Jonathan
die? — Hitherto they had expressed themselves in a way that manifested their
obedience to Saul, and acquiesced in what seemed good to him. But now that
Jonathan is in danger, Saul’s word is no longer a law to them; but with the
utmost zeal they oppose the execution of his sentence. Who hath wrought this
great salvation in Israel — Shall that life be sacrificed which was so bravely
exposed for the public service, and to which we owe our lives and triumphs? No,
we will never stand by and see him thus treated whom God has delighted to
honour. As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the
ground — Saul had sworn that he should die; but they oppose their oath to his,
and swear he shall not die. They did not rescue him by violence, but by reason
and resolution. And Josephus says, “They offered prayers to God that he would
forgive Jonathan’s sin,” and that he might be loosed from the curse. He hath
wrought with God this day — It is plain the blessing and favour of God have
been with him. It has been in concurrence with God that he has wrought this
salvation. And God is so far from being offended with Jonathan, that he hath
graciously owned him in the great services of this day. We may suppose Saul had
not so perfectly forgot the relation of a father, but that he was willing enough to
have Jonathan rescued, and well pleased to have that done which yet he would
not do himself; and he that knows the heart of a father, knows not how to blame
him.
It may be edifying to the reader, and therefore not improper to copy here, the
following important observations of a late but anonymous writer, on the
foregoing verses: “It may, at first sight, appear strange that the Divine
Providence should so order things, by giving no answer to the high-priest, and
causing the lots so to fall, that Jonathan, who appears entirely guiltless, should
be brought into imminent danger of his life. If we consider this only in respect to
Jonathan, it does indeed appear unaccountable; but if we take in his father Saul,
it will appear to have been an act of divine wisdom. It is manifest, as well from
the unnecessary and unprofitable oath that Saul here exacted from the people, as
from many other passages of his life, that Saul was of a hasty, precipitate temper.
What better lesson then could God give to him, and to all of such hasty,
154

155. precipitate tempers, than to bring him into the grievous strait of either breaking
a solemn oath or putting his own son to death? That this was the main intention
of all that happened on this occasion appears evident, in that God inspired the
people with such a courage and love for Jonathan, that they would not, upon any
terms, permit even a hair of his head to fall to the ground. For we cannot
suppose, if God had intended to punish Jonathan, as guilty of any crime, that the
disposition of the people could have prevented his purposes, though they did
those of Saul, which had no foundation in justice.”
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:44
‘And Saul said, “God do so and more also, for you shall surely die, Jonathan.” ’
At his words Saul confirmed the death sentence. He declared that before God
Jonathan must assuredly die. As far as he was concerned there was no
alternative. It was the king’s oath. This was the extreme to which his religious
activity had taken him. The death of his own son for something that had not been
done with sin in the heart.
The writer wants us to know that Saul’s arrogance had reached such a stage that
the thought of his oath being violated was seen by him as sufficient to warrant a
death sentence being passed even on his own son. It was the arrogance of the
absolute monarch. (We should note in this regard that there is no hint that any
enquiry was made into the circumstances, nor had God been consulted as to the
verdict. Saul just assumed that he was right).
45 But the men said to Saul, “Should Jonathan
die—he who has brought about this great
deliverance in Israel? Never! As surely as the
Lord lives, not a hair of his head will fall to the
ground, for he did this today with God’s help.
So the men rescued Jonathan, and he was not
155

156. put to death.
CLARKE, "And the people said - “Shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this
great salvation in Israel? God forbid! As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of
his head fall to the ground.” Here was a righteous and impartial jury, who brought in
a verdict according to the evidence: No man should die but for a breach of the law of
God; but Jonathan hath not broken any law of God; therefore Jonathan should not
die. And because he should not, therefore he shall not.
He hath wrought with God this day - God has been commander-in-chief;
Jonathan has acted under his directions.
So the people rescued Jonathan - And God testified no displeasure; and
perhaps he permitted all this that he might correct Saul’s propensity to rashness and
precipitancy.
GILL, "And the people said unto Saul,.... Hearing such words, and filled with
grief, pity, and sympathy for Jonathan, as Josephus (k) observes:
shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this great salvation in Israel? no, he
shall not; what, such a man as he die, who, under God, has been the instrument of so
great deliverance, who first began it himself with one man only with him, and has
proceeded in it to the finishing of it?
God forbid: this shall not be so; they speak of it with the utmost abhorrence and
detestation, as a shocking piece of cruelty and ingratitude, unheard of, and not to be
paralleled:
as the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground;
as Saul swore he should die, they also swear he should not, expressing their firm
resolution to stand by him, and preserve his life; and so far should it be from him to
have his life taken away, that an hair of his head should not be touched, or the least
injury done to his person; for though they had yielded a ready obedience to all the
orders and commands of Saul, which were distressing to themselves, they were
determined to oppose him in this case of his son:
for he hath wrought with God this day; God has been with him, assisted him to
do great things for Israel, and therefore should not die for a thing so trivial; and it
being not done in disobedience to his father, nor in contempt of him, but through
pure ignorance, as some of them well knew; so the Targum,"for it is known before the
Lord, that in ignorance he did it this day:"
so the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not; not by force, but by their
resolution and importunity; or "redeemed" him (l), by exposing their own lives to
danger in opposing their king, and by their petitions to him for him; and, as
Josephus says (m), by their prayers to God for him, that his fault might be forgiven.
156

157. HENRY 45-46, "The people rescued Jonathan out of his father's hands, v. 45.
Hitherto they had expressed themselves very observant of Saul. What seemed good
to him they acquiesced in, v. 36, 40. But, when Jonathan is in danger, Saul's word is
no longer a law to them, but with the utmost zeal they oppose the execution of his
sentence: “Shall Jonathan die - that blessing, that darling, of his country? Shall that
life be sacrificed to a punctilio of law and honour which was so bravely exposed for
the public service, and to which we owe our lives and triumphs? No, we will never
stand by and see him thus treated whom God delights to honour.” It is good to see
Israelites zealous for the protection of those whom God has made instruments of
public good. Saul had sworn that Jonathan should die, but they oppose their oath to
his, and swear he shall not die: “As the Lord liveth there shall not only not his head,
but not a hair of his head fall to the ground;” they did not rescue him by violence,
but by reason and resolution; and Josephus says they made their prayer to God that
he might be loosed from the curse. They pleaded for him that he has wrought with
God this day; that is, “he has owned God's cause, and God has owned his
endeavours, and therefore his life is too precious to be thrown away upon a nicety.”
We may suppose Saul had not so perfectly forgotten the relation of a father but that
he was willing enough to have Jonathan rescued, and well pleased to have that done
which yet he would not do himself: and he that knows the heart of a father knows not
how to blame him.
5. The design against the Philistines is quashed by this incident (v. 46): Saul went
up from following them, and so an opportunity was lost of completing the victory.
When Israel's shields are clashing with one another the public safety and service
suffer by it.
JAMISON, "the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not — When Saul
became aware of Jonathan’s transgression in regard to the honey, albeit it was done
in ignorance and involved no guilt, he was, like Jephthah [Jdg_11:31, Jdg_11:35],
about to put his son to death, in conformity with his vow [1Sa_14:44]. But the more
enlightened conscience of the army prevented the tarnishing the glory of the day by
the blood of the young hero, to whose faith and valor it was chiefly due.
K&D, "1Sa_14:45
But the people interposed, “Shall Jonathan die, who has achieved this great
salvation (victory) in Israel? God forbid! As truly as Jehovah liveth, not a hair shall
fall from his head upon the ground; for he hath wrought (the victory) with God to-
day.” Thus the people delivered Jonathan from death. The objection raised by the
people was so conclusive, that Saul was obliged to yield.
What Jonathan had done was not wrong in itself, but became so simply on account
of the oath with which Saul had forbidden it. But Jonathan did not hear the oath, and
therefore had not even consciously transgressed. Nevertheless a curse lay upon
Israel, which was to be brought to light as a warning for the culprit. Therefore
Jehovah had given no reply to Saul. But when the lot, which had the force of a divine
verdict, fell upon Jonathan, sentence of death was not thereby pronounced upon him
by God; but is was simply made manifest, that through his transgression of his
father's oath, with which he was not acquainted, guilt had been brought upon Israel.
The breach of a command issued with a solemn oath, even when it took place
157

158. unconsciously, excited the wrath of God, as being a profanation of the divine name.
But such a sin could only rest as guilt upon the man who had committed, or the man
who occasioned it. Now where the command in question was one of God himself,
there could be no question, that even in the case of unconscious transgression the sin
fell upon the transgressor, and it was necessary that it should either be expiated by
him or forgiven him. But where the command of a man had been unconsciously
transgressed, the guilt might also fall upon the man who issued the command, that is
to say, if he did it without being authorized or empowered by God. In the present
instance, Saul had issued the prohibition without divine authority, and had made it
obligatory upon the people by a solemn oath. The people had conscientiously obeyed
the command, but Jonathan had transgressed it without being aware of it. For this
Saul was about to punish him with death, in order to keep his oath. But the people
opposed it. They not only pronounced Jonathan innocent, because he had broken the
king's command unconsciously, but they also exclaimed that he had gained the
victory for Israel “with God.” In this fact (Jonathan's victory) there was a divine
verdict. And Saul could not fail to recognise now, that it was not Jonathan, but he
himself, who had sinned, and through his arbitrary and despotic command had
brought guilt upon Israel, on account of which God had given him no reply.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:45. And the people said unto Saul— Lowman, speaking of
the authority of the congregation or general assembly of the people of Israel,
observes, that "like the popular assemblies of other governments, they had some
jurisdiction in criminal causes. When Saul had adjudged Israel not to eat any
food till the evening, his own son Jonathan transgressed his order; and upon his
confession, Saul his father, then king and general, determines to put him to
death. And Saul answered, God do so to me, and more also; for thou shalt surely
die, Jonathan. This sentence passed by Saul might appear to be without appeal,
and that there was no authority to reverse it; however, the people said unto Saul,
Shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this great salvation for Israel? God
forbid! As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground;
for he hath wrought with God this day: so the people rescued Jonathan, that he
died not. Bishop Patrick justly observes, that 'the people did not rescue Jonathan
by violence or force.' It was not a mutinous act of an army: yet the expressions of
the history will no ways suit with his further supposition, that 'they delivered
him by petition to Saul;' or as Grotius, 'not by authority, but entreaty.' As the
Lord liveth, there shall not an hair of his head fall to the ground, has very little
of the style of an humble petition: it seems a very full resolution, and which it
appears they understood to be their right. And why may it not be so understood,
when the authority of condemning or absolving criminals is known to have
belonged to the assembly of the people in the most celebrated governments of
Greece and Rome? Josephus mentions, indeed, that 'they offered prayers to God,
that he would forgive Jonathan's sin:' he makes no mention, however, of any
petition that they made to his father Saul; but that 'they rescued him from his
father's anger and rash curse:' which words can hardly, I think, be understood
of a petition, but must mean either force or authority. And the words in the
158

159. original seem to mean neither force nor petition, but an act of their own
authority, whereby Jonathan was redeemed from the sentence of death, or
whereby he was pardoned, and the sentence of death passed upon him was
reversed in the general court of Israel. This interpretation is greatly favoured, as
judgment in criminal cases is given to the congregation by an express law on
some occasions." See Numbers 35:24-25 and Lowman's Civ. Gov. of the
Hebrews, p. 145.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:45
‘And the people said to Saul, “Shall Jonathan die, who has wrought this great
salvation in Israel? Far from it. As YHWH lives, there shall not one hair of his
head fall to the ground, for he has wrought with God this day.” So the people
rescued Jonathan, with the result that he died not.’
The people, however, were not prepared for this to happen. Was it not Jonathan
whom YHWH had used to bring about His great deliverance? How then could he
be put to death on the day of that victory? Thus they would not allow it and
declared equally strongly in YHWH’s Name that as God’s champion not a hair
of his head would be allowed to fall to the ground. And the consequence was that
he was delivered from death.
The writer clearly sees the people as in the right and Saul as in the wrong, and
sees YHWH’s response to Saul’s questions as His attempt also to prove Saul in
the wrong. The people similarly saw it in the same way, for they swore by
YHWH’s life. Thus in the writer’s view they recognised the heart of God better
than Saul. What Saul was proposing therefore was not YHWH’s will. His
exposure as no longer knowing the mind of God was complete.
Note the contrast with 1 Samuel 11:13. The magnanimous Saul has now become
the callous Saul. He no longer sees YHWH’s victory as a cause for forgiveness.
His heart has become rigid in its religious inflexibility. It is a further indication
of his downward slide.
46 Then Saul stopped pursuing the Philistines,
159

160. and they withdrew to their own land.
GILL, "Then Saul went up from following the Philistines,.... Returned home
to his own city, finding that he could get no answer from the Lord, whether he should
pursue further or not, and losing the time and opportunity of doing it, by examining
into the affair of his son, and casting lots to find it out:
and the Philistines went to their own place; their country and cities, such of
them as remained, who were not cut off by their own and the sword of the Israelites.
Josephus (n) says, Saul killed about 60,000 of them. It seems to be the will of God
that they should not now be utterly destroyed, that they might be a rod of correction
in his hand, to chastise the people of Israel hereafter.
K&D, "1Sa_14:46
With the feeling of this guilt, Saul gave up any further pursuit of the Philistines: he
“went up” (sc., to Gibeah) “from behind the Philistines,” i.e., desisting from any
further pursuit. But the Philistines went to their place, i.e., back into their own land.
ELLICOTT, "(46) Then Saul went up from following the Philistines.—Saul
recognised now that the fault which caused the oracle of the Urim and
Thummim to keep silence was his, and not Jonathan’s. He seems quietly to have
acquiesced with Ahijah’s evident reluctance to countenance a public pursuit; he
drew off his forces then from the direction of the enemy, and went up, no doubt,
to Gibeah; but the power of the Philistines for the time seems to have been
utterly broken, and they retreated to their own districts along the sea coasts.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:46. The closing statement. Saul desisted from further
pursuit of the Philistines, with whose overthrow as far as it could be effected
under the harmful consequences of his blind zeal, he had to be contented. The
Philistines went back to their own land. In spite of this serious defeat their
strength was not broken (comp. 1 Samuel 14:52). The fact that Saul desisted
from pursuit shows that he understood the Lord’s silence as a denial, and was
obliged to recognize as the cause of it not Jonathan’s conduct, but his own
arbitrary and rash procedure.
160

161. 47 After Saul had assumed rule over Israel, he
fought against their enemies on every side:
Moab, the Ammonites, Edom, the kings[e] of
Zobah, and the Philistines. Wherever he turned,
he inflicted punishment on them.[f]
BARNES, "Compare 2Sa_8:15. The preceding narrative shows that before this
time Saul had been king in name only, since his country was occupied by the
Philistines, and he could only muster 600 men, and those but half armed and pent up
in a narrow stronghold. Now, however, on the expulsion of the Philistines from his
country, and the return of the Israelites from their vassalage and from their hiding
places 1Sa_14:21-22, Saul became king in deed as well as in name, and acted the part
of a king through the rest of his reign in defending his people against their enemies
round about. A comprehensive list of these enemies, including the Ammonite war
which had already been described 1Sa_11:1-15, and the Amalekite war which follows
in 1 Sam. 15, is given in 1Sa_14:47-48. There is not the slightest indication from the
words whether this “taking the kingdom” occurred soon or really years after Saul’s
anointing at Gilgal. Hence, some would place the clause 1Sa_14:47-52 immediately
after 1Sa_11:1-15, or 1 Sam. 12, as a summary of Saul’s reign. The details of the reign,
namely, of the Philistine war in 1 Sam. 13; 14, of the Amalekite war in 1 Sam. 15, and
the other events down to the end of 1Sa_31:1-13, preceded by the formulary, 1Sa_
13:1, would then follow according to the common method of Hebrew historical
narrative.
Zobah - This was one of the petty Ara-roman kingdoms flourishing at this time
(Psa_60:1-12 title). It seems to have been situated between Damascus and the
Euphrates.
CLARKE, "So Saul took the kingdom - The Targum appears to give the
meaning of this expression: “Saul prospered in his government over Israel.” And the
proofs of his prosperity are immediately subjoined.
Fought against all his enemies - Of the wars which are mentioned here we
have no particulars; they must have endured a long time, and have been, at least in
general, successful.
GILL, "So Saul took the kingdom over Israel,.... Which seemed to be almost
taken from him when he was shut up in Gibeah, and the Philistines ravaged his
country at pleasure; but now, having obtained a victory over them, he recovered his
161

162. kingdom, and reassumed his power and authority; or he was now strengthened in it,
as Kimchi interprets it; the people seeing that he succeeded in his wars with their
enemies, they readily submitted to his government without any hesitation, and
obeyed his commands; so the Targum,"Saul prospered in the kingdom over
Israel;''and, according to Abarbinel, these words will admit of another sense, that
whereas, after he was anointed and made king, he followed the herd, and attended
rustic affairs; but now, after this victory over the Philistines, he took upon him the
state and majesty of a king, and no more concerned himself with his farm and cattle,
but betook himself wholly to regal and military affairs, as follows:
and fought against all his enemies on every side; who invaded his kingdom
from different quarters; he defended himself against them, and preserved his
kingdom:
against Moab, and against the children of Ammon; who lay to the east of
him:
and against Edom; which was on the southern border of his land:
and against the king of Zobah; a part of Syria, which was to the north of the land
of Israel, and was near Damascus, see 2Sa_8:3, and, according to Benjamin of Tudela
(o), the same with Haleb, or Aleppo, There never were but two kings of it, Rehob and
Hadadezer, who lived in the reigns of Saul and David, 2Sa_8:3.
and against the Philistines; who were on the western border of the land of
Canaan:
and whithersoever he turned himself, he vexed them; disturbed and
disquieted them, and made them very uneasy; he terrified and distressed them; the
Targum is, he "condemned" them, he treated them as wicked and ungodly persons,
and punished them as such.
HENRY 47-52, "Here is a general account of Saul's court and camp. 1. Of his
court and family, the names of his sons and daughters (1Sa_14:49), and of his wife
and his cousin-german that was general of his army, 1Sa_14:50. There is mention of
another wife of Saul's (2Sa_21:8), Rizpah, a secondary wife, and of the children he
had by her. 2. Of his camp and military actions. (1.) How he levied his army: When he
saw any strong valiant man, that was remarkably fit for service, he took him unto
him (1Sa_14:52), as Samuel had told them the manner of the king would be (1Sa_
8:11); and, if he must have a standing army, it was his prudence to fill it up with the
ablest men he could make choice of. (2.) How he employed his army. He guarded his
country against the insults of its enemies on every side, and prevented their
incursions, 1Sa_14:47, 1Sa_14:48. It is supposed that he acted only defensively
against those that used to invade the borders of Israel; and withersoever he turned
himself, as there was occasion, he vexed them, by checking and disappointing them.
But the enemies he struggled most with were the Philistines, with whom he had sore
war all his days, 1Sa_14:52. He had little reason to be proud of his royal dignity, nor
had any of his neighbours cause to envy him, for he had little enjoyment of himself
after he took the kingdom. He could not vex his enemies without some vexation to
himself, such thorns are crowns quilted with.
162

163. JAMISON, "So Saul ... fought against all his enemies on every side —
This signal triumph over the Philistines was followed, not only by their expulsion
from the land of Israel, but by successful incursions against various hostile
neighbors, whom he harassed though he did not subdue them.
COFFMAN, "A GENERAL SUMMARY OF SAUL'S WARS
"When Saul had taken the kingship over Israel, he fought against all his enemies
on every side, against Moab, against the Ammonites, against Edom, against the
kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines; wherever he turned, he put them to
the worse. And he did valiantly, and smote the Amelekites, and delivered Israel
out of the hands of those who plundered them."
The chronology of events mentioned in this chapter is impossible of any adequate
solution. This little paragraph is a summary of Saul's forty years of fighting
against Israel's enemies. If every event in that period had been described as fully
as that episode just mentioned, it would have required thousands of pages. It was
only the special moral, religious, and theological implications that led to the more
complete details in this and in the following chapters.
The inspired author here freely admitted Saul's ability as a "valiant" soldier and
his ability to defeat God's enemies. Thus, the reason assigned by the Lord in his
appointment of Saul to deliver the people from the Philistines was indeed a good
one.
WHEDON, " 47. Against Moab — These enemies had sought to injure Israel in
the days of Moses. Numbers 22.
Against the children of Ammon — As described in chap. 11.
Against Edom — The descendants of Esau, who had refused the Israelites a
passage through their country. Numbers 20:14-21.
The kings of Zobah — Zobah seems to have lain somewhere between Damascus
and the Euphrates, but its exact position has not been determined. In the days of
David it was ruled by a single king, named Hadadezer. 2 Samuel 8:3.
163

164. Against the Philistines — Against these inveterate foes he carried on war, at
intervals, all his days, (1 Samuel 14:52,) and at last was conquered by them.
Chap. 31.
He vexed them — The Hebrew word thus rendered here is the Hiphil form of the
verb ‫,רשׁע‬ and has been rendered variously. Septuagint, He saved himself.
Vulgate, He was victorious. So Gesenius and Furst. Luther, He executed
punishment. This last is best supported by the usage of the language.
ELLICOTT, " (47) So Saul took the kingdom over Israel.—Some expositors
closely connect this verse with the successful termination of the Philistine war,
considering that it was through this great victory over the nation which had so
long harassed and impoverished Israel that Saul really acquired for the first time
the regal authority over all Israel, and that previously his rule had only been
acknowledged in certain of the tribes. It is, however, better to consider the
statement contained in this verse as simply a general view of Saul’s reign, which
was a reign of perpetual wars. The words, then, of our verse are simply
introductory to the list of wars waged from the very beginning of his
government. It should be observed that this view is supported by the mention of
the Ammonite war, which took place a considerable time before the events just
related. Such a mention would, therefore, be out of place, unless we take this
verse as containing a general statement—in other words, “Saul assumed the
reins of government, and during his reign he waged the following wars.”
On every side . . . Moab . . . Ammon . . . Edom . . . Zobah . . . Philistines.—This
enumeration of the nations with whom he fought literally included the countries
on every side of the Land of Promise. Moab and Ammon bounded the Israelites
on the east; Edom on the south; the Philistines on the west, along the coast of the
Mediterranean; while Zobah was a district of Syria on the north-east of the
territory of the twelve tribes, lying between the Euphrates and the Syrian
Orontes.
He vexed them.—The exact sense of the Hebrew word yar’shia, rendered in our
version “he vexed,” has puzzled all commentators. The LXX. evidently read
another word here, as they translate it by es‫פ‬zeto, “he was preserved.” The
majority of the versions and Gesenius, however, give the real sense:
“Whithersoever he (Saul) turned himself lie was victorious.” Luther’s rendering
is scholarly: “Whithersoever he turned he inflicted punishment,” and is adopted
164

165. by Keil.
HAWKER, "Verses 47-52
(47) ¶ So Saul took the kingdom over Israel, and fought against all his enemies
on every side, against Moab, and against the children of Ammon, and against
Edom, and against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines: and
whithersoever he turned himself, he vexed them. (48) And he gathered an host,
and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that
spoiled them. (49) Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, and Ishui, and
Melchishua: and the names of his two daughters were these; the name of the
firstborn Merab, and the name of the younger Michal: (50) And the name of
Saul's wife was Ahinoam, the daughter of Ahimaaz: and the name of the captain
of his host was Abner, the son of Ner, Saul's uncle. (51) And Kish was the father
of Saul; and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel. (52) And there was
sore war against the Philistines all the days of Saul: and when Saul saw any
strong man, or any valiant man, he took him unto him.
The victory, which begun from such small and inconsiderable means, as
Jonathan and his armour bearer, was prosecuted to great exploits. It should
seem, as if the Lord meant that Israel should learn from it, how much his mercy
was with his people, notwithstanding their undeservings. if we spiritualize the
subject, as it concerns God's people, the same gracious lesson is exhibited to us
now. We may, without going far in the enquiry of our lives, see enough to
discover that our success is wholly in God's favor, not man's desert; that grace is
not bestowed for our merit, nor withheld for our transgressions. The rich and
full salvation by Jesus, founded as it is in free and sovereign love, like the dew of
heaven, waiteth not for man, neither tarrieth for the sons of men; but comes to us
of the Lord's own bounty, and hath for its beginning God's love, and for its end
God's glory. For of him and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be
glory, forever, and ever. Amen.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:47-48. Saul took the kingdom — That is, resumed the
administration of it, after he had, in a manner, lost it by the Philistines, who had
almost got the entire possession of it, and enslaved Israel. And fought against all
his enemies on every side — He did not invade them, as may be gathered from
the next verse, but repelled them, and kept them within their own limits. He
gathered a host, and smote the Amalekites; which war is described at large in the
next chapter.
CONSTABLE, "4. Saul's limited effectiveness in battle 14:47-52
Saul was an active warrior and was effective to an extent due to his native
165

166. abilities and God's limited blessing. He punished the enemies of Israel (1 Samuel
14:47-48), which was God's will. Yet he did not subdue and defeat them all as
David did.
The information concerning Saul's family members that the writer recorded here
corresponds to other similar ancient Near Eastern texts. It was common to give
this information as part of a summary of a king's accomplishments (cf. 2 Samuel
8). Ishvi is probably an alternative name for Ishbosheth.
God would later bring valiant warriors to David as He had previously brought to
Saul (1 Samuel 10:26), but Saul now had to select recruits by personally
evaluating them. This is another indication of God's limited blessing on Saul. In
contrast, hundreds of soldiers volunteered to serve with David. Saul established a
standing army in Israel for the first time (cf. 1 Samuel 8:11).
LANGE, "Summary account of Saul’s wars and family-relations. 1 Samuel
14:47-52
1 Samuel 14:47-48. And Saul had taken the kingdom, then he fought, or: “When
Saul had taken the kingdom, he fought.” The words do not stand in pragmatical
connection with the preceding narrative of the battle against the Philistines, as if
the intention was to state that thus (by this victory) Saul gained royal authority
(Then, Keil). His accession to the throne is mentioned merely as starting-point
for the historical-statistical statement of the various wars which he carried on
from the beginning of his government. The already-related war against the
Ammonites is here again mentioned, and of the war against the Philistines it is
said, in accordance with the design of this interposed section, at the end ( 1
Samuel 14:52), that it extended throughout his whole reign. His whole
government was a warlike one. Wars are here mentioned, of which nothing is
elsewhere said. What is said of his wars before and after this is determined by
the theocratic point of view, and is designed to show how Saul, in fulfilling his
royal calling (essentially a warlike one), came into principial[FN17] conflict with
the theocratic task and significance of the kingdom, and therefore incurred of
necessity the judgment of God. The wars, which he had to carry on with his
enemies roundabout, are the following: against the Moabites and Ammonites in
the East, against the Edomites in the South, against the kings of Zobah in the
Northeast (Zobah, a district of Syria, lay probably north-east of Damascus,
between the Euphrates and the Orontes, see 2 Samuel 8:3 [“perhaps included the
eastern flank of the mountain-chain which shuts in Cœ Leviticus -Syria on that
166

167. side, the high land about Aleppo, and the more northern portion of the Syrian
desert” (Geo. Rawlinson in Smith B. D.).—Tr.]), and against the Philistines in the
West. Thus the “roundabout” is pictured to us. The word ַ‫ִיﬠ‬‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ַר‬‫י‬[Eng. A. V.
“vexed”[FN18]] indicates the point of view from which these wars are to be
regarded as victories: he declared guilty (Keil: by deeds), the Hiph. [causative] of
the verb being often used of judges ( Exodus 22:8; Deuteronomy 25:1; Job 32:3),
he inflicted punishment, or executed judgment against these nations, because
they warred against God’s people and thus opposed the Lord’s designs with
respect to Israel. They were national wars, which Saul carried on for the honor
of the Lord and of His people.—Saul’s development of power against the
Amalekites is made specially prominent; he “gathered strength” ]‫ל‬ִ‫י‬ַ‫ח‬ ‫שׂ‬ַ‫ַﬠ‬‫יּ‬ַ‫וֹ‬ , Eng.
A. V. incorrectly: “gathered a host”]. This war against the robbing, plundering
hereditary enemy, the Amalekites, is in the next chapter described “from the
theocratical point of view” (Then.).
PETT, " A Summary Of Saul’s Earlier Reign And Its Successes And Of His
Close Family (1 Samuel 14:47-52).
Having demonstrated both Saul’s partial success, mainly through the faith of
Jonathan, and his partial failure as a result of his own distorted religious ideas,
the writer looks back and summarises his reign from when he took over the
kingship. It will be noted that he could not have said what he did about the
Philistines, firstly of Israel’s subjection to them, and then of their triumph over
them, had he not previously described the situation above. These had not
occurred at the commencement of his reign. But now the Philistines too could be
listed among the defeated nations, and thus a complete list of victories can be
given. This explains why these words come after the incident above. The order is
intended to be topical, not chronological.
Even then, however, the writer will not let all the credit go to Saul and he
therefore introduces another figure, Saul’s uncle, whose name is Abner, who is
the commander-in-chief of the armies of Saul. It is almost as though he was
saying, ‘Remember that Saul did not do it on his own’.
Analysis.
a Now when Saul had taken the kingship over Israel, he fought against all his
enemies on every side, against Moab, and against the children of Ammon, and
167

168. against Edom, and against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines, and
wherever he turned himself, he put them to the worse (1 Samuel 14:47).
b And he did valiantly, and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the
hands of those who despoiled them (1 Samuel 14:48).
c Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, and Ishvi, and Malchi-shua; and the
names of his two daughters were these: the name of the first-born Merab, and
the name of the younger Michal, and the name of Saul’s wife was Ahinoam the
daughter of Ahimaaz (1 Samuel 14:49-50 a).
b And the name of the captain of his host was Abner the son of Ner, the uncle of
Saul. And Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son
of Abiel (1 Samuel 14:50-51).
a And there was fierce war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, and when
Saul saw any mighty man, or any valiant man, he took him to him (1 Samuel
14:52).
Note that in ‘a’ we are informed of the victories of Saul, while in the parallel we
learn that in the case of the Philistines the warfare continued throughout the
days of Saul with the result that he had always to be on the look out for good
warriors so that he could maintain a standing army and as a result keep them in
check. In ‘b’ he delivered Israel out of the hands of those who despoiled them,
while in the parallel it is emphasised that he had in this the assistance of his
uncle, the mighty Abner, commander-in-chief of his forces. Centrally in ‘c’ we
have described the family of Saul.
1 Samuel 14:47
‘Now when Saul had taken the kingship over Israel, he fought against all his
enemies on every side, against Moab, and against the children of Ammon, and
against Edom, and against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines: and
168

169. wherever he turned himself, he put them to the worse.’
Note the reference back to ‘when he had taken over the kingship’. What we learn
here indicates how little we know about Saul’s genuine early achievements, for it
is made quite clear that he had been kept constantly busy, especially in
Transjordan against the Moabites, the Ammonites, and the Edomites, and
against threats from the north from the Aramean kingdom of Zobah. But he had
defeated them all. Only against the Philistines had he been unable to achieve
victory, and now that too had been accomplished.
48 He fought valiantly and defeated the
Amalekites, delivering Israel from the hands of
those who had plundered them.
CLARKE, "Smote the Amalekites - This war is mentioned in the following
chapter.
GILL, "And he gathered an host,.... A large army; for after the battle with the
Ammonites he disbanded his army, and sent them home, retaining only 3000 men,
and these deserted him to six hundred, which were all the men he had with him,
when he fought last with the Philistines; but now, finding he had enemies on every
side of him, he gathered a numerous host to defend his country against them, and
particularly to attack the people next mentioned:
and he smote the Amalekites; a people that Israel, by the law of God, were
bound to destroy, and blot out their name; a particular account of his expedition
against them is given in the following chapter:
and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled them; the
nations before mentioned, Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Syrians, and Philistines.
K&D, "1Sa_14:48
“And he acquired power;” ‫ל‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫ח‬ ‫ה‬ ָ‫שׂ‬ ָ‫ע‬ (as in Num_24:18) does not merely signify he
169

170. proved himself brave, or he formed an army, but denotes the development and
unfolding of power in various respects. Here it relates more particularly to the
development of strength in the war against Amalek, by virtue of which Saul smote
this arch-enemy of Israel, and put an end to their depredations. This war is described
more fully in 1 Samuel 15, on account of its consequences in relation to Saul's own
sovereignty.
WHEDON, " 48. He gathered a host — Rather, he waxed mighty. He acquired
mighty influence and power by his many successful battles.
Smote the Amalekites — As we read in the next chapter. But as we have detailed
descriptions of the wars with Amalek, and Ammon, and the Philistines, how are
we to account for the fact that the wars with Moab, Edom, and Zobah are only
mentioned with a passing notice? We answer, The sacred writers seek to show us
the divine as well as the human side in the history of the chosen people, and
therefore they select those facts which serve this purpose best. Saul’s battles with
Moab, Edom, and Zobah probably furnished no marked displays of Divine
interposition, and for this reason our author paused not to describe them fully.
ELLICOTT, "(48) Smote the Amalekites.—Out of the many wars the king
waged, this war with Amalek is singled out, for in the new development of
Hebrew power by which Saul’s reign was marked this campaign or series of
campaigns was especially prominent. This war is related with some detail in the
next chapter, but it is there introduced on account of other considerations. The
English translators in their rendering, “he gathered an host,” have followed the
Syriac and Vulg.; the marginal translation, “he wrought mightily,” is the more
accurate.
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:48
‘And he did valiantly, and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the
hands of those who despoiled them.’
The separate reference here to the smiting of the Amalekites may refer to 1
Samuel 15, or it may have in mind earlier attempts by the Amalekites to invade
Israel. The Amalekites were ferocious, wandering desert tribes (similar to the
Bedouin) who would constantly swoop down on any nation that they found to be
in a weak condition in order to kill simply for the pleasure of it, and in order to
obtain tribute and booty, often in alliance with others (compare Judges 3:13;
Judges 6:3). They were unholy predators. That was why in the end they had to
170

171. be utterly destroyed.
Up to this point then Saul’s reign could be said to have been reasonably
successful, for while he had had to wait for success against the Philistines, he had
succeeded admirably against others. And now at last even the defeat of the
Philistines had been achieved.
However, as the writer has already indicated throughout 1 Samuel 13-14, Saul
has also begun to go downhill, and this will be brought home in the chapters that
follow where it will be demonstrated how the last part of Saul’s reign reveals his
continuing disobedience, his consequent rejection by YHWH, his subsequent
illness, his sense of absolute monarchy, the murderous nature of his own
inclinations, his opposition to David, the man of God’s choice, and his own
rapidly deteriorating spiritual state.
Saul’s Family
49 Saul’s sons were Jonathan, Ishvi and Malki-
Shua. The name of his older daughter was
Merab, and that of the younger was Michal.
BARNES, "This enumeration of Saul’s children and chief officers is according to
the analogy of the subsequent annals of David and Solomen’s reign. But the one here
called Ishui, is elsewhere (marginal references) called Abi-nadab; and a fourth son,
Esh-baal or Ish-bosheth, is here omitted.
171

172. CLARKE, "Now the sons of Saul - We do not find Ishbosheth here. Calmet
says it was “because he was too young, and did not go with him to the war, for he
mentions only those who were with him.” Why then mention his daughters and his
wife? Did they go with him to the war?
GILL, "And the sons of Saul were Jonathan,.... Who seems to be his firstborn,
of whom, his valour and success, we read in this and the preceding chapter:
and Ishui; the same with Abinadab, 1Ch_8:33 for he had two names:
and Melchishua; and besides these three there was another, whose name was
Ishbosheth, sometimes called Eshbaal, 2Sa_2:8 who succeeded him in the kingdom;
for which reason Abarbinel thinks he is not mentioned here, because he was a king;
though it is generally supposed the reason why these only are named is, because they
went out to war with him, and died with him, but this did not; he had other children
by a concubine, or secondary wife, whose name was Rizpah, not mentioned here,
2Sa_21:8,
and the names of his two daughters were these, the name of the firstborn
Merab; who was afterwards married to Adriel the Meholathite, 1Sa_18:19 and the
name of the younger Michal; who became the wife of David, 1Sa_18:27.
K&D, "1Sa_14:49-51
Saul's family. - 1Sa_14:49. Only three of his sons are mentioned, namely those
who fell with him, according to 1Sa_31:2, in the war with the Philistines. Jisvi is only
another name for Abinadab (1Sa_31:2; 1Ch_8:33; 1Ch_9:39). In these passages in
the Chronicles there is a fourth mentioned, Esh-baal, i.e., the one who is called Ish-
bosheth in 2Sa_2:8, etc., and who was set up by Abner as the antagonist of David.
The reason why he is not mentioned here it is impossible to determine. It may be that
the name has fallen out simply through some mistake in copying: the daughters
Michal and Merab are mentioned, with special reference to the occurrence described
in 1Sa_18:17.
COFFMAN, "A NOTE REGARDING SAUL'S FAMILY
"Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, Ishvi, and Malchishua; and the names of
his two daughters were these: the name of the firstborn was Merab, and the
name of the younger was Michal; And the name of Saul's wife was Ahinoam the
daughter of Ahimaaz. And the name of the commander of his army was Abner,
the son of Ner, Saul's uncle; Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of
Abner was the son of Abiel."
As cited earlier in this chapter, the omission of the name of Isbosheth, or
Eshbaal, from this list of Saul's children is probably due to the fact that this list
172

173. was written very early in Saul's reign, before Eshbaal was born. Abner made
Eshbaal king over part of Israel following Saul's death; and he contested with
David for the throne of all Israel for a period of seven years. The significant fact
(2 Samuel 2:8-11) of Eshbaal being forty years of age when he was declared king
is the basis for concluding that Saul reigned forty years. The theory that Ishvi is
the same son as Eshbaal is an ingenious device to avoid the deduction regarding
the length of Saul's reign.
ELLICOTT, "(49) The sons of Saul.—The three brave sons who perished with
their father in the battle on Mount Gilboa are apparently mentioned here, the
only difficulty being the middle name, “Ishui,” which occurs nowhere else, save
in two genealogies as that of a son of Asher (Genesis 46:17; 1 Chronicles 7:30). It
is supposed to be the same as the Abinadab mentioned in that battle. His two
daughters, Merab and Michal, are speciallynamed, probably owing to their
connection with the history of David (1 Samuel 18:17-21), the elder of them
having been promised to him in marriage, and the younger being actually
wedded to him.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 14:49. And Ishui — Called also Abinadab, 1 Samuel 31:2.
Ish- bosheth, Saul’s other son, is here omitted because the sacred historian
intended to mention only those of Saul’s sons who went with him into the battles
here recorded, and who were afterward slain with him.
COKE, "1 Samuel 14:49. Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, &c.— i.e. three
sons, who signalised themselves in the wars here mentioned. Ish-bosheth,
mentioned 1 Chronicles 8:33 under the name of Esh-baal, was too young to go to
war, and therefore he is omitted in this place.
Reflections on 1 Samuel 14:36-52.—1st. Saul has no sooner given his army a
moment's refreshment, than he is eager to pursue again the flying Philistines;
and, though weary and wanting repose, his men, as faithful soldiers, are
submissive to his orders, and ready to follow him. But,
1. Ahiah desires to consult God first, and Saul consents; but when they drew
near, God gave them no answer. Note; It is good to have near us a faithful
minister to advise and admonish us of our duty.
2. Saul hereupon concludes, that some sin had been committed, which provoked
God thus to withdraw; and therefore as passionately resolves to punish, as he
had imprudently bound the people under a curse. To determine the case, lots are
173

174. cast; and, though none dared or cared to inform against Jonathan, God is
pleased to give the discovery in the person of Jonathan, on whom the lot fell.
Note: (1.) We may well conclude that God is angry, when our prayers find no
answer of peace from him. (2.) We should solicitously inquire what it is wherein
we have offended, that we may put away iniquity from us.
3. Jonathan, at Saul's injunction, acknowledges that he had tasted a little honey
that day in the wood; and, though he thinks it hard to die for such a fault, he
speaks as expecting it from his father's rash and unrelenting spirit; whilst Saul,
agreeably to his character, binds his resolution with a solemn oath, that nothing
should save him. Note; (1.) Violent tempers will sacrifice to their passions even
the dearest relatives. (2.) An angry judge cannot but pass a rash and unjust
sentence. (3.) They who swear in heat will often be guilty not only of profaneness,
but perjury.
4. The people are highly displeased at Saul's resolve, and bind themselves by
oath to prevent its execution. It was unjust to condemn Jonathan for unwittingly
offending; and ungrateful to put to death him, who, under God, had that day
saved their lives and all Israel; therefore they rescued, or redeemed, him out of
his hand. Note; (1.) Those whom God, in his cause, evidently honours with his
blessing, we must support against all opposers. (2.) When kings act madly
against the laws of God, and tyrannically against the lives and liberties of the
people, such resistance as tends to reduce them to their duty, without injuring
their persons, or lessening their lawful authority, is, no doubt, true patriotism,
and consistent with true piety.
5. The season of pursuit being lost by altercation, and God reserving the
Philistines for a further scourge, those who escaped from the battle got into
places of safety, and Saul returned to Gibeah. Thus dissensions between the
generals have often lost the advantages of victory.
2nd, Saul's family are taken notice of. His house was now established, like his
kingdom, great and prosperous. But how fading are all sublunary things! In a
few years his house becomes ruined, and his kingdom removed. Let us never
place confidence then in any thing beneath the sun. The fashion of this world
passeth away.
LANGE, " 1 Samuel 14:49-51. Saul’s household and family. Three sons are
174

175. mentioned: Jonathan, Ishwi and Malchishua. Instead of Ishwi in 1 Samuel 31:2;
1 Chronicles 8:33; 1 Chronicles 9:39, is Abinadab. In the last two passages a
fourth is named, Eshbaal,[FN19] who is certainly the same with Ishbosheth, 2
Samuel 2:8. The daughters: Merab and Michal.—Saul’s wife: Ahinoam, a
daughter of Ahimaaz.—[Bib. Comm.: “It is not improbable that Ahimaaz may
have been of the priestly family (Ahimaaz was son of Zadok, 2 Samuel 15:36),
and perhaps it may have been owing to such a connection that Ahijah was
brought into prominence by Saul. If there is any truth in the above supposition,
it would be an indication that Saul was not married till after his election to the
throne.” But to this last there are serious objections, especially the age of
Jonathan, and the whole is a mere conjecture.—Tr.]—Saul’s captain of the host,
general-in-chief, Abiner, abbreviated ( 1 Samuel 14:51) Abner, his cousin; in the
next verse this relationship is stated more fully: Kish, Saul’s father, and Neri,
Abner’s father, were sons of Abiel.[FN20]
PETT, "Verses 49-52
Further Details About Saul And His Leading General Who Was Related To Him
(1 Samuel 14:49-52).
Saul’s ancestry was given in 1 Samuel 9:1. Now we are given his family details,
after which we are also given the details of his commander in chief’s family,
partly because they were related to Saul, and partly because of Abner’s loyal
support, both in Saul’s own battles, and as preparing the way for what Abner
would later seek to do for Saul’s son, Ishbaal (Ishbosheth). See 2 Samuel 2:8 ff.
1 Samuel 14:49-50 a
‘Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, and Ishvi, and Malchi-shua; and the
names of his two daughters were these: the name of the first-born Merab, and
the name of the younger Michal, and the name of Saul’s wife was Ahinoam the
daughter of Ahimaaz.’
At this stage Saul had at least three sons. Jonathan (gift of YHWH) was the
firstborn. Then came Ishvi. This could be another name for Abinadab (see 1
Samuel 31:2), for it was not uncommon for a man to have two names. Alternately
Ish-vi is possibly another way of expressing Ish-yah, ‘man of YHWH’, which
175

176. could well then have been expressed as Ish-baal/Esh-baal (man of the Lord) in
order to avoid using the name of Yah, being later expressed by writers as Ish-
bosheth (2 Samuel 2:8) because bosheth means ‘shame’. The reason for this last
was in order to express shame at the use of Baal’s name, although when Saul
used the word it did not have the same connotation, and even Hosea could think
of God as ‘baali’ (Hosea 2:16). We know nothing of Malchi-shua, except that he
fell fighting alongside Saul, but the names of the two daughters will occur later
in relation to David. 1 Chronicles 8:33; 1 Chronicles 9:39 list Saul’s sons as
Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Esh-baal.
50 His wife’s name was Ahinoam daughter of
Ahimaaz. The name of the commander of Saul’s
army was Abner son of Ner, and Ner was Saul’s
uncle.
BARNES, "The only other “Ahimaaz” mentioned in Scripture was the son of
Zadok the priest. The word “Ahi” (brother) is frequently found in composition in
names in the High Priest’s family, e. g. in Ahijah, Ahimelech. It is not improbable
that Ahimaaz may have been of this family, as marriages between the reval and
priestly houses were not unusual 2Ki_11:2; 2Ch_22:11, and perhaps it may have been
owing to such a connection that Ahijah was brought into prominence by Saul. If there
be any truth in the above supposition, it would be an indication that Saul was not
married until after his election to the throne.
GILL, "The only other “Ahimaaz” mentioned in Scripture was the son of Zadok
the priest. The word “Ahi” (brother) is frequently found in composition in names in
the High Priest’s family, e. g. in Ahijah, Ahimelech. It is not improbable that Ahimaaz
may have been of this family, as marriages between the reval and priestly houses
were not unusual 2Ki_11:2; 2Ch_22:11, and perhaps it may have been owing to such
a connection that Ahijah was brought into prominence by Saul. If there be any truth
in the above supposition, it would be an indication that Saul was not married until
after his election to the throne.
ELLICOTT, " (50) Saul’s wife.—In accordance with a usual practice, the name
of the most prominent of the family and royal household of the king are given.
We know nothing of Saul’s queen besides her name. It has been surmised that
176

177. she was of the family of Eli, the high priest, owing to the Ah (brother) entering
into her name and that of her father, Ahimaaz, as this compound was apparently
the favourite prefix to names in this great and renowned house. The simplicity
and modesty of the king’s domestic habits is evident. Ewald thinks from this
circumstance that he had only this one wife and one concubine, Rizpah, the
daughter of Aiah, afterwards so famous for her sad misfortunes and for her
devoted love to her ill-fated children. (See 2 Samuel 21:8-12.)
The captain of his host was Abner.—This “cousin”—or, as some have
understood the sentence, the uncle—of King Saul was evidently a man of rare
powers and ability. The brilliant campaigns of this reign were, no doubt, in no
small measure owing to the military skill of this great commander. After the
terrible disaster on Mount Gilboa, Abner was the mainstay of the house of the
dead King Saul, and when he died the generous David followed the bier, and
lamented over him with a lamentation which has come down to us in words ever
memorable: “Know ye not that there is a prince and a great man fallen this day
in Israel.” His son Jaasiel was subsequently allowed the first place in the tribe of
Benjamin. (See 1 Chronicles 27:21.)
PETT, "1 Samuel 14:50-51
‘And the name of the captain of his host was Abner the son of Ner, Saul’s uncle.
And Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son of
Abiel.’
We now learn that Abner was the commander in chief of Saul’s army. He was on
the whole a loyal and good man. His details are recorded here both because he
was a relative of the king, and in order to demonstrate that Saul did not achieve
what he did on his own. He had solid support from his family. It is also
preparing the way for his later activities in supporting Ishbaal (Ishbosheth)
against David.
51 Saul’s father Kish and Abner’s father Ner
were sons of Abiel.
177

178. BARNES, "Read, “And Kish the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner, were
the sons of Abiel.” Ner was Saul’s uncle.
GILL, "And Kish was the father of Saul,.... See 1Sa_9:1.
and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel; this Abiel was the father
both of Kish and Ner, and the grandfather of Saul, see 1Sa_9:1.
WHEDON, "51. Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel — From 1
Chronicles 8:33, we learn that Ner was the father of Kish; so Abner and Kish
were brothers, and Abiel, represented as the father of Kish in 1 Samuel 9:1,must
be understood as a more remote ancestor.
52 All the days of Saul there was bitter war with
the Philistines, and whenever Saul saw a mighty
or brave man, he took him into his service.
CLARKE, "When Saul saw any strong man - This was very politic. He thus
continued to recruit his army with strong and effective men.
GILL, "And there was sore war against the Philistines all the days of
Saul,.... For notwithstanding the late victory over them, and slaughter made among
them, they recovered themselves, and came out again to battle, and gave Saul a great
deal of trouble, and he at last died in battle with them:
and when Saul saw any strong man, or any valiant man, he took him unto
him; to be his bodyguard, as Josephus (q) says; or for soldiers and officers in his
army, even such, as the same writer observes, that exceeded others in comeliness of
person, and in largeness and height; such as were in some measure like himself, that
were strong, able bodied men, and of courage, and valour, and fortitude of mind.
178

179. HENRY, "But the enemies he struggled most with were the Philistines, with
whom he had sore war all his days, 1Sa_14:52. He had little reason to be proud of
his royal dignity, nor had any of his neighbours cause to envy him, for he had little
enjoyment of himself after he took the kingdom. He could not vex his enemies
without some vexation to himself, such thorns are crowns quilted with.
K&D, "1Sa_14:52
The statement, “and the war was hard (severe) against the Philistines as long as
Saul lived,” merely serves to explain the notice which follows, namely, that Saul took
or drew to himself every strong man and every brave man that he saw. If we observe
this, which is the true relation between the two clauses in this verse, the appearance
of abruptness which we find in the first notice completely vanishes, and the verse
follows very suitably upon the allusion to the general. The meaning might be
expressed in this manner: And as Saul had to carry on a severe war against the
Philistines his whole life long, he drew to himself every powerful man and every
brave man that he met with.
COFFMAN, ""There was hard fighting against the Philistines all the days of
Saul; and when Saul saw any strong man, or any valiant man, he attached him to
himself."
The Bible does not say that this continual war between Israel and the Philistines
was due to events recorded in this chapter, but the appearance of this verse just
here surely suggests that very thing. Furthermore, it was in a battle with the
Philistines that Saul lost his life, ending his reign.
ELLICOTT, " (52) All the days of Saul.—Although after the rout of Michmash
the Philistines were driven out of their fastnesses in the land of Israel back into
their own coast districts, yet all through the reign of Saul they continued to be
powerful, and were a constant source of danger and trouble to the people. We
know that in the end Saul lost his life in an engagement with this warlike and
restless race, who were not finally crushed before the days of his successor,
David. To keep them in check necessitated the maintenance of a standing army,
which, in the days of David, became one of the great armed forces of the East.
The reader of this verse is reminded at once of a similar military fancy of King
Frederick William of Prussia, the founder of Prussian military greatness, and the
father of the Great Frederick.
HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS
PAUSE over this chapter, my soul, and mark, in the history of Saul, the sure
consequences of rebellion against God. The word of the Lord assures us, that,
when a man's ways please the Lord, he maketh, even his enemies to be at peace
179

180. with him. But, when sinners neglect and despise the Lord, he can convert their
very comforts into crosses. And Saul, though at the head of a kingdom, shall be
afflicted, and his crown be filled with thorns.
But, my soul, while remarking, as in this man's history, the sure consequences of
sin, remark no less in his history, and in thine own, how gracious the Lord is,
notwithstanding all our multiplied transgressions. The Lord will not retain his
anger forever, because he delighteth in mercy. By some slender instrument, like
that of Jonathan, he will work out deliverance for his people. Oh! my soul, learn
to impress upon thy mind those precious things of God's grace. And in all thy
manifold undeservings, never lose sight of divine love. And when at any time
trials and difficulties occur for the exercise of faith, keep a steady eye unto Jesus,
that it may be enlightened with the droppings of his grace, as the honey did unto
him. And depend upon it, in the strength of the Lord Jesus, it will be found that
all difficulties are as nothing. He can, and will make thee more than conqueror,
through the sovereignty of his power. All obstacles, in the way to the
accomplishment of his holy purpose, will be as nothing, for there is no restraint
to the Lord, he saveth, by many or by few.
LANGE, "1 Samuel 14:52 connects itself as to subject-matter with 1 Samuel
14:46, in order, after the general view of Saul’s wars, to show that he had to
carry on a hard struggle with one of these peoples, the Philistines, all his life, and
so give the ground for the necessity that Saul was under, of forming and
maintaining a central body of markedly valiant men about him. This finishes the
historical-statistical sketch of Saul as a warrior-prince, to which belongs also
from this point of view the mention of his three sons, who fell in battle with him
( 1 Samuel 31:2), and of Abner, his general. The national-historical significance
of Saul as a king whose mission was essentially that of a warrior is thereby
definitely characterized. At the same time the description of Saul as theocratic
king is here ended. In what follows is shown how the Lord transferred the
theocratic mission from him to another man. Ewald: According to the
prophetical perception of the Work, Saul ceases with chap14. to be the true king,
and therefore the history of his reign is here concluded with the necessary
general remarks about him.”—We cannot (with Then.) hold that the remark ( 1
Samuel 14:52) “when Saul saw any strong or valiant Prayer of Manasseh, he
took him,” is intended to introduce the narrative of David’s coming to Saul after
the victory over Goliath ( 1 Samuel 18:2), on the ground that here it drags too
much after what precedes. It would, if we accepted Thenius’ view, stand too
abruptly and too far from this narrative of David. It rather concludes the
foregoing account, and connects itself with the account of the first formation of a
standing army by a levy from the people ( 1 Samuel 13:2).
180

181. PETT. "1 Samuel 14:52
‘And there was fierce war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, and when
Saul saw any mighty man, or any valiant man, he took him to him.’
In order to make sure that we are not deceived by what has been said earlier we
now learn that the Philistines were the one foe that Saul never finally quelled, for
although sometimes defeated they soon came back again and occupied at least
part of Israel. As a result Saul had continually to maintain a small standing
army, both in readiness to deal with their forays, and in order, when they
became something more serious, to prevent them taking over Israel completely.
That is why we learn here that, with that in mind, he was always on the look out
for good recruits. Thus whenever he came across a mighty man or a valiant man
he attached him to his standing army.
181