TRV
Study This Verse
Commentary on 1 Samuel 14 verses 36–46
Here is, I. Saul's boasting against the Philistines. He proposed, as soon as his soldiers had got their suppers, to pursue them all night, and not leave a man of them, Sa1 14:36. Here he showed much zeal, but little discretion; for his army, thus fatigued, could as ill spare a night's sleep as a meal's meat. But it is common for rash and foolish men to consider nobody but themselves, and, so that they might but have their humour, not to care what hardships they put upon those that are under them. However, the people were so obsequious to their king that they would by no means oppose the motion, but resolved to make the best of it, and, if he will go on, they will follow him: Do whatsoever seemeth good to thee. Only the priest thought it convenient to go on with the devotions that were broken off abruptly (Sa1 14:19), and to consult the oracle: Let us draw near hither unto God. Princes and great men have need of such about them as will thus be their remembrancers, wherever they go, to take God along with them. And, when the priest proposed it, Saul could not for shame reject the proposal, but asked counsel of God (Sa1 14:37): "Shall I go down after the Philistines? And shall I speed?"
II. His falling foul on his son Jonathan: and the rest of this paragraph is wholly concerning him: for, while he is prosecuted, the Philistines make their escape. We know not what mischief may ensue upon on rash resolve.
1.God, by giving an intimation of his displeasure, put Saul upon searching for an accursed thing. When, by the priest, he consulted the oracle, God answered him not, Sa1 14:37. Note, When God denies our prayers it concerns us to enquire what the sin is that has provoked him to do so. Let us see where the sin is, Sa1 14:38. For God's ear is not heavy that it cannot hear, but it is sin that separates between us and him. If God turns away our prayer, we have reason to suspect it is for some iniquity regarding our hearts, which we are concerned to find out, that we may put it away, may mortify it, and put it to death. Saul swears by his Maker that whoever was the Achan that troubled the camp, by eating the forbidden fruit, should certainly die, though it were Jonathan himself, that is, though ever so dear to himself and the people, little thinking that Jonathan was the man (Sa1 14:39): He shall surely die, the curse shall be executed upon him. But none of the people answered him, that is, none of those who knew Jonathan had broken the order would inform against him.
2.Jonathan was discovered by lot to be the offender. Saul would have lots cast between himself and Jonathan on the one side, and the people on the other, perhaps because he was as confident of Jonathan's innocency in this matter as of his own, Sa1 14:40. The people, seeing him in a heat, durst not gainsay any thing he proposed, but acquiesced: Do as seemeth good unto thee. Before he cast lots, he prayed that God would give a perfect lot (Sa1 14:41), that is, make a full discovery of this matter, or, as it is in the margin, that he would show the innocent. This was with an air of impartial justice. Judges should desire that truth may come out, whoever may suffer by it. Lots should be cast with prayer, because they are a solemn appeal to Providence, and by them we beg of God to direct and determine us (Act 1:24), for which reason some have condemned games that depend purely upon lot or chance as making too bold with a sacred thing. Jonathan at length was taken (Sa1 14:42), Providence designing hereby to countenance and support a lawful authority, and to put an honour upon the administration of public justice in general, reserving another way to bring off one that had done nothing worthy of death.
3.Jonathan ingenuously confesses the fact, and Saul, with an angry curse, passes sentence upon him. Jonathan denies not the truth, nor goes about to conceal it, only he thinks it hard that he must die for it, Sa1 14:43. He might very fairly have pleaded his invincible ignorance of the law, or have insisted upon his merit, but he submitted to the necessity with a great and generous mind: "God's and my father's will be done:" thus he showed as much valour in receiving the messengers of death himself as in sending them among the Philistines. It is as brave to yield in some cases as it is in other cases to fight. Saul is not mollified by his filial submission nor the hardness of his case; but as one that affected to be thought firm to his word, and much more to his oath; even when it bound him hardest, with another imprecation he gives judgment upon Jonathan (Sa1 14:44): "God do so and more also to me if I do not execute the law upon thee, for thou shalt surely die, Jonathan." (1.) He passed this sentence too hastily, without consulting the oracle. Jonathan had a very good plea in arrest of the judgment. What he had done was not malum in se - bad in itself; and, as for the prohibition of it, he was ignorant of that, so that he could not be charged with rebellion or disobedience. (2.) He did it in fury. Had Jonathan been worthy to die, yet it would have become a judge, much more a father, to pass sentence with tenderness and compassion, and not with such an air of triumph, like a man perfectly divested of all humanity and natural affection. Justice is debased when it is administered with wrath and bitterness. (3.) He backed it with a curse upon himself if he did not see the sentence executed; and this curse did return upon his own head. Jonathan escaped, but God did so to Saul, and more also; for he was rejected of God and made anathema. Let none upon any occasion dare to use such imprecations as these, lest God say Amen to them, and make their own tongues to fall upon them, Psa 64:8. This stone will return upon him that rolleth it. Yet we have reason to think that Saul's bowels yearned toward Jonathan, so that he really punished himself, and very justly, when he seemed so severe upon Jonathan. God made him feel the smart of his own rash edict, which might make him fear being again guilty of the like. By all these vexatious accidents God did likewise correct him for his presumption in offering sacrifice without Samuel. An expedition so ill begun could not end without some rebukes.
4.The people rescued Jonathan out of his father's hands, v. 45. Hitherto they had expressed themselves very observant of Saul. What seemed good to him they acquiesced in, v. 36, 40. But, when Jonathan is in danger, Saul's word is no longer a law to them, but with the utmost zeal they oppose the execution of his sentence: "Shall Jonathan die - that blessing, that darling, of his country? Shall that life be sacrificed to a punctilio of law and honour which was so bravely exposed for the public service, and to which we owe our lives and triumphs? No, we will never stand by and see him thus treated whom God delights to honour." It is good to see Israelites zealous for the protection of those whom God has made instruments of public good. Saul had sworn that Jonathan should die, but they oppose their oath to his, and swear he shall not die: "As the Lord liveth there shall not only not his head, but not a hair of his head fall to the ground;" they did not rescue him by violence, but by reason and resolution; and Josephus says they made their prayer to God that he might be loosed from the curse. They pleaded for him that he has wrought with God this day; that is, "he has owned God's cause, and God has owned his endeavours, and therefore his life is too precious to be thrown away upon a nicety." We may suppose Saul had not so perfectly forgotten the relation of a father but that he was willing enough to have Jonathan rescued, and well pleased to have that done which yet he would not do himself: and he that knows the heart of a father knows not how to blame him.
5.The design against the Philistines is quashed by this incident (v. 46): Saul went up from following them, and so an opportunity was lost of completing the victory. When Israel's shields are clashing with one another the public safety and service suffer by it.
Continue studying 1 Samuel 14:40 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
1 Samuel 14:40 describes King Saul's decisive action to uncover a perceived sin among the Israelites that he believed was hindering their military efforts against the Philistines. Following a lack of divine guidance, Saul proposes a dramatic division: the entire Israelite army on one side, and he and his son Jonathan on the other. The people's immediate and submissive reply, "Do what seemeth good unto thee," highlights their deference to the king's authority and their willingness to comply with his extraordinary investigative measures in a moment of national crisis.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The verse employs several significant literary devices. Foreshadowing is prominent, as Saul's dramatic division of the people, with himself and Jonathan positioned separately, directly anticipates the subsequent casting of lots that will precisely identify Jonathan as the unwitting transgressor. This structural setup masterfully builds suspense for the audience, who, unlike Saul, are already aware of Jonathan's earlier action. There is also a powerful element of Irony at play; Saul, the king, meticulously orchestrates a process to uncover sin among his people, yet the true underlying cause of the divine displeasure is his own rash and ill-conceived vow. This dramatic irony underscores Saul's flawed judgment, his self-deception, and his inability to see his own culpability. Furthermore, the verse presents a clear Contrast between Saul's active, commanding role and the people's passive, submissive response, effectively highlighting the power dynamics inherent in the early Israelite monarchy.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
This passage powerfully illustrates the Old Testament understanding of corporate responsibility for sin and the severe consequences it could bring upon a community. Saul's conviction that God's silence was due to unconfessed sin reflects a theological framework where the purity and obedience of the nation were directly linked to divine blessing and success, especially in warfare. While Saul's method of identifying the sin was human-devised and his vow rash, the underlying principle of accountability before God is paramount. The narrative also raises critical questions about the nature of leadership, particularly the dangers of impulsive decisions made under pressure, and the importance of discerning God's true will rather than relying on human logic or legalistic enforcement.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
1 Samuel 14:40 offers profound lessons for believers today regarding the nature of leadership, the gravity of our decisions, and the principle of accountability. Saul's actions serve as a stark reminder of the perils of impulsive vows and the far-reaching negative consequences that can stem from them, impacting not just the individual but an entire community. Leaders, whether in the church, family, or workplace, are called to exercise wisdom, prudence, and prayerful discernment, carefully considering the full implications of their decisions before acting. The narrative also underscores the timeless biblical principle of accountability; while Saul's method was flawed, the underlying desire to address sin and maintain integrity before God remains a vital spiritual principle. We are reminded that our actions, even seemingly small ones or those made without full knowledge, can have ripple effects, and that seeking God's guidance should always precede our most significant decisions, rather than resorting to human logic when divine clarity is absent.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why was Saul so determined to find the transgressor?
Answer: Saul was convinced that God's silence, specifically the lack of a clear answer when he consulted the Lord about pursuing the Philistines further (1 Samuel 14:37), indicated that there was unconfessed sin among the people. In the Old Testament understanding, corporate sin could hinder divine favor and bring judgment upon the entire community, especially in battle. Saul's rash oath earlier in the chapter (1 Samuel 14:24) was the root cause of the problem, but he was unaware of this. He felt compelled as king to purge this sin to restore divine favor and secure victory against the Philistines, believing it was the only way to move forward.
Was the people's response "Do what seemeth good unto thee" a sign of genuine agreement or fear?
Answer: The people's response, "Do what seemeth good unto thee," likely represents a complex mix of genuine deference, cultural expectation, and perhaps a degree of fear or exhaustion. It is a common idiom in the Hebrew Bible expressing full consent and submission to the speaker's judgment or plan, indicating their willingness to abide by Saul's decision-making process. Given the high stakes of the battle, their extreme hunger and exhaustion due to Saul's oath (1 Samuel 14:28-32), and the immediate need for divine favor, their compliance could stem from a desire for resolution and a fear of incurring Saul's wrath or further divine displeasure if they resisted. It was an expression of complete compliance with his proposed method.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The desperate scene in 1 Samuel 14:40, where Saul attempts to identify the source of sin through human means to restore divine favor, powerfully foreshadows and contrasts with the ultimate solution to humanity's sin problem found in Jesus Christ. Saul's investigation was a flawed, legalistic, and ultimately dangerous endeavor, leading to the near-sacrifice of his own son, Jonathan, who was an unwitting transgressor. This human attempt to deal with sin through identification and punishment falls tragically short. In stark contrast, Christ is the perfect Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, not as an unwitting participant, but as the willing, sinless sacrifice. Unlike Saul, who sought to find the sinner for judgment, God in Christ came to be the sin offering, so that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). The shedding of blood was necessary for atonement (Hebrews 9:22), and Christ's perfect sacrifice on the cross fully satisfied God's righteous demands, something no human king or legalistic system could ever achieve. He is the true and final means by which humanity's corporate and individual sin is addressed, not through a process of elimination, but through radical grace and substitutionary atonement, bringing true and lasting fellowship with God, a peace that surpasses all understanding (Philippians 4:7).