1 Samuel 14:43

Translation
King James Version
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.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Then Saul H7586 said H559 to Jonathan H3129, Tell H5046 me what thou hast done H6213. And Jonathan H3129 told H5046 him, and said H559, I did but H2938 taste H2938 a little H4592 honey H1706 with the end H7097 of the rod H4294 that was in mine hand H3027, and, lo H2009, I must die H4191.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
Then Sha'ul said to Y'honatan, "Tell me what you did."Y'honatan told him, "Yes, I tasted a little honey with the end of the staff in my hand. Here I am; I'm ready to die."
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
“Tell me what you have done,” Saul commanded him. So Jonathan told him, “I only tasted a little honey with the end of the staff that was in my hand. And now I must die?”
Ask
American Standard Version
Then Saul said to Jonathan, Tell me what thou hast done. And Jonathan told him, and said, I did certainly taste a little honey with the end of the rod that was in my hand; and, lo, I must die.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
Then Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done!” Jonathan told him, and said, “I certainly did taste a little honey with the end of the rod that was in my hand; and behold, I must die.”
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
Then Saul said to Ionathan, Tell me what thou hast done. And Ionathan tolde him, and said, I tasted a litle hony with the ende of the rod, that was in mine hand, and loe, I must die.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
And Saul saith unto Jonathan, `Declare to me, what hast thou done?' and Jonathan declareth to him, and saith, `I certainly tasted with the end of the rod that is in my hand a little honey; lo, I die!'
Ask
See also
Joshua 7:191 Samuel 14:27Jonah 1:7Jonah 1:10
See on the biblical-era map
The Battle of Mikmash
The Battle of Mikmash View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 7,552 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

1 Samuel 14:43 vividly portrays a moment of profound moral and familial tension as King Saul confronts his son, Jonathan, who has been identified by divine lot as the unwitting transgressor of Saul's rash oath. Jonathan, the day's hero, responds with remarkable integrity, openly confessing his minor act of tasting honey and stoically accepting the death sentence pronounced by his father, thereby exposing the perilous consequences of impulsive vows and the stark contrast between human legalism and the potential for divine mercy.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse serves as the dramatic climax of a narrative arc detailing a decisive victory against the Philistines. The preceding verses establish the context: Jonathan's heroic, almost solitary, initiative sparked a rout among the enemy, while King Saul, unbeknownst to his son, had pronounced a severe, divinely-invoked oath: "Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies" (1 Samuel 14:24). Exhausted and famished, the Israelite army, including Jonathan, unknowingly violated this oath. When Saul sought divine guidance for further pursuit of the Philistines, God remained silent, signaling a transgression within the camp. Through the casting of lots, the identity of the transgressor was narrowed down, first to Saul or Jonathan, and then conclusively to Jonathan, leading directly to this intense confrontation where Saul demands his son's confession.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: In ancient Israel, the practice of making solemn oaths and vows was deeply ingrained and considered binding, often carrying divine curses for their violation. Such vows, even if made impulsively, invoked God's name and authority, making their fulfillment a matter of religious and legal obligation. The casting of lots was a recognized, divinely sanctioned method for discerning God's will or identifying guilt in situations where human knowledge was insufficient, as demonstrated in the selection of Saul as king (1 Samuel 10:20-21) and the revelation of Achan's sin (Joshua 7:16-18). Kings held absolute authority, and a monarch's word, especially when backed by an oath, was considered law. This cultural backdrop intensifies the gravity of Saul's dilemma and Jonathan's confession, as the expectation was that such a vow, once made, must be fulfilled, even if it led to tragic outcomes.
  • Key Themes: The passage powerfully illustrates several profound themes. Firstly, it underscores the peril of rash vows, demonstrating how Saul's impulsive and ill-conceived oath not only burdened his weary army but also threatened the life of his own valiant son. This serves as a cautionary tale against making commitments without careful consideration, a theme echoed in wisdom literature such as Ecclesiastes 5:4-5. Secondly, Jonathan's response highlights integrity and submission, as he, despite his innocence in unknowingly breaking the vow, immediately confesses his simple act and acknowledges the death sentence pronounced by his father. His honesty and willingness to accept the perceived divine will revealed through the lots are remarkable. Thirdly, Saul's unwavering commitment to his own oath, even when it meant sacrificing his beloved son, reveals a rigid and self-righteous aspect of his character, prioritizing his word over compassion or practical wisdom. This contrasts sharply with the people's later intervention on Jonathan's behalf, demonstrating a more nuanced understanding of justice. Finally, divine revelation and consequences are central; God's initial silence signaled a problem, leading to the use of lots to uncover the transgression, emphasizing that even unwitting sin, when under a curse, can have severe consequences, though divine mercy often intercedes.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Taste (Hebrew, ṭâʻam', H4592): The verb "taste" (טָעַם, ṭâʻam) signifies a mere sampling or light consumption, not a full meal. Jonathan's action was a minimal act of refreshment, a small amount of honey (H4592, mᵉʻaṭ) taken with the end of his rod. This highlights the trivial nature of his "transgression" in contrast to the severity of the death sentence, emphasizing the disproportionate nature of Saul's oath and its consequences.
  • Honey (Hebrew, dᵉbash', H1706): The substance "honey" (דְּבַשׁ, dᵉbash) in biblical contexts often symbolizes blessing, abundance, and pleasantness (e.g., "a land flowing with milk and honey"). Here, ironically, this very symbol of life and sweetness becomes the instrument of a death sentence due to Saul's curse. This stark contrast underscores the tragic irony of the situation, where a source of life becomes a catalyst for death.
  • Die (Hebrew, mûwth', H4191): The phrase "I must die" uses a powerful and emphatic construction in Hebrew (מֹת אָמוּת, moth amut), literally meaning "dying I will die" or "surely I will die." This infinitive absolute followed by a finite verb of the same root conveys absolute certainty and inevitability. Jonathan's declaration is not a plea for mercy but a stoic, courageous acceptance of what he perceives as a divinely ordained and inescapable fate under his father's oath.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Then Saul said to Jonathan, Tell me what thou hast done.": This opening clause establishes the direct and authoritative confrontation. Saul, having identified Jonathan through the divine lot, now demands a full confession. The imperative "Tell me" conveys his kingly authority and unwavering determination to uncover the precise nature of the transgression, even from his own son. This marks a moment of profound tension, as the king's rigid adherence to his oath clashes with his paternal bond and the people's love for Jonathan.
  • "And Jonathan told him, and said, I did but taste a little honey with the end of the rod that [was] in mine hand,": Jonathan's response is immediate, honest, and unreserved. He does not deny, evade, or attempt to justify his action. His use of "but" (literally "only" or "just") emphasizes the smallness and insignificance of the act – a mere taste, not a deliberate meal, and taken with the practical tool of his rod, not with leisure. This confession underscores his integrity and innocence regarding the spirit of the law, even as he technically violated the letter of his father's oath.
  • "[and], lo, I must die.": This concluding declaration is stark and dramatically impactful. The interjection "lo" (הִנֵּה, hinnêh) draws immediate attention to the gravity of the statement, signaling a moment of revelation or profound realization. Jonathan's use of the emphatic "I must die" (מֹת אָמוּת, moth amut) signifies his full understanding and courageous acceptance of the seemingly inevitable consequence of his father's oath and the divine revelation through the lots. There is no plea, no argument, only a resigned and brave acknowledgment of his fate.

Literary Devices

The passage is rich in Irony, as Jonathan, the day's hero who secured a great victory for Israel, is condemned to death for a minor, unwitting act of refreshment, while his father, Saul, who made the rash oath, is the one enacting the judgment. This creates a powerful Contrast between Jonathan's selfless courage and integrity, and Saul's rigid, self-serving legalism. The scene also builds intense Dramatic Tension, with the fate of the beloved son hanging precariously on the father's unyielding word, leading to a climax where the audience anticipates a tragic outcome. Furthermore, Saul's unyielding commitment to his oath, even at the cost of his son, serves as Foreshadowing of his own later downfall, characterized by a similar stubbornness and self-will that would ultimately lead to his rejection by God, as seen in 1 Samuel 15.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

This pivotal moment in 1 Samuel 14:43 profoundly explores the tension between human law and divine mercy, and the far-reaching consequences of rash vows. Saul's oath, though perhaps initially well-intentioned, becomes a legalistic trap, prioritizing human pronouncements over the well-being of his people and even his own valiant son. Jonathan's innocent suffering highlights the potential for human systems of justice to become rigid and devoid of compassion, threatening to condemn the righteous. Yet, the narrative also underscores God's sovereignty, as He uses the situation to expose the flaws in Saul's leadership and ultimately orchestrates Jonathan's deliverance through the passionate intercession of the people, demonstrating that divine mercy can override human error and legalistic condemnation.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

The narrative of Jonathan's near-sacrifice offers profound lessons for contemporary life, challenging us to consider the weight of our words and commitments, particularly when they involve others or are made before God. Saul's example serves as a stark warning against making rash promises or enforcing rules with a rigid, legalistic spirit that lacks compassion or discernment. True leadership, whether in family, church, or society, requires wisdom to balance justice with mercy, understanding that the spirit of the law often transcends its letter. Jonathan's integrity in confessing his action, even when it meant facing death, provides a powerful model of honesty, courage, and submission to perceived authority. Moreover, the people's spontaneous and unified intervention on Jonathan's behalf reminds us of the vital importance of community, intercession, and speaking truth to power when an innocent life is threatened by misguided zeal. We are called to be discerning, compassionate, and ready to stand for what is right, trusting that God's hand can intervene to prevent tragic outcomes stemming from human folly.

Questions for Reflection

  • In what ways might I be prone to making "rash vows" or commitments that could inadvertently harm myself or others, or lead to unintended consequences?
  • How can I cultivate a spirit of discernment and compassion in applying rules or principles, rather than falling into rigid legalism that prioritizes the letter over the spirit?
  • What does Jonathan's immediate and honest confession, even in the face of death, teach me about integrity, courage, and taking responsibility for my actions?
  • When have I seen or experienced the power of a community's intercession to bring about a just or merciful outcome, and how might I participate in such advocacy?

FAQ

Was Jonathan truly guilty of sinning against God by eating the honey?

Answer: From a strictly legalistic perspective, Jonathan did technically violate Saul's oath, which was pronounced "before the LORD" (1 Samuel 14:24). However, Jonathan was completely unaware of the oath, having been separated from the main army during his heroic exploits. His act was one of innocent refreshment, not rebellious disobedience. The narrative seems to highlight the rashness and severity of Saul's oath more than Jonathan's culpability. The people's intervention to save Jonathan suggests a common understanding that his "transgression" was not a moral sin worthy of death, especially given his vital role in securing Israel's victory. God's initial silence when Saul inquired indicated a problem in the camp, which the lots identified as Jonathan, but this was more about revealing the consequences of the oath and exposing Saul's flawed leadership than confirming Jonathan's moral guilt in a way that warranted death.

Why did God allow the lot to fall on Jonathan if he was innocent?

Answer: The casting of lots was a divinely sanctioned method for discerning truth or God's will in ancient Israel (Proverbs 16:33). While Jonathan was morally innocent of intentional wrongdoing, he had indeed, unknowingly, broken Saul's oath. God allowed the lot to fall on Jonathan not necessarily to condemn him as a sinner, but to expose the profound flaw in Saul's leadership and the dangerous implications of his rash vow. It brought to light the conflict between Saul's rigid legalism and the true spirit of justice and mercy. This dramatic revelation served to highlight Saul's character flaws and set the stage for the people's intervention, demonstrating God's ultimate sovereignty even over human errors and legalistic systems, ultimately orchestrating Jonathan's deliverance.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The dramatic scene of Jonathan's near-sacrifice in 1 Samuel 14:43 powerfully foreshadows the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Jonathan, the innocent hero, faces a death sentence for a technical transgression he unknowingly committed, a consequence of his father's rash and legalistic vow. Similarly, Jesus, the perfect and innocent Son of God, willingly accepted the death sentence not for His own sin, but for the sins of humanity, bearing the curse of the law that we had broken (Galatians 3:13). Jonathan's stoic confession and acceptance of his fate, "lo, I must die," echoes Christ's profound submission to the Father's will, even unto death on the cross (Luke 22:42). Just as the people interceded to save Jonathan from Saul's rigid law, demonstrating a higher form of justice and mercy, so too does Christ intercede for us, delivering us from the condemnation of the law and the curse of sin, not by human intervention but by His own atoning sacrifice (Hebrews 7:25). Jonathan's life was spared by the people's love and recognition of his righteousness, but Christ's life was given to secure our eternal salvation, fulfilling the ultimate act of self-sacrificial love and triumphing over sin and death (John 10:18).

Copy as

Commentary on 1 Samuel 14 verses 36–46

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

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.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 36–46. Public domain.
Copy as
JeromeAD 420
Against the Pelagians 1.33
Jonathan tasted of a honeycomb on a rod, and his eyes were enlightened, and his life was in danger because he acted through ignorance. For Scripture testifies to the fact that he did not know that his father had given strict orders that no one was to taste any food until the victory of the Lord was accomplished. However, the Lord was so angered that the lot disclosed him hiding, and he confessed openly, saying, “I did but taste a little honey with the end of the rod, which was in my hand, and behold I must die.” And he was subsequently delivered through the intercession and prayers of the people, who said to Saul, “Shall Jonathan die, who has wrought this great salvation in Israel? This must not be. As the Lord lives, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground, for he has wrought with God this day. And the people delivered Jonathan, and he did not die.”
Maximus of TurinAD 465
SERMON 69.4
It is no light sin, as I have said, to violate the appointed fast. In order to demonstrate this briefly by examples, we read in the book of Kings [Samuel] that when Saul the king of Israel was waging war against the foreigners he proclaimed a fast for his entire army, and when all were abstaining he began to fight against the opposing forces. This is obviously a good king, who overcame his enemies not so much by arms as by devotion and who fought more by piety than with spears. When, therefore, Saul had proclaimed a day’s abstinence for all his men and his son Jonathan, unaware of the command, had tasted some honeycomb into which the tip of his staff had been dipped as the victorious army was proceeding into the midst of the enemy, suddenly such indignation was aroused that the victory was delayed and the Divinity offended. And neither was an end put to the war nor a prophetic response given to the king. From this we understand that Saul used to overcome his enemies not so much by the might of his soldiers as by the abstinence of his soldiers. And so by the sin of one person guilt is laid upon all, and by the crime of one person weakness is produced in all, for the army’s strength failed when the observance of the fast failed. But since Saul recognized the sin from the fact that the Divinity had been offended, he immediately said that Jonathan should not be pardoned but that the sin which he admitted should be atoned for by the shedding of his blood. See how religious was the behavior of Saul the king, who desired to pacify the offended Lord even by the slaying of his kin! And see what guilt attaches to the broken fast, which is only punished by the shedding of blood! And if the unwitting Jonathan is delivered over to death because he broke the fast proclaimed by his father, what would a person deserve who knowingly broke the fast proclaimed by Christ? Therefore, brothers, let us most carefully observe the fast that has been decreed for us so that we may overcome our spiritual and fleshly enemies. For we have, as you know, fleshly enemies as well. Let us fast, then, so that our army, like Saul’s, might overcome and seize them, and let us not having determined to abstain, turn away for a honeycomb. For a honeycomb is, so to speak, the pleasure and vices of the world, which, as it is written, are sweet in the throat for a time, to be sure, but in the end are more bitter than gall.
Gregory the DialogistAD 604
MORALS ON THE BOOK OF JOB 30.18
It should also be known that the vice of gluttony tempts us in five ways. For it sometimes anticipates the seasons of want, but sometimes [it] does not anticipate them but seeks for daintier food. Sometimes it looks for those things, which must be taken, to be prepared more carefully; but sometimes it agrees with both the quality of, and the season for, its food, but exceeds, in the quantity of what is to be taken, the measure of moderate refreshment. But sometimes that which it longs for is even of a baser kind, and yet it sins more fatally through the heat of unbounded desire. For Jonathan deserved in truth the sentence of death from the mouth of his father, because in taking honey he anticipated the time which had been fixed for eating.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying 1 Samuel 14:43 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

Read & Compare

Commentaries

Original Language & Research

Sermons, Hymns & Audio

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.