Jonathan, without telling his father Saul, takes only his armor-bearer on a daring two-man assault against a Philistine garrison at the pass of Michmash. God confirms the mission through a sign, and Jonathan and his armor-bearer kill about twenty men, triggering a divinely amplified panic throughout the Philistine camp. Saul's watchmen see the confusion, and Saul musters his small force to pursue. Meanwhile, Saul has bound the army with a rash oath — a curse on anyone who eats food before evening. Jonathan, who never heard the oath, eats wild honey in the forest. When Saul attempts to inquire of God through the sacred lots, God does not answer. The lots identify Jonathan as the oath-breaker. Saul declares that Jonathan must die, but the people intervene and ransom Jonathan, declaring that he fought alongside God that day. The chapter closes with a summary of Saul's wars and family.
What Makes This Chapter Remarkable
This chapter is a study in contrasts between two models of faith and leadership. Jonathan acts with stunning theological clarity: 'Nothing prevents the LORD from saving by many or by few' (v6). He does not presume on God — he proposes a sign, waits for confirmation, and only then attacks. His faith is bold yet submitted. Saul, by contrast, sits under a pomegranate tree with a shrinking army (v2), issues an oath that harms his own troops (v24-30), and nearly executes his own son for an oath Jonathan never heard (v44). The irony is devastating: the man who should be leading is sitting, and the prince is doing the king's work. The chapter also preserves a critical textual moment in verses 41-42 where the Septuagint (drawing from a Hebrew Vorlage likely reflected in 4QSamᵃ) preserves a much longer and more explicit description of the Urim and Thummim lot-casting procedure, material almost certainly lost from the Masoretic Text through haplography. Jonathan's rescue by the people using the verb padah ('ransom/redeem') in verse 45 introduces sacrificial substitution language — the people redeem Jonathan from death, insisting that his victory was accomplished 'with God.'
Translation Friction
The textual history of this chapter is among the most significant in Samuel. The MT of verse 41 reads simply 'Give a perfect lot' (havah tamim), while the LXX preserves a substantially longer text in which Saul explicitly addresses God, asks why he has not answered, and requests that the Urim and Thummim distinguish between himself and Jonathan on one side and the people on the other. Most text critics regard the LXX as preserving the earlier reading, with the MT having lost material through homoioteleuton (the scribe's eye skipping between similar phrase endings). This matters theologically: the longer text makes explicit that Urim and Thummim are the mechanism of divine inquiry, information only implied in the MT. Additionally, verse 18 presents a discrepancy — the MT says Saul called for the 'ark of God,' while the LXX reads 'ephod,' which fits the context far better since the ephod (containing the Urim and Thummim) is the instrument of priestly inquiry, and the ark was at Kiriath-jearim, not with Saul's army. Most scholars follow the LXX here. Saul's oath in verse 24 and its consequences raise questions about the theology of rash vows — the text never endorses Saul's oath as righteous, and Jonathan's critique of it (vv29-30) stands unchallenged by the narrator.
Connections
Jonathan's faith declaration in verse 6 ('Nothing prevents the LORD from saving by many or by few') establishes a theological principle that echoes forward to David and Goliath (chapter 17), where another young man confronts a vastly superior enemy trusting in divine, not numerical, advantage. The Michmash pass assault recalls Gideon's reduction from 32,000 to 300 (Judges 7) — God's pattern of delivering through the few to ensure that credit belongs to him alone. Saul's rash oath belongs to a biblical pattern of devastating vows: Jephthah's vow that cost his daughter's life (Judges 11:30-40) is the closest parallel, and the text invites comparison — both are military leaders whose misguided oaths threaten their own children. But where Jephthah carried out his vow, the people prevent Saul from doing so. The verb padah ('ransom') used for Jonathan's rescue is the same verb used for the redemption of firstborn sons (Exodus 13:13-15) and for God's redemption of Israel from Egypt — the people are performing a theological act, not merely a political rescue. The chapter's closing genealogical note (vv49-51) introduces names that will dominate the coming narrative: Abner the commander, and the daughters Merab and Michal — Michal will become David's wife and the hinge of the Saul-David conflict.
One day Jonathan son of Saul said to the young man who carried his weapons, "Come, let's cross over to the Philistine outpost on the other side." But he did not tell his father.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
מַצַּבmatsav
"outpost"—garrison, outpost, military station, pillar, standing-place
From the root n-ts-v ('to stand, to station'), matsav refers to a Philistine military position — either a garrison of troops or a fortified outpost. The Philistines had established these throughout the central highlands to control Israelite territory. Jonathan's plan to attack a matsav with just two men is either reckless or Spirit-driven — the text will reveal which.
Translator Notes
The phrase vayehi hayyom ('it happened one day') is a standard narrative opener indicating an unspecified but significant day. Jonathan is identified as ben-Sha'ul ('son of Saul') to establish the royal connection. The na'ar nosei khelav ('the young man carrying his weapons') is a military attendant — an armor-bearer who also fights. The verb na'averah ('let us cross over') from '-v-r implies crossing a geographic barrier (the wadi between the two cliff faces described in v4-5). The final clause ule'aviv lo higgid ('but to his father he did not tell') uses the Hiphil of n-g-d ('to declare, to report') — Jonathan deliberately withheld this plan from Saul.
Saul was sitting at the edge of Gibeah under the pomegranate tree at Migron, and the force with him was about six hundred men.
KJV 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;
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The participle yoshev ('sitting') contrasts sharply with Jonathan's initiative in v1. Migron is a location near Gibeah; some scholars identify it with a site north of Michmash. The rimmon ('pomegranate tree') is a specific landmark — the definite article ha-rimmon indicates a known tree. Six hundred men is all that remains of Saul's army after the desertions described in 13:6-7 — a catastrophic reduction from the original force. This number echoes the 600 Benjaminite survivors of the civil war in Judges 20:47, another Benjaminite remnant.
Ahijah son of Ahitub — brother of Ichabod, son of Phinehas, son of Eli, priest of the LORD at Shiloh — was wearing the ephod. And the people did not know that Jonathan had gone.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
אֵפוֹדefod
"ephod"—priestly garment, vestment for divination, linen garment
The ephod in this context is the priestly vestment associated with the Urim and Thummim — the mechanism for receiving yes/no answers from God through sacred lot-casting. Its presence with Saul's army means he has access to divine inquiry, which makes his later failure to receive an answer (v37) all the more devastating.
Translator Notes
The genealogy traces Ahijah (Achiyyah, 'my brother is YAH') through Ahitub, past Ichabod (I-khavod, 'where is the glory?'), through Phinehas (Pinechas) to Eli — the entire priestly line that fell under God's judgment in chapters 2-4. The ephod (efod) here is the priestly vestment containing the pocket (choshen) that held the Urim and Thummim for divine consultation. The phrase nosei efod ('wearing/carrying the ephod') identifies Ahijah as the active consulting priest. The clause veha'am lo yada' ki halakh Yonatan ('the people did not know that Jonathan had gone') — even Saul did not know, as v17 will confirm.
Between the passes by which Jonathan intended to cross to the Philistine outpost, there was a rocky crag on one side and a rocky crag on the other. One was named Bozez and the other Seneh.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The ma'averot ('passes, crossing-points') are the narrow defiles in the wadi system. The phrase shen-hasela' ('tooth of the rock') is a vivid geographic term — a jagged, protruding crag. Two such formations face each other across the pass. Bozez (Botsets) likely derives from b-ts-ts ('to gleam, to shine'), suggesting a light-colored or sun-facing cliff. Seneh (Senneh) likely relates to seneh ('thorn-bush'), the same word used for the burning bush in Exodus 3:2-4. Whether this connection is coincidental or narratively significant is debated.
One crag rose as a cliff face on the north, facing Michmash, and the other on the south, facing Geba.
KJV The forefront of the one was situate northward over against Michmash, and the other southward over against Gibeah.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The noun matsuq ('cliff, pillar of rock') intensifies the description — these are not gentle slopes but sheer rock faces. The northern crag faces Michmash (Mikhmash), where the Philistines are encamped. The southern crag faces Geva' (Geba), where Jonathan's starting position is. Jonathan must climb the northern cliff to reach the Philistine outpost — ascending a sheer face toward an enemy looking down. The geography is preserved in the modern Wadi Suweinit near the Palestinian village of Mukhmas.
Jonathan said to his armor-bearer, "Come, let's cross over to the outpost of these uncircumcised men. Perhaps the LORD will act for us, because nothing prevents the LORD from saving — whether by many or by few."
KJV 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.
From '-ts-r ('to restrain, to hold back'). Jonathan declares that no barrier exists between God's power and its exercise — numerical disadvantage cannot restrain divine salvation. This word encapsulates the theology of holy war: victory belongs to God, and human armies are merely the instrument he chooses to wield.
Translator Notes
The term ha'arelim ('the uncircumcised') is Israel's standard term of contempt for the Philistines — it identifies them as outside the Abrahamic covenant and therefore outside divine protection. The particle ulay ('perhaps') is theologically important: Jonathan does not presume on God but expresses hopeful openness. The noun ma'atsor ('restraint, barrier, hindrance') from '-ts-r means there is literally nothing that can hold God back. The Hiphil infinitive lehoshi'a ('to save, to deliver') is from the root y-sh-' — the salvation root. The contrast berav o vim'at ('by many or by few') states the theological principle in its purest form: divine deliverance is independent of human resources.
His armor-bearer said to him, "Do everything that is in your heart. Go forward — I am with you, heart and soul."
KJV And his armourbearer said unto him, Do all that is in thine heart: turn thee; behold, I am with thee according to thy heart.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase kol-asher bilvavekha ('all that is in your heart') grants Jonathan complete authority — the armor-bearer submits fully to his commander's judgment. The imperative neteh lekha ('turn, go forward, proceed') expresses readiness to move. The declaration hinneni immekha kilevavekha ('here I am with you according to your heart') is a triple affirmation: presence (hinneni), companionship (immekha), and shared purpose (kilevavekha). The word levav ('heart') appears twice in this verse, emphasizing that the armor-bearer's inner conviction matches Jonathan's own.
Jonathan said, "Right — we are going to cross over toward those men and let them see us."
KJV Then said Jonathan, Behold, we will pass over unto these men, and we will discover ourselves unto them.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The verb overim ('crossing over') resumes the language of v1 and v6 — they will cross the wadi. The Niphal veniglinu ('we will reveal ourselves, we will be disclosed') from g-l-h means they will deliberately make themselves visible. This is part of Jonathan's sign: they will expose themselves to the enemy and let the Philistines' response determine whether God has granted them the initiative. Stealth is abandoned in favor of a faith-test.
"If they say to us, 'Stay where you are until we come down to you,' then we will stand in place and not go up to them."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The first option of the sign: if the Philistines say dommu ('stand still, wait, be silent') — a command to halt — and declare they will come down, Jonathan reads this as God withholding the signal. The phrase ve'amadnu tachteinu ('we will stand in our place') means they will hold position and abort the mission. Jonathan's sign is not arbitrary; it has tactical logic — if the enemy comes to them on the cliff face, the disadvantage of terrain belongs to Jonathan. He needs them to stay put and invite the climb.
Jonathan seeks an ot — a divinely legible indicator — before committing to the attack. This is not divination or superstition; it is a warrior's request for divine guidance, consistent with Israel's practice of inquiring of God before battle. The ot he chooses is psychologically astute: enemy overconfidence signals divine setup.
Translator Notes
The imperative 'alu ('come up') from the Philistines is intended as mockery — inviting two men to climb a cliff toward an armed garrison is a taunt. Jonathan reads this taunt as the sign (ot) of divine authorization. The verb netanam ('he has given them') is a prophetic perfect — future action described with past-tense certainty because God's decision is already made. The phrase beyadenu ('into our hand') is the standard expression for military victory granted by God. The word ot ('sign') links Jonathan's method to the broader prophetic tradition of seeking and receiving divine confirmation before action.
The two of them revealed themselves to the Philistine outpost. The Philistines said, "Look — Hebrews coming out of the holes where they have been hiding."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The Niphal vayyiggalu ('they revealed themselves') from g-l-h — the deliberate exposure described in v8. The word Ivrim ('Hebrews') is used by non-Israelites throughout Samuel and Exodus — it may be an exonym (outsider-name) with condescending overtones. The chorim ('holes') are the caves and crevices mentioned in 13:6. The participle yotse'im ('coming out') and the relative clause asher hitchabbe'u sham ('where they hid themselves') — the Philistines read the situation as desperate refugees emerging from hiding, not as warriors attacking.
The men of the outpost called out to Jonathan and his armor-bearer, "Come up to us and we will teach you a lesson!" Jonathan said to his armor-bearer, "Climb up behind me — the LORD has given them into Israel's hand."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase venodi'ah etkhem davar (literally 'we will cause you to know a thing') is an idiomatic threat — 'we'll give you something to remember.' It functions as the sign Jonathan specified in v10. Jonathan's command 'aleh acharai ('climb up behind me') shows he leads the assault personally, going first up the cliff face. The shift from beyadenu ('into our hand,' v10) to beyad Yisra'el ('into Israel's hand') widens the scope — this is not Jonathan's private victory but God's deliverance for the nation.
Jonathan climbed up on his hands and feet, with his armor-bearer right behind him. The Philistines fell before Jonathan, and his armor-bearer finished them off behind him.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase al-yadav ve'al-raglav ('on his hands and on his feet') describes literal hand-and-foot climbing — scrambling up the rock face. This is not metaphor; the terrain requires it. The verb vayyippelu ('they fell') before Jonathan could indicate they collapsed in panic, were struck down, or stumbled — the text leaves the mechanism ambiguous. The participle memottet ('putting to death, finishing off') from m-v-t (Polel) describes the armor-bearer's role as executioner of those Jonathan has already downed. The combat choreography is precise: Jonathan leads and strikes first, the armor-bearer follows and ensures the kill.
That first strike by Jonathan and his armor-bearer killed about twenty men within roughly half the area a team of oxen could plow in a day.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase makkah rishonah ('first strike, initial slaughter') implies there will be more killing to follow — this is just the opening blow. The measurement keba'chatsi ma'anah tsemed sadeh ('about half a furrow of a yoke of field') is an agricultural land measure — the area one team of oxen could plow in a single pass, roughly half an acre. Using farming units for a battlefield measurement is distinctly Israelite. The number ke'esrim ish ('about twenty men') is modest enough to be credible — the narrator is not inflating the count.
Terror struck the camp — in the field, among all the troops, the outpost, and the raiding parties — they all trembled. The ground itself shook. It became a God-sent panic.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
חֶרְדַּת אֱלֹהִיםcherdat Elohim
"God-sent panic"—divine trembling, supernatural terror, panic from God
This construction (noun + Elohim) uses God's name as a superlative: 'a trembling of God' means 'an extraordinary, divinely caused trembling.' The same pattern appears in 'mountains of God' (enormous mountains) and 'wind of God' (mighty wind). Here it signals that the panic exceeding anything natural combat could produce — God himself has struck the Philistine army with terror.
Translator Notes
The noun charadah ('trembling, terror, anxiety') from ch-r-d appears three times in this verse (charadah, chardu, cherdat), creating an intensifying repetition. The categories of troops affected expand outward: the camp (machaneh), the field (sadeh), all the people (kol-ha'am), the garrison (matsav), and the raiding parties (mashchit, literally 'destroyers'). The verb vattirgaz ('it quaked') from r-g-z describes seismic trembling. The climactic phrase cherdat Elohim ('trembling of God') uses the divine name as a superlative intensifier — this is not ordinary panic but supernaturally induced, overwhelming terror.
Saul's lookouts in Gibeah of Benjamin watched as the Philistine horde was dissolving, scattering in every direction.
KJV And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin looked; and, behold, the multitude melted away, and they went on beating down one another.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The tsofim ('lookouts, watchmen') are Saul's scouts stationed to observe Philistine movements. From Gibeah they can see across to Michmash. The verb namog ('melting, dissolving') from m-u-g describes the army losing cohesion — troops flowing away like liquid. The phrase vayelekh vahalom ('going and striking') is difficult — it may mean the Philistines were scattering in confusion while striking each other, or it may describe the mass moving and collapsing. The LXX reads the scene as the camp dissolving in all directions.
Saul said to the troops with him, "Take a count and find out who has left us." They took the count, and Jonathan and his armor-bearer were missing.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The imperative piquedu-na ('muster, take a count, please') from p-q-d shows Saul trying to understand the situation through administrative means — counting heads rather than inquiring of God. Only after the count reveals Jonathan's absence does Saul begin to understand what has happened. The verb halakh me'immanu ('has gone from us') — Saul does not yet know that Jonathan left deliberately to attack; he only knows someone is missing.
Saul said to Ahijah, "Bring the ephod of God here" — for the ephod of God was with the Israelites at that time.
KJV And Saul said unto Ahijah, Bring hither the ark of God. For the ark of God was at that time with the children of Israel.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
TEXTUAL NOTE: The MT reads aron ha-Elohim ('ark of God') but the LXX reads efod ('ephod'). The rendering follows the LXX. The ark was at Kiriath-jearim (7:1-2), not with Saul's army. Ahijah was already identified as wearing the ephod in v3. The verb haggisah ('bring near') is a Hiphil imperative of n-g-sh, commonly used for bringing sacred objects or offerings close for ritual use. The entire context — Saul wanting to inquire of God before battle — points to the ephod (and its Urim and Thummim), not the ark.
While Saul was still speaking to the priest, the commotion in the Philistine camp kept growing louder and louder. Saul said to the priest, "Pull your hand back."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase halokh varav ('going and increasing') is an intensifying construction — the noise continually grows. The command esof yadekha ('gather in your hand') tells the priest to stop the Urim and Thummim procedure. The 'hand' likely refers to the priest reaching into the ephod's pouch to draw the lots. Saul's impatience here echoes his premature sacrifice in 13:8-12 — both are moments where Saul acts before the proper ritual or prophetic process is complete. The narrator records this without explicit condemnation, but the pattern is unmistakable.
Saul and all the troops with him rallied and advanced to the battle. When they arrived, every Philistine's sword was turned against his neighbor — the confusion was catastrophic.
KJV 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.
Mehumah is a technical term in holy war texts for God-caused panic that turns an enemy army against itself. It appears in Deuteronomy 7:23 as part of God's promise to throw Israel's enemies into great mehumah, and in Joshua 10:10 for the rout at Gibeon. The word signals that this is not merely a military setback but a divine intervention — God himself is sowing chaos in the Philistine ranks.
Translator Notes
The verb vayyizza'eq ('he cried out, he rallied') from z-'-q is the war cry that musters the troops. The phrase cherev ish bere'ehu ('the sword of each man against his neighbor') describes the Philistines killing each other in the panic — a phenomenon that occurs repeatedly in biblical holy war narratives (Judges 7:22, 2 Chronicles 20:23). The word mehumah ('confusion, tumult, panic') is a technical term for divinely induced battlefield chaos — it shares a root with the tohom of Genesis 1:2, primordial disorder. The phrase gedolah me'od ('very great') intensifies: this is total disintegration of military order.
The Hebrews who had previously been with the Philistines — who had gone up with them into the camp from the surrounding area — even they turned to join the Israelites under Saul and Jonathan.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The Ivrim ('Hebrews') here are Israelites who had defected to or been conscripted by the Philistines — collaborators or forced laborers who served in the Philistine army. The phrase ke'etmol shilshom ('as yesterday and the day before,' i.e., 'previously, in earlier times') indicates an established arrangement. When the panic breaks out, these Hebrews switch sides — they turn (lihyot im, 'to be with') Israel. The narrator distinguishes between these turncoats and the Israelites who had remained with Saul, without explicit condemnation of the former. Battlefield loyalty shifts were common in ancient Near Eastern warfare.
And all the Israelites who had been hiding in the hill country of Ephraim heard that the Philistines were fleeing, and they too joined the pursuit in battle.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The Hithpael participle hammitchabbe'im ('those hiding themselves') from ch-v-' recalls 13:6 — these are the deserters and refugees who fled Saul's army. When word spreads that the Philistines are in full retreat, they emerge and join the pursuit. The verb vayyadebiqu ('they pursued closely, they clung after') from d-v-q indicates aggressive, close pursuit — staying right on the enemy's heels. The phrase behar-Efrayim ('in the hill country of Ephraim') places these refugees north of the battlefield, in territory the fleeing Philistines would pass through.
The LORD saved Israel that day, and the battle moved past Beth-aven.
KJV So the LORD saved Israel that day: and the battle passed over unto Bethaven.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The Hiphil vayyosha' ('he saved, he delivered') from y-sh-' is the central salvation verb of the Hebrew Bible — the root of the names Joshua and Jesus. Its subject is YHWH alone. Beth-aven (Beit Aven, 'house of wickedness') is located near Bethel; some scholars suggest it is a polemical renaming of Bethel ('house of God') after it became associated with idolatrous worship. The phrase vehamillchamah averah ('and the battle passed beyond') indicates the pursuit continued well past the initial engagement zone.
The men of Israel were hard-pressed that day, because Saul had bound the troops with an oath, saying, "Cursed is the man who eats any food before evening, until I have taken vengeance on my enemies!" So none of the troops ate anything.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
אָלָהalah
"oath/cursed"—oath, curse, imprecation, sworn covenant with penalties
Alah is a self-imprecating oath — a sworn declaration that invokes divine punishment on the oath-breaker. Saul's alah binds the entire army under threat of curse for eating before evening. The gravity of an alah in Israelite culture cannot be overstated: it was considered binding regardless of the oath-maker's foolishness, which is why Jonathan's unknowing violation creates a genuine crisis. The tension between the binding force of the alah and its obvious injustice drives the rest of the chapter.
Translator Notes
The verb vayyoel ('he made swear, he adjured') from '-l-h is related to alah ('oath, curse') — Saul binds the people under a self-imprecating oath. The word arur ('cursed') invokes covenant-curse language — whoever breaks this oath falls under divine malediction. The phrase veniqamti me'oyevai ('and I will be avenged on my enemies') centers the entire military campaign on Saul's personal vendetta rather than God's deliverance. The verb nigas ('pressed, distressed, oppressed') describes the physical and psychological toll of fighting all day without food. The phrase lo ta'am kol-ha'am lachem ('all the people did not taste food') confirms universal compliance — except for Jonathan, who never heard the oath.
The whole army entered a forest, and there was honey on the surface of the ground.
KJV And all they of the land came to a wood; and there was honey upon the ground.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase kol-ha'arets ('all the land/earth') here functions as 'the whole group' or 'everyone.' The ya'ar ('forest, woodland') is likely in the hill country west of Michmash. The devash ('honey') on penei hasadeh ('the face of the field/ground') is wild honey — probably from a ground-level or low-hanging hive. The forest dripping with honey creates a scene of abundant provision: God has just given them victory and now provides sustenance — but Saul's oath prevents them from receiving it.
When the troops entered the forest, honey was flowing freely, but no one raised his hand to his mouth, because the troops feared the oath.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase helekh devash ('a flow of honey') describes honey actively dripping or running — the hive is overflowing. The image is almost torturous: exhausted, starving soldiers walking through a forest dripping with honey, and no one dares eat. The verb massig ('bringing, reaching') with yado el-piv ('his hand to his mouth') — the most basic human gesture of eating. The noun shevu'ah ('oath, sworn declaration') from sh-v-' is the binding force that restrains them. The fear (yare') is not of Saul personally but of the sacred curse — breaking a sworn oath in Israel's worldview invited divine retribution.
But Jonathan had not heard when his father bound the troops with the oath. He reached out the tip of the staff in his hand, dipped it into the honeycomb, brought his hand to his mouth — and his eyes brightened.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The clause lo shama' behashbi'a aviv et-ha'am ('he had not heard when his father made the people swear') establishes Jonathan's complete ignorance — the oath is not binding on one who never heard it, though Saul will not see it that way. The matteh ('staff, rod') is Jonathan's walking/fighting stick. The ya'arat haddevash ('honeycomb,' literally 'forest of honey') is a dense mass of wild honeycomb. The phrase vatta'ornah einav ('his eyes brightened/became light') from '-v-r ('to be light') is an idiom for physical revitalization — the opposite of the dim eyes of exhaustion or fasting (cf. v29). The brightening of eyes signals that the honey did exactly what food should do for exhausted warriors.
One of the soldiers spoke up and said, "Your father strictly bound the troops with an oath, saying, 'Cursed is the man who eats food today.'" The troops were exhausted.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase hashbe'a hishbi'a ('he made solemnly swear, he strictly adjured') uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis — the oath was emphatic and public. The soldier informs Jonathan of what he missed. The final clause vayya'af ha'am ('the people were faint/exhausted') from '-y-f uses a verb meaning to be weary to the point of collapse — the oath's toll on fighting men who have been pursuing all day without food. The narrator places this observation right after Jonathan's eyes brighten from eating, creating an implicit contrast: Jonathan is revived, everyone else is collapsing.
Jonathan said, "My father has brought trouble on the land. Look at how my eyes have brightened because I tasted just a little of this honey."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The verb akhar ('to trouble, to stir up disaster') is loaded — it connects Saul to Achan (Akhan from the same root) whose trespass at Jericho brought defeat on all Israel (Joshua 7). Jonathan's use of this word is a serious accusation. The phrase re'u-na ('look, please') invites the soldiers to observe the evidence. The clause ki oru einai ('because my eyes have brightened') from '-v-r proves his point physically — the honey worked. The phrase me'at devash hazzeh ('a little of this honey') minimizes the amount: even a tiny portion of what God provided through the forest would have transformed the army's effectiveness.
How much greater would the victory have been if the troops had eaten freely today from the plunder of their enemies! The slaughter among the Philistines would have been far greater.
KJV How much more, if haply the people had eaten freely to day of the spoil of their enemies which they found? had there not been now a much greater slaughter among the Philistines?
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The particle af ki ('how much more') introduces an a fortiori argument — if a little honey did this much, imagine if the whole army had eaten. The phrase akhol akhal ('had freely eaten') uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis — unrestricted eating. The noun mishellal oyeveihem ('from the plunder of their enemies') — the food seized from the fleeing Philistines was available but forbidden. Jonathan argues that the oath limited the scope of God's victory: the makkah ('strike, slaughter, defeat') against the Philistines would have been ravetah ('greater, more extensive') if the army had been properly fed. Jonathan's critique is both military and theological: Saul's oath hindered what God was doing.
They struck down the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon, and the troops were utterly exhausted.
KJV And they smote the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon: and the people were very faint.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The pursuit extended from Mikhmash (Michmash, the starting point) to Ayyalon (Aijalon), a distance of roughly 15-20 miles westward through the hill country toward the coastal plain — a full day's hard march and fighting. The phrase vayya'af ha'am me'od ('the people were very faint') repeats the exhaustion motif from v28 with the intensifier me'od ('very, exceedingly'). These men have been fighting and running all day on empty stomachs because of Saul's oath. The narrator ensures the reader understands the human cost of Saul's reckless vow.
The troops rushed at the plunder, seizing sheep, cattle, and calves, and slaughtered them right on the ground. The troops ate the meat with the blood still in it.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase vayya'as ha'am el-hashalal ('the people rushed/flew at the plunder') uses a verb suggesting violent, undisciplined haste. The animals — tso'n (sheep/goats), baqar (cattle), benei vaqar (calves) — represent significant captured livestock. The phrase vayyishchatu al-ha'arets ('they slaughtered on the ground') means they killed the animals where they stood rather than using a proper slaughtering site with drainage for the blood. The critical phrase vayyokhal ha'am al-haddam ('the people ate with/on the blood') indicates they consumed meat without properly draining the blood — a violation of the prohibition in Leviticus 17:10-14 and Genesis 9:4.
Someone reported to Saul, "Look, the troops are sinning against the LORD by eating meat with the blood." He said, "You have acted treacherously! Roll a large stone over to me right now."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The report uses the participle chot'im ('sinning, missing the mark') — the people are in active violation of Torah. Saul's response begadtem ('you have acted treacherously, you have dealt faithlessly') from b-g-d is a strong accusation of covenant betrayal. The command gollu elai even gedolah ('roll to me a large stone') — Saul improvises a solution: a large stone will serve as a raised slaughtering surface so the blood can drain properly. The stone elevates the killing above ground level, allowing blood to flow away rather than pool around the meat. This shows Saul can think practically about religious law, even though his oath caused the problem.
Saul said, "Spread out among the troops and tell them: Every man bring his ox, every man his sheep — slaughter them here on this stone and eat. Do not sin against the LORD by eating meat with the blood." All the troops brought their animals that night, each man leading his ox by hand, and slaughtered them there.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The imperative putsu ('scatter, disperse') sends messengers throughout the camp. The phrase ish shoro ve'ish seihu ('each man his ox and each man his sheep') requires orderly, individual slaughter on the elevated stone. The verb ushechatetem bazzeh ('and you shall slaughter on this') — bazzeh ('on this') refers to the great stone. The prohibition velo-techetu laYHWH le'ekhol el-haddam ('do not sin against the LORD by eating with the blood') shows Saul correctly identifying the theological issue. The nighttime setting (hallaylah) indicates this continued after dark — the troops were so hungry they slaughtered and ate through the night.
Saul built an altar to the LORD. It was the first altar he had ever built to the LORD.
KJV And Saul built an altar unto the LORD: the same was the first altar that he built unto the LORD.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The verb vayyiven ('he built') from b-n-h is the standard term for altar construction. The phrase oto hechel livnot mizbe'ach laYHWH ('it he began to build an altar to the LORD' — i.e., 'that was the first altar he built to the LORD') uses hechel ('he began') in a way that emphasizes the novelty of the act. Some read this as 'he began by building' (i.e., this was his first), others as a comment on his overall reign. The repeated phrase laYHWH ('to the LORD') twice in one verse may emphasize that this altar is properly dedicated — unlike the improper ground-slaughter.
Saul said, "Let's go down after the Philistines tonight and plunder them until dawn, and not leave a single man alive." The troops said, "Do whatever seems good to you." But the priest said, "Let us approach God here first."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The cohortative neredah ('let us go down') from y-r-d suits the geography — the Philistines are retreating westward and downhill toward the coastal plain. The verb navozah ('let us plunder') from b-z-z means to strip the defeated of all valuables. The phrase ad-or habboqer ('until the light of morning') — a night operation extending to dawn. The troops' kol-hattov be'einekha aseh ('do whatever is good in your eyes') is formulaic deference. The priest's niqerevah halom el-ha-Elohim ('let us draw near here to God') uses language of sacred approach — qerev is the verb for approaching the divine presence, and halom ('here, to this place') suggests using the ephod right where they are.
Saul inquired of God: "Should I go down after the Philistines? Will you give them into Israel's hand?" But God did not answer him that day.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The verb vayyish'al ('he inquired') from sh-'-l — the same root as Saul's own name (Sha'ul, 'asked/requested'). The two questions follow the binary format required by the Urim and Thummim: yes/no answers. The crushing phrase velo anahu bayyom hahu ('he did not answer him that day') — God's refusal to communicate through the appointed channel indicates a breach in the relationship. In 28:6, this same silence will recur when Saul desperately seeks guidance before his final battle, and 'the LORD did not answer him, not by dreams, not by Urim, not by prophets.'
Saul said, "Come forward — all the leaders of the troops. Find out and determine what sin has been committed today."
KJV And Saul said, Draw ye near hither, all the chief of the people: and know and see wherein this sin hath been this day.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The imperative goshu halom ('draw near here') summons the leaders for investigation. The pinnot ha'am ('corners of the people') is an idiom for the leaders — the 'cornerstones' who hold the community together. The verbs ude'u ur'u ('know and see') demand both intellectual understanding and visible evidence. The noun hachattat ('the sin') from ch-t-' — Saul assumes that God's silence must be caused by sin, which is correct in the framework of holy war theology. But the irony is that the 'sin' is Jonathan eating honey he never knew was forbidden.
"As the LORD who saves Israel lives — even if the guilt lies with my son Jonathan, he will certainly die." But not a single person among all the troops said a word.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
Saul swears by the living God (chai-YHWH) — another oath on top of the first one. The phrase hammoshi'a et-Yisra'el ('who saves Israel') is bitterly ironic: Saul invokes God as Israel's savior in the same breath that he threatens to kill the man through whom God just saved Israel. The phrase mot yamut ('he will surely die') uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis — death is certain. The people's silence (ein onehu mikkol-ha'am, 'none answering him from all the people') is pregnant: they know Jonathan ate the honey, they know the oath was unjust, but no one dares contradict a king swearing by God's name.
He said to all Israel, "You will stand on one side, and I and my son Jonathan will stand on the other." The people said to Saul, "Do what seems good to you."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
Saul divides the lot-casting into two groups: the people on one side (ever echad) and the royal house (Saul and Jonathan) on the other. This is the initial binary division for the Urim and Thummim process — the lots will determine which side bears the guilt. The people's repeated deference hattov be'einekha aseh ('do what is good in your eyes') shows compliance but not enthusiasm. They are watching Saul move toward a conclusion they fear.
Saul said to the LORD, the God of Israel, "Why have you not answered your servant today? If the guilt is in me or in my son Jonathan, LORD God of Israel, let the answer be Urim. If the guilt is in your people Israel, let the answer be Thummim." Jonathan and Saul were selected by lot, and the people were cleared.
KJV Therefore Saul said unto the LORD God of Israel, Give a perfect lot. And Saul and Jonathan were taken. But the people escaped.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
אוּרִים וְתֻמִּיםUrim veTummim
"Urim … Thummim"—sacred lots for divine inquiry; possibly 'lights and perfections' or 'curses and completions'
The Urim and Thummim are sacred lot-casting objects kept in the high priest's ephod, used to receive binary (yes/no) answers from God. Their exact form is unknown — possibly two flat stones, one light and one dark, drawn from the ephod's pouch. The LXX text of this verse is the most explicit description of their use in the entire Hebrew Bible: one result (Urim) indicates guilt on one side, the other (Thummim) indicates guilt on the other. The system requires a clear result; when neither lot gives a definitive answer (as in v37), it signals that something is obstructing divine communication.
Translator Notes
CRITICAL TEXTUAL NOTE: The MT reads only havah tamim ('give perfection/completeness'), which is grammatically awkward and widely regarded as a truncation. The LXX (and 4QSamᵃ) preserves the full text of Saul's prayer, which explicitly names the Urim and Thummim as the two possible lot-outcomes. This longer reading is followed by most modern text critics (McCarter, Cross, Tov) and is almost certainly original. The loss in the MT is best explained by homoioteleuton — the word Yisra'el appears multiple times in the full text, and a scribe's eye skipped from one occurrence to a later one, dropping the intervening material. The verb vayyillakhed ('he was taken/caught') from l-k-d is the technical term for being identified by sacred lot (cf. Joshua 7:14-18, where Achan is 'taken' by lot).
Saul said, "Cast the lot between me and my son Jonathan." And Jonathan was selected.
KJV And Saul said, Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan was taken.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The imperative happilu ('cast') is the standard term for lot-casting — literally 'cause to fall.' The phrase beini uvein Yonatan beni ('between me and between Jonathan my son') sets up the final binary. The verb vayyillakhed ('was taken/caught') identifies Jonathan. The brevity of the verse is striking — no editorializing, no divine speech, just the stark result. The narrative tension is at its peak: Saul has sworn Jonathan will die (v39), the lots have identified Jonathan, and the audience knows Jonathan is innocent.
Saul said to Jonathan, "Tell me — what have you done?" Jonathan told him: "I tasted a little honey with the tip of the staff in my hand. Here I am — I am ready to die."
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The imperative haggidah li ('tell me') from n-g-d demands full disclosure. Jonathan's response uses the infinitive absolute ta'om ta'amti ('I certainly tasted') — an honest, unvarnished admission. The phrase me'at devash ('a little honey') — minimizing the quantity emphasizes the absurdity: death for a taste of honey. The declaration hinneni amut ('here I am, I will die') combines hinneni (the response of covenant readiness) with amut ('I will die') — Jonathan accepts the sentence with the composure of a man whose conscience is clear. He does not say 'I deserve to die' — only that he is prepared to.
Saul said, "May God do this to me and worse — you will certainly die, Jonathan."
KJV And Saul answered, God do so and more also: for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The formula koh ya'aseh Elohim vekhoh yosif ('thus may God do and thus may he add') is a conditional self-curse — if I fail to carry this out, may God punish me and then some. The phrase mot tamut ('dying you will die,' i.e., 'you will certainly die') is the strongest possible death sentence in Hebrew. Using it for Jonathan — the hero of the day — reveals the full absurdity of Saul's oath-driven logic. The narrator records the sentence without endorsement.
But the people said to Saul, "Should Jonathan die — the one who accomplished this great deliverance in Israel? Absolutely not! As the LORD lives, not a single hair from his head will fall to the ground, because he fought alongside God today." The people ransomed Jonathan, and he did not die.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
1 term
Key Terms
פָּדָהpadah
"ransomed"—to ransom, to redeem, to buy back, to deliver by payment of a price
Padah is the verb of substitutionary redemption — it implies that a price was paid or a substitute was offered to secure Jonathan's release from the death sentence. In Exodus 13:13, every firstborn son must be redeemed (padah) because the firstborn belongs to God. The people's act of redeeming Jonathan may have involved an animal sacrifice as substitute, though the text is silent on the mechanism. The theological resonance is profound: Jonathan, the firstborn of the king, is redeemed from death by the community's intervention — a pattern that points forward to the broader biblical theology of substitutionary redemption.
Translator Notes
The rhetorical question haYonatan yamut ('should Jonathan die?') expects a forceful 'no.' The noun yeshu'ah ('salvation, deliverance') from y-sh-' attributes the victory to Jonathan as God's agent. The oath formula chai-YHWH ('as the LORD lives') matches Saul's own oath formula, creating a direct confrontation of sworn declarations. The idiom im-yippol missa'arat rosho artsah ('if a hair of his head falls to the ground') — a guarantee of absolute safety. The phrase im-Elohim asah ('with God he acted/worked') — the people declare Jonathan's battle was a partnership with God. The verb vayyifdu ('they ransomed/redeemed') from p-d-h is the critical term — redemption language typically reserved for God's saving acts or the substitutionary redemption of firstborn sons.
Saul broke off the pursuit of the Philistines, and the Philistines returned to their own territory.
KJV Then Saul went up from following the Philistines: and the Philistines went to their own place.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The verb vayya'al ('he went up') from '-l-h here means Saul ascended back from the lowland pursuit — returning eastward and upward from the coastal plain toward the hill country. The phrase halekhu limqomam ('they went to their place') — the Philistines retreated to Philistia (the coastal cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath). The pursuit ends without a decisive Philistine defeat.
Saul had secured the kingship over Israel and waged war on every side against all his enemies: against Moab, the Ammonites, Edom, the kings of Zobah, and the Philistines. Wherever he turned, he inflicted defeat.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase lakhad hammelukhah ('he seized/secured the kingship') from l-k-d uses the same 'capture' verb as the lot-casting — Saul took hold of royal power. The list of enemies covers all compass directions: Moab (east of the Dead Sea), Ammon (Transjordan), Edom (south, Negev to the Gulf of Aqaba), Zobah (Aramean kingdom north of Damascus), and Philistines (western coastal plain). The phrase uvkhol asher-yifneh yarshi'a ('wherever he turned, he condemned/defeated') — the Hiphil of r-sh-' normally means 'to condemn, to declare guilty,' which is an unusual way to describe military victory. Some emend to yatsliyach ('he succeeded') or read it as 'he prevailed.' The MT reading may be deliberately ambiguous.
He mustered a fighting force and struck Amalek, and he rescued Israel from the hands of those who plundered them.
KJV And he gathered an host, and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled them.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The phrase vayya'as chayil ('he made/gathered strength/valor') can mean either 'he acted valiantly' or 'he mustered an army.' The Amalek campaign described here will be narrated in full in chapter 15 — and it will become the occasion of Saul's definitive rejection by God. The verb vayyatsel ('he rescued, he delivered') from n-ts-l credits Saul with rescuing Israel from the shosehu ('the one plundering him'). This summary presents Saul in the best possible light as a military king, which makes the coming narrative of his disobedience and rejection all the more tragic.
The sons of Saul were Jonathan, Ishvi, and Malki-shua. The names of his two daughters: the firstborn was Merab, and the younger was Michal.
KJV 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:
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The three sons listed here do not include Ish-bosheth (Eshbaal), who appears in 2 Samuel 2:8 — either Ishvi is an alternate name or Ish-bosheth is omitted. Malki-shu'a means 'my king is noble/generous.' The daughters are listed by birth order: Merav (firstborn) and Mikhal (younger). Both names will feature prominently: Merab in the broken betrothal to David (18:17-19), Michal in the love story and later estrangement (18:20-28, 2 Samuel 6:16-23). The genealogical format follows ancient Near Eastern royal chronicle conventions.
The name of Saul's wife was Ahinoam daughter of Ahimaaz. The name of his army commander was Abner son of Ner, Saul's uncle.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
Achinoam (Ahinoam, 'my brother is delight/pleasantness') daughter of Achimaats (Ahimaaz) — a different Ahinoam from the one David later marries (25:43). Avner (Abner, 'my father is a lamp') son of Ner is identified as Saul's dod ('uncle' or 'kinsman'). Abner will become a major figure: he will champion Ish-bosheth after Saul's death, oppose David, and eventually be killed by Joab (2 Samuel 3). As sar-tseva'o ('commander of his army'), Abner holds the most powerful military position in the kingdom.
Kish was Saul's father, and Ner, Abner's father, was the son of Abiel.
KJV And Kish was the father of Saul; and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The genealogy clarifies the family relationships: Kish (Qish) is Saul's father (as established in 9:1), and Ner is Abner's father. Both Kish and Ner are identified as sons of Abiel (Avi'el, 'my father is God'), making Saul and Abner cousins. This explains Abner's fierce loyalty to Saul's house — they are close kin. The genealogy also anchors the royal house in the tribe of Benjamin.
The war against the Philistines was fierce throughout Saul's entire reign. Whenever Saul saw a strong warrior or any capable fighting man, he would recruit him into his service.
KJV 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.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
The adjective chazaqah ('strong, fierce, hard') describes the Philistine war as a grinding, sustained conflict. The phrase kol yemei Sha'ul ('all the days of Saul') encompasses his entire reign — the war never ends. The verb vayya'asfehu ('he gathered him, he recruited him') from '-s-f shows a systematic policy of military conscription based on observed ability. The phrase ish gibbor ('mighty man, warrior') and ben-chayil ('son of valor, capable man') are the elite warrior designations that David will embody. This recruiting policy ironically sets the stage for David's arrival at court and the beginning of Saul's undoing.