Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 14:24
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.
24 30. Jonathan’s breach of Saul’s rash oath
24. were distressed that day: for Saul, &c.] Render, And the men of Israel were distressed that day. And Saul caused the people to swear, &c. Seeing the fatigued condition of the army, and fearing lest they should relinquish the pursuit to get food, Saul rashly exacted from them an oath, which led to three evil results. (1) It hindered instead of facilitating the pursuit of the enemy. (2) It involved Jonathan in an involuntary trespass. (3) It indirectly occasioned the sin of the people ( 1Sa 14:32). The Sept. however appears to have had a different text as follows: “And all the people that were with Saul were about ten thousand men. And the battle was scattered throughout the whole wood [ city is a mistranslation of the Heb. word for wood in 1Sa 14:25 ] in mount Ephraim. And Saul did very foolishly on that day, and adjured the people, saying, &c.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
1Sa 14:24-52
And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people.
Great issues hang on a Kings 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.)
Sauls 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 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 Gods will in his public acts, and was now beginning to reap the penalty. He felt that he must pay more attention to Gods 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 kings 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 us, chiefly, one more painful defect, in Sauls 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 Israels 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 Sauls 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 Sauls personal religion at this time.
1. It leads us to perceive how strangely partial his religion was in its operation. Sauls 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 the folly of Sauls 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 believers 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.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 24. 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.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Were distressed, with hunger, and weakness, and faintness, thence arising; and all by reason of the following oath. As Sauls intention was good, namely, to execute vengeance upon Gods and his enemies; so the matter of the obligation was not simply and in itself unlawful, if it had not been so rigorous in excluding all food, without any exception of cases of necessity; and in obliging the people to it under pain of a curse, and an accursed death, 1Sa 14:38,39,44, which was a punishment far exceeding the fault. None of the people tasted any food; partly in obedience to the kings command; and partly for fear of the curse.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24. Saul had adjured thepeopleAfraid lest so precious an opportunity of effectuallyhumbling the Philistine power might be lost, the impetuous king laidan anathema on any one who should taste food until the evening. Thisrash and foolish denunciation distressed the people, by preventingthem taking such refreshments as they might get on the march, andmaterially hindered the successful attainment of his own patrioticobject.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
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 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.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
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.” , fut. apoc. of for , from , 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 , “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.” is not to be connected with as an apodosis.
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.” signifies here a woody district, in which forests alternated with tracts of arable land and meadows.
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.”
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 is probably to be read , the eyes became seeing, received their power of vision again. The Masoretes have substituted as the Keri , from , to become bright, according to 1Sa 14:29; and this is probably the correct reading, as the letters might easily be transposed.
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 ( belongs to the man’s words; and 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 ( , 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? ” , lit. to this (there comes) also that = not to mention how much more; and 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.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Saul’s Rash Oath. | B. C. 1067. |
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 a 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 to day 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 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.
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, v. 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.
II. 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 (Deut. xxxii. 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. 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 (v. 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 (v. 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. 3. 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 (v. 30); but, as it was, they were very faint, too much fatigued (so the Chaldee), 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, v. 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, v. 32. Saul, being informed of it, reproved them for the sin (v. 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 (v. 33), and the people did so (v. 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.
III. On this occasion Saul built an altar (v. 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. viii. 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.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Saul’s Foolish Ban, vs. 24-35
This section of chapter 14 relates an event that occurred in the course of Israel’s pursuit of the Philistine fugitives. It begins with the statement that Israel was distressed on that day and goes on to show why they were distressed. It was for a foolish ban placed on them by their king. From his initial humility upon becoming king Saul has now risen to great pride. It seems from the ban that he felt that he was taking a share in the defeat of the Philistines. To him it required the undivided attention of the Israelites to totally vanquish the enemy, so that he strictly forbade their turning aside even for the purpose of relieving their hunger.
The pursuit passed through a forest, where there were many bee trees, and the honey was so plentiful that it was lying on the ground. Honey is quick energy food, and it might have really given the men a lift and kept them from exhaustion, but they were afraid to eat it because of the oath Saul had made. However, Jonathan, the real hero of the day, had been away precipitating the victory when his father made the oath and did not know about it. Therefore he took his rod and lifted a piece of the honeycomb to his lips
Immediately Jonathan felt better. His vision was clearer, but he was also aware that something was wrong in the eyes of the soldiers. Upon inquiry he learned of his father’s ban. The people were fatigued and too tired to keep going, but they dared not eat. Jonathan correctly evaluated his father’s deeds. He was a troubler of the land, Jonathan said. They could see how the honeycomb had revived the spirits of Jonathan, and if all the people had been allowed to eat freely it might have been the same for them.
It was a long, exhausting day, at the end of which the men of Saul were gaunt with hunger. They had pursued the Philistines from Michmash to Aijalon, a distance of some twenty straight-line miles, across the mountains of Ephraim. When the night came on, and the people at last were no longer bound by the oath of Saul, they killed oxen, sheep, and calves and ate them uncooked, with the blood still in them, contrary to the law (Lev 7:26-27, and many other passages). When it was told Saul he had them set up a great stone and sent a message among the men commanding them to bring their animals to him for slaughter, which they did.
Verse 35 reveals a very significant thing which illustrates the carelessness and lack of godly concern on the part of King Saul. That night the king built an altar to the Lord, and that is all well and good. It is the last part that indicts him, “the same was the first altar” that he built unto the Lord. As has been noted before in this commentary it is not known how long Saul had been king when this war with the Philistines took place. Suffice it to say there had been ample time for him to have built an altar long since.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Sauls Ill-advised Oath. 1Sa. 14:24-46
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 a 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 day from Michmash to Aijalon: and the people were 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 them. 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 on 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.
13.
What was the purpose of Sauls prohibition? 1Sa. 14:24
To forbid a fighting man to eat is to cut down his efficiency. Saul must have been more interested in demonstrating kingly zeal than to care for his men. Fasting had its place as a man is disciplining his spirit but it could hardly serve a useful purpose in the field. The only possible practical reason for the prohibition would be to save time, but this value would be lost in the decreased efficiency of the soldiers.
14.
What is the meaning of his eyes were enlightened? 1Sa. 14:27
Partaking of a little food gave increased energy to Jonathan. Honey is a well-known quick-energy food. Jonathan was strengthened physically; and since the loss of strength is noticeably reflected in the eyes, this was the primary center of the resurging energy. His eyes would be keener and his hand would be stronger.
15.
How had Saul troubled the land? 1Sa. 14:29
Saul had disobeyed Samuel and brought a pronunciation of judgment on himself. He had issued a foolish order to his troops in the midst of a situation which might have resulted in total victory for Israel. The king had demonstrated a lack of courage in staying behind in the battle. In all these things Saul had caused trouble among his people.
16.
Where was Aijalon? 1Sa. 14:31
Aijalon was on the west slope of the hill country of Judah. A modern spot named Yalo (see Jos. 19:42) is pointed out as the most likely location. This site is about three miles southwest of Michmash. Joshua had been fighting the armies of the southern coalition at this point when he prayed for the sun to stand still and give the Israelites the needed extra hours (Jos. 10:12).
17.
Why were the people so faint? 1Sa. 14:31
The people were weak from hunger since Saul had forbidden them to eat until evening (1Sa. 14:24). The sight of the booty was too much for them and they seized sheep, oxen, and calves. Without proper care for dressing the animals, they devoured them where they were. Animals which were slain were left lying on the ground and were saturated in their own blood. The famished soldiers ate the flesh along with the blood which adhered to it. By doing this they sinned against the law in Lev. 19:26 and the earlier prohibition given by God to the postdiluvian world (Gen. 9:4).
18.
Why did Saul call for a stone? 1Sa. 14:33
Saul requested a stone to be provided as a place for slaughtering the animals. In this way the blood would run off properly on the ground. The flesh would be separated from the blood, and the people could eat without committing sin. The hungry people could thus satisfy their overwhelming appetites.
19.
Why did he build an altar? 1Sa. 14:35
Saul had learned his lesson about offering sacrifices when he was ineligible to act as a priest. His purpose in erecting an altar was hardly to provide a place for a sacrifice. This altar was to be a memorial of the presence of God. If this is the first altar he ever built, it is evidence of his irreligion. More devoted people, such as Abraham, build altars on many occasions and never allow their devotion to lag (Gen. 12:8; Gen. 12:18).
20.
Why did Saul think that someone had sinned? 1Sa. 14:38
Saul had asked counsel of God about going down in pursuit of the Philistines. He wanted to know if God would deliver the enemy into his hands, but God did not give him an answer. He concluded that someone had sinned and prevented God from giving him an answer.
21.
Why was Saul willing to slay Jonathan? 1Sa. 14:39
When the breach of a commandment such as that given by Saul is revealed, the guilt has to be expiated. The law of the ancient Oriental kings was inviolable, and no lawbreaker was exempt from the wrath of the monarch. Saul had proudly boasted, though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die (1Sa. 14:39). When he found out it was Jonathan who had violated his prohibition, he was forced to carry out his threat to prevent losing prestige among the people.
22.
What prompted Saul to exact such a penalty?
Although the king had made a decree that no one was to eat during the time of the battle, Jonathan had put forth the rod that was in his hand and dipped a little honey to his mouth to eat, When Saul asked God to direct him in his activities, there was no answer; and Saul concluded that someone had sinned. When the lot was cast, it fell upon Jonathan. Jonathan confessed his crime; and Saul was willing to exact the penalty by slaying his own son. He knew that as a ruler he was setting an example. He was also exerting the authority that was his, and those who witnessed would have greater respect for his authority. The people, when they saw this, were willing then that Jonathan be spared; and by their earnest entreaty Saul was led to withdraw his order. Thus it is said that the people rescued Jonathan that day.
23.
How did the people rescue him? 1Sa. 14:45
The objection of the people was so conclusive that Saul was obliged to yield. Justice would demand that Jonathan be spared. He had done nothing wrong in itself. Jonathan had not heard the oath which his father had imposed on the people. He did not consciously or intentionally go against his fathers commandment. The divine lot had revealed to Saul that Jonathan had tasted a little honey. The sentence of death was not thereby pronounced by God. Judgment was in the hands of Saul, and he was wise to listen to the desire of the people to spare Jonathan.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(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 vengeanceso bent upon pursuing to the uttermost these Philistines who so long had defied his power, and who had brought him so lowthat 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.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
SAUL’S HASTY ADJURATION, 1Sa 14:24-46.
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.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
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, ( ) 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.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Saul’s Unwise Adjuration
v. 24. And the men of Israel were distressed that day, v. 25. And all they of the land, v. 26. And when the people were come into the wood, behold, the honey dropped, v. 27. But Jonathan heard not when his father charged the people with the oath, v. 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, v. 29. Then said Jonathan, My father hath troubled the land, v. 30. How much more, if haply, v. 31. And they smote the Philistines that day, v. 32. And the people, v. 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, v. 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, v. 35. And Saul built an altar unto the Lord, v. 36. And Saul said, v. 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, v. 38. And Saul said, v. 39. For, as the Lord liveth, which saveth Israel, though it be in Jonathan, my son, he shall surely die. v. 40. Then said he unto all Israel, Be ye on one side, and I and Jonathan, my son, will be on the other side, v. 41. Therefore Saul said unto the Lord God of Israel, Give a perfect lot, v. 42. And Saul said, Cast lots between me and Jonathan, my son. And Jonathan was taken, v. 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; v. 44. And Saul answered, v. 45. And the people, v. 46. Then Saul went up from following the Philistines,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Sa 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 (1Sa 14:30-31.); and at the same time, through their great hunger, became transgressors of the law of God, 1Sa 14:33. See the note on chap. 1Sa 13:13.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
(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 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 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 Gen 9:4 . and the note in the Commentary on Gen 9:4 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 14:24 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.
Ver. 24. And the men of Israel were distressed that day. ] Saved they were that day, and yet distressed: usque adeo nihil est ex omni porte beatum. Men must ever have somewhat to complain of, for an allay of their enjoyments. Miscentur tristia laetis.
For Saul had adjured the people.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
food.Hebrew “bread”, put by Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Species), App-6, for all kinds of food.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Cursed: 1Sa 14:27-30, Lev 27:29, Num 21:2, Deu 27:15-26, Jos 6:17-19, Jos 6:26, Jdg 11:30, Jdg 11:31, Jdg 21:1-5, Pro 11:9, Rom 10:2, 1Co 16:22
I may be: Jdg 5:2, Jdg 1:28, Psa 18:47
Reciprocal: Gen 26:31 – sware Gen 27:13 – Upon Gen 28:20 – vowed Gen 31:32 – For Jacob Lev 5:4 – to do evil Lev 27:28 – no devoted Num 5:21 – an oath Deu 23:23 – hast vowed Jdg 2:15 – greatly Jdg 17:2 – cursedst 1Sa 14:19 – Withdraw 1Sa 14:28 – Cursed 1Sa 14:39 – General 1Sa 18:25 – to be avenged 1Ki 22:16 – shall I adjure 2Ch 18:15 – shall I adjure Pro 18:7 – his lips Ecc 5:2 – not rash Mat 14:9 – the oath’s Mat 26:63 – I adjure Mat 26:74 – began Act 19:13 – adjure Act 23:12 – that Rom 9:3 – were
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Sa 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 Sauls 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 Sauls 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.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 14:24-30. In order to propitiate Yahweh and secure His continued assistance, Saul had laid a solemn taboo upon the people, forbidding them to take food till nightfall. Then there was honeycomb upon the ground, and the people came to the honeycomb, and behold the bees had gone away, but no one put his hand to his mouth, for the people were afraid. Jonathan, however, knowing nothing about the taboo, tasted a little honey, and was much refreshed. When he was told of it, he treated the matter lightly.
1Sa 14:25 f. Here we have followed the reconstruction of the text in SBOT, partly based on the LXX. The words for forest and honeycomb are the same in Hebrew.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
14:24 And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people, saying, {l} 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.
(l) Such was his hypocrisy and arrogancy, that he thought to attribute to his policy that which God had given by the hand of Jonathan.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
3. Saul’s cursing of Jonathan 14:24-46
Jonathan, a man of faith, initiated a great victory, but in this section we see that Saul, a man of pride, limited the extent of that victory while trying to extend it. Saul’s failure to submit to Yahweh’s authority resulted in his behaving foolishly more than wickedly (at this time).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Saul’s selfishness 14:24-35
Saul’s improper view of his role as Israel’s king comes through clearly in 1Sa 14:24. The Philistines were not Saul’s enemies as much as God’s enemies. This was holy war (cf. Jdg 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. Perhaps Saul had "sworn the army to a vow that they would fast until God intervened on their behalf (1Sa 14:24-30)." [Note: Ibid.]
An oath was an extremely serious matter in the ancient Near East (1Sa 14:26; cf. Jdg 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 (1Sa 14:29-30). The Hebrew word translated "troubled" (1Sa 14:29, ’akar) is the same one from which "Achan" and "Achor" come (Jos 7:25-26). Saul, not Jonathan, had troubled Israel, as Achan had, by his foolish command (1Sa 14:24).
Aijalon (1Sa 14:31) stood about 17 miles west of Michmash. 1Sa 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 (Lev 17:10-14). The great stone (1Sa 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 (1Sa 14:33) and his desire to honor God for the victory (1Sa 14:35; cf. Exo 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., 1Sa 7:17; Gen 12:8; Jdg 6:24; 2Sa 24:25; 1Ch 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.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER XX
SAULS WILFULNESS.
1Sa 14:24-51.
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 than he has been used to pay to the forms of religion. He enjoins a fast on his people at a very inconvenient time, under the idea that fasting is a proper religious act. He is concerned for the trespass of the people in eating their food with the blood. He builds the first altar he ever built to God. He consults the oracle before he will commit himself to the enterprise of pursuing the retreating enemy by night. He is concerned to find the oracle dumb, and tries to discover through whose sin it is so. For a ceremonial offence, committed by Jonathan in ignorance, he fancies that God’s displeasure has come down on the people, and he not only insists that Jonathan shall die for this offence, but confirms his decision by a solemn oath, sworn in the name of God. All this shows Saul plunging and floundering from one mistake to another, and crowning his blunders by a proposal so outrageous that the indignation of the people arrests his purpose. The idea that the work of the day shall be wound up by the execution of the youth through whom all the wonderful deliverance has come, and that youth Saul’s own son, is one that could never have entered into any but a distempered brain. Reason seems to have begun to stagger on her throne; the sad process has begun which in a more advanced stage left Saul the prey of an evil spirit, and in its last and most humiliating stage drove him to consult with the witch of Endor.
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 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 imperiled. It is this selfish motive that makes him determine to be more religious. The fast, and the consultation of the oracle, and the altar, and the oath that Jonathan shall die, have all their origin in this frightened, selfish feeling. And hence, in their very nature and circumstances, his religious acts are unsuitable and unseemly. In place of making things better by such services, he makes them worse; no peace of God falls like dew on his soul; no joy is diffused throughout his army; discontent reaches a climax when the death of Jonathan is called for; and tranquility is restored only by the rebellion of the people, rescuing their youthful prince and hero.
Alas, how common has this spirit been in the history of the world 1 What awful tragedies has it led to, what slaughter of heretics, what frightful excesses disgraceful to kings, what outrages on the common feelings of humanity! 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 greater 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 with every kind of vexatious interference, shutting up their churches on frivolous pretexts, compelling them to bury their dead by night, forbidding the singing of psalms in worship, subjecting them to great injustice in their civil rapacity, and at last, by the revocation of the edict that gave them toleration, sweeping them from the kingdom in hundreds of thousands, till hardly a Protestant is left behind. 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. Prayers and penances and vows and charities in cases without number have been little better than premiums of insurance, designed to save the soul from punishment and pain. Nor have these acts been confined to that Church which, more than any other, has encouraged men to lock for saving benefit to the merit of their own works. Many a Protestant, roused by his conscience into a state of fright, has resolved to be more attentive to the duties of religion. He will read his Bible more; he will pray more; he will give more; he will go to church more. Alas, the spring of all this is found in no humiliation for sin before God, no grief at having offended the Father, no humble desire to be renewed in heart and conformed to the image of the First-born! And the consequence is, as in the case of Saul, that things go, not from bad to better, but from bad to worse. There is no peace of God that passeth all understanding; there is no general rectification of the disordered faculties of the soul; there is no token of heavenly blessing, blessing to the man himself and blessing to those about him. A more fiery element seems to come into his temper; a more bitter tone pervades his life. To himself it feels as if there were no good in trying to be better; to the world it appears as if religion put more of the devil into him. 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 over. Any one may see that to compel fasting under such circumstances was alike cruel and unwise. To fast in the solitude of one’s chamber, where there is no extra wear and tear of the bodily organs, and therefore no special need for recruiting them, is comparatively safe and easy. But to fast amid the struggles of battle or the hurry of a pursuit; to fast under the burning sun and that strain of the system which brings the keenest thirst; to fast under exertions that rapidly exhaust the thews and sinews, and call for a renewal of their tissues – to fast in circumstances like these involves an amount of suffering which it is not easy to estimate. It was cruel in Saul to impose a fast at such a time, all the more that, being commander-in-chief of the army, it was his duty to do his utmost for the comfort of his soldiers. But it was unwise as well as cruel; with energies impaired by fasting, they could not continue the pursuit nor make the victory so telling. Perhaps he was under the influence of the delusion that the more painful a religious service is, the more is it acceptable to God. That idea of penance does find a place in our natural notions of religion. Saul, as we have seen, grew up with little acquaintance with religious persons and little knowledge of Divine things; and now that perforce he is constrained to attend to them, it is no wonder if he falls into many a serious error. For he probably had no idea of that great rule of God’s kingdom, “I will have mercy, and not sacrifice.”
The folly of Saul’s order became apparent when the army came to a wood, where, as is common enough in the country, a stream of wild honey poured out, probably from the trunk of a hollow tree. Stretching out his rod or spear, Jonathan fixed it in a piece of the comb, which he transferred with his hand to his mouth. Immediately “his eyes were enlightened;” the dull feeling which settles on the eyes amid fatigue and hunger disappeared; and with the return of clear vision to his eyes, there would come a restoration of vigour to his whole frame. When told for the first time of the order which his father had given, he showed no regret at having broken it, but openly expressed his displeasure at its having ever been imposed. “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. How much more if haply the people had eaten freely to-day of the spoil of their enemies which they found I for had there not been a much greater slaughter among the Philistines?” We must bear in mind that Jonathan was a true man of God. He had set out that morning in his wonderful exploit in the true spirit of faith and full consecration to 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. The godly man has an unction from the Holy One to understand His will; he goes straight to the Lord’s business; like our blessed Lord, he finishes the work given him to do while the merely religious man is often so occupied with his forms, that, like the Pharisees, he neglects the structure for which forms are but the scaffolding; in paying his tithes of mint, anise, and cumin, he omits the weightier matters – justice, mercy, and truth.
But the evil caused by Saul’s injudicious fast was not yet over. The obligation to fast lasted only till sunset, and when the day was ended, the people, faint and ravenous, flew upon the spoil – sheep, oxen, and calves – and devoured them on the spot, without taking time or pains to sever the blood from the flesh. To remedy this, Saul had a great stone placed beside him, and ordered the people to bring every man his ox or his sheep, and slay them on that stone, that he might see that the blood was properly drained from the flesh. Then we gather from the marginal reading of 1Sa 14:35 that he was proceeding to erect with the stone an altar to God, but that he did not carry this purpose completely into effect, because he determined to continue the pursuit of the Philistines. He saw how much recruited his troops were by their food, and he therefore determined to make a new assault. If it had not been for the unwise order to fast given early in the day, if the people had been at liberty to help themselves to the honey as they passed it, or to such other refreshments as they found in their way, they would have been some hours earlier in this pursuit, and it would have been so much the more effectual.
It would seem, however, that the priest who was in attendance on Saul was somewhat alarmed at the abrupt and rather reckless way in which the king was making his plans and giving his orders. “Let us draw near hither unto God,” said he. Counsel was accordingly asked of God whether Saul should go down after the Philistines and whether God would deliver them into the hand of Israel. But to this inquiry no answer was given. It was natural to infer that some sin had separated between God and Saul, some iniquity had caused God to hide His face from him. Here was a State of things that might well make Saul pause and examine himself. Had he done so in an honest spirit, he could hardly have failed to find out what was wrong. 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. Jonathan had been wonderfully blessed that day, but now that Saul, through the priest, sought to have a communication with God, none was given. Might he not have seen that the real cause of this was that Saul wanted what Jonathan possessed? Besides, was Saul doing justice to Jonathan in taking the enterprise out of his hands? If Jonathan began it, was he not entitled to finish it? Would not Saul have been doing a thing alike generous and just had he stood aside at this time, and called on Jonathan to complete the work of the day? If the king of England was justified in not going to the help of the Black Prince, serious though his danger was, but leaving him to extricate himself, and thus enjoy the whole credit of his valour, might not Saul have let his son end the enterprise which he had so auspiciously begun? In these two facts, in the difference between him and Jonathan as to the spirit of faith, and in the way in which Saul displaced the man whom God so signally’ countenanced in the morning, the king of Israel might have found the cause of the silence of the oracle. And the right thing for him would have been to confess his error, stand aside, and call on Jonathan to continue the pursuit and, if possible, exterminate the foe.
But Saul took a different course. He had recourse to the lot, to determine the guilty party. Now, it does not appear that even the king of Israel, with the priest at his side, was entitled to resort to the lot to ascertain the mind of God except in cases where all natural means of discovering it confessedly failed. But we have just seen that in this case the natural means had not failed. Therefore there was no obligation on God to order the lot supernaturally so as to bring out the truth. In point of fact, the process ended so as to point to the very last man in all the army to whom blame was due. It was, as mathematicians say, a reductio ad absurdum. It is a proof that an instrument is out of order if it brings out a result positively ludicrous. If near the equator an instrument gives the latitude of the polar circle, it is a proof that it is not working rightly. When the lot pointed to Jonathan, it was a proof that it was not working rightly. Any man might have seen this. And Saul ought to have seen it. And he ought to have confessed that he was entirely out of his reckoning. Frankly and cordially he should have taken the blame on himself, and at once exonerated his noble son.
But Saul was in no mood to take the blame on himself. Nor had he moral sagacity enough to see what an outrage it would be to lay the blame on Jonathan. Assuming that he was guilty, he asked him what he had done. He had done nothing but eat a little honey, not having heard the king’s order to abstain. The justification was complete. 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 first-born, ”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. But now they were excited – excited by their victory, excited by their fast followed by their meal, and excited by the terror of harm befalling Jonathan. They had far clearer and more correct apprehension of the whole circumstances than the king had. It is especially to be noted that they laid great emphasis on the fact that that day God had worked by Jonathan, and Jonathan had worked with God. This made the great difference between him and Saul. “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.”
The opportunity of inflicting further damage on the Philistines at this time was thus lost through the moral obtuseness, recklessness, and obstinacy of Saul. But in many a future campaign Saul as a warrior rendered great service to the kingdom. He fought against all his enemies on every side. On the east, the Moabites, the Ammonites, and the Edomites had to be dealt with; on the north, the kings of Zobah; on the south, the Amalekites; and on the west, the Philistines. These campaigns are briefly stated, but we may easily see how much of hard military work is implied in connection with each. We may understand, too, with what honesty David, in his elegy over Saul and Jonathan, might commemorate their warlike prowess: ”From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not empty.” Whether these military expeditions were conducted in a better spirit than Saul shows in this chapter we cannot tell. Whether further proofs were given of God’s presence with Jonathan as contrasted with his absence from Saul we do not know. It does not appear that there was any essential improvement in Saul. But when Jonathan again emerges from the obscurity of history, and is seen in a clear and definite light, his character is singularly attractive – one of the purest and brightest in the whole field of Scripture.
Evidently the military spirit ruled in Saul, but it did not bring peace nor blessing to the kingdom. ”He gathered an host,” surrounded himself with a standing army, so as to be ready and have an excuse for any expedition that he wished to undertake. After a brief notice of Saul’s family, the chapter ends by telling us that “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 Philistines were far from being permanently subdued; there were not even intervals of peace between the two countries. There was bitter war, an open sore, perpetually bleeding, a terror on every side, never removed. How different it might have been had that one day been better spent! how different it would certainly have been had Saul been a man after God’s own heart! One day’s misdeeds may bring a whole generation of sorrow, for “one sinner destroyeth much good.” 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.
Who does not see what a fearful thing it is to leave Cod and His ways, and give one’s self up to the impulses of one’s own heart? Fearful for even the humblest of us, but infinitely fearful for one of great resources and influence, with a whole people under him! How beautiful some prayers in the Psalms sound after we have been contemplating the wild career of Saul! “Show me Thy ways, O Lord; teach me in Thy paths. Lead me in Thy truth and teach me, for Thou art the God of my salvation; on Thee do I wait all the day.” “Oh that my ways were directed to keep Thy statutes! Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all Thy commandments.”