Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 20:34
So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no meat the second day of the month: for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
34. had done him shame ] Saul had insulted and wronged David by publicly charging him with treasonable intentions ( 1Sa 20:31). “The generosity of Jonathan’s character is very apparent. He did not resent the injury and insult offered to himself so much as the wrong done to his friend.” Speaker’s Comm.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
1Sa 20:34
And Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger.
Jonathans moral courage
I propose to enquire into the moral meaning of this incident; to see whether there is anything in it that applies to our own circumstances. I think it impossible to read this story without having the mind arrested as several points of unusual interest.
I. Here is the saddest of all sights–man arrayed against man. Not man against a savage beast; but man against his own kind.
II. Here we have the rupture of the most sacred bonds. Who is it that is offended in this case? It is not a stranger; it is the son that rose in fierce anger, being grieved for David and ashamed of his own father. When fathers occupy their right positions, sons, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, will be likely to occupy theirs. A good example is never lost.
III. Here, too, is the assertion of the highest instinct. What is it that asserts itself in this case? It is the spirit of right. Men that get up from dinner tables and say, Not I am ashamed of your evil doing; and I will not taste your bread! We, poor hounds, tarry at the trough and satisfy our appetites, and slake our thirst, but the man that is going out will save the world!
IV. Here we have a disproof of a familiar proverb. The familiar proverb is, Blood is thicker than water. Jonathan says, Right is thicker than blood.
V. Here we have the espousal on a noble policy. What was the policy of Jonathan? He espoused the cause of right against might. David had no resources. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 34. Jonathan arose – in fierce anger] We should probably understand this rather of Jonathan’s grief than of his anger, the latter clause explaining the former: for he was grieved for David. He was grieved for his father-he was grieved for his friend.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Or, and because; for this is a second cause of his grief. The conjunction and is ofttimes omitted, and to be supplied; as Psa 33:2; 144:9; Hab 3:11.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger,…. Resenting his father’s attempt to smite him, and his resolution to slay David:
and did eat no meat the second day of the month; not then at that meal he was just sat down to, nor at another time that day, his stomach was so full through indignation at his father, and grief for his friend David; and besides, being a mourner on the above accounts, he might not eat of the sacrifices:
for he was grieved for David; that his death should be determined upon by his father, and he in so much danger of it; as also that he himself must be parted from and lose so dear a friend, which was one reason he ate no meat that day: and another follows,
because his father had done him shame; the copulative “and” being wanting; and this he did by calling him a perverse and rebellious son, and representing him as an arrant fool, and particularly by casting a javelin at him to smite him.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(34) So Jonathan arose.In fierce anger, so runs the too true record. The son of Saul left the presence, and appeared no more at that fatal feast. The hot anger was stirred up, first, no doubt, by the terrible insult offered him, the prince and heir to the throne, before the assembled great ones of Israel. The great spear uplifted to strike, following the harsh and bitter words spoken, was an act not likely soon to be forgotten by the spectators. And secondly, by the determined and relentless enmity of Saul against David, of whose stainless integrity and perfect loyalty Jonathan was firmly convinced. The bitter wrong done to David his friend no doubt affected Jonathan most.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 20:34 So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no meat the second day of the month: for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
Ver. 34. Because his father had done him shame. ] Traducing him for a rebel and a traitor on so public a theatre. This went to good Jonathan’s heart, which bled in David’s wounds, and ached for his miseries.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
in fierce: Ecc 7:20, Eph 4:26
he was grieved: Mar 3:5