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.
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.”
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.
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.
Continue studying 1 Samuel 14:44 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 14:44 captures the dramatic climax of a confrontation where King Saul, driven by a rash and ill-conceived oath, declares his unyielding intention to execute his own son, Jonathan. This pronouncement follows Jonathan's unwitting violation of Saul's decree, which had forbidden the Israelite army from eating until victory over the Philistines was secured. The verse encapsulates Saul's rigid adherence to a flawed vow, his misguided zeal, and the imminent peril faced by the innocent Jonathan, setting the stage for a crucial intervention by the people.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse serves as the intense culmination of a narrative arc that dominates much of 1 Samuel 14. The chapter opens with Jonathan's audacious, faith-filled strike against a Philistine garrison, which God blesses with a significant victory for Israel. However, Saul's impulsive oath, issued in 1 Samuel 14:24, forbids his soldiers from eating, inadvertently weakening them and impeding the full pursuit of the fleeing Philistines. Jonathan, unaware of this decree, tastes honey, which revitalizes him. When God does not respond to Saul's inquiry about further pursuit, lots are cast to identify the transgressor, leading directly to Jonathan's exposure and Saul's grim pronouncement in verse 44. The immediate aftermath, described in 1 Samuel 14:45, depicts the people's intervention to save Jonathan, highlighting their loyalty and wisdom in stark contrast to Saul's flawed leadership.
Historical & Cultural Context: Oaths in ancient Israel were profoundly serious and considered binding before God, as evidenced in passages like Numbers 30:2 and Deuteronomy 23:21-23. A king's oath carried immense weight and was often perceived as a reflection of divine will or a means to secure divine favor. Saul's oath was likely an attempt to emulate a form of herem (devotion to destruction) or a solemn vow of abstinence for divine blessing in battle. The casting of lots, often involving the Urim and Thummim, was a legitimate, divinely sanctioned method of discerning God's will, as described earlier in 1 Samuel 14:41-42. The cultural expectation was that such a divine revelation, especially concerning a royal oath, would be strictly enforced, even if the outcome was tragic, underscoring the immense pressure on Saul to maintain his word.
Key Themes: This verse powerfully illustrates several crucial themes within the book of Samuel and the broader biblical narrative. It highlights the peril of rash vows, demonstrating how human attempts to manipulate divine favor through ill-considered oaths can lead to disastrous consequences, a danger also warned against in Ecclesiastes 5:4-6. It underscores Saul's flawed leadership, revealing his impulsiveness, insecurity, and legalistic rigidity, which stands in sharp contrast to Jonathan's faith and the people's discernment. This event is a significant marker in the narrative of Saul's decline, showcasing his increasing alienation from God's true will and his people, foreshadowing his eventual rejection as king, a theme that becomes particularly prominent in 1 Samuel 15. Finally, it subtly introduces the theme of divine grace and human intervention, as the people's righteous protest ultimately prevents a tragic injustice, demonstrating that God's purposes are not always bound by human legalism.
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The verse is rich in Dramatic Irony, as Saul, in his misguided zeal to honor God and enforce his oath, is about to execute the very person (Jonathan) through whom God has just granted a great victory for Israel. The audience knows Jonathan's innocence, valor, and God's blessing upon him, making Saul's rigid adherence to his vow tragically ironic and revealing his spiritual blindness. There is also a strong element of Foreshadowing present; Saul's inability to discern God's true will, his rigid legalism, and his willingness to sacrifice his own son for a flawed oath, all point to his eventual rejection as king and the transfer of the kingdom to David, who consistently demonstrates a heart more aligned with God's mercy and justice. The entire scene functions as a powerful Cautionary Tale, illustrating the dangers of leadership untempered by wisdom, discernment, and compassion, and the destructive power of human vows when they contradict divine principles.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
The theological implications of 1 Samuel 14:44 are profound, illustrating the tension between human law and divine grace, and the dangers of legalism over mercy. Saul's actions demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of God's character, prioritizing the letter of his own law (his oath) over the spirit of justice, the value of human life, and the clear evidence of God's blessing on Jonathan. This episode serves as a powerful reminder that zeal for God, when untempered by wisdom and compassion, can lead to grave injustice and opposition to God's true will. It highlights the importance of discerning God's heart, which often favors mercy and life, especially when human rules clash with divine principles of righteousness and love. The people's intervention in the subsequent verse, where they save Jonathan (1 Samuel 14:45), underscores the idea that God can work through the collective wisdom and moral conscience of a community to prevent a tragic outcome, even when leadership fails.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
1 Samuel 14:44 challenges us to examine the nature of our commitments and the principles that govern our decisions, especially in positions of authority. Saul's rigid adherence to a self-imposed vow, even at the cost of innocent life and the well-being of his kingdom, serves as a stark warning against legalism and a lack of discernment. It reminds us that true faithfulness to God is not found in blind adherence to rules, but in a heart that seeks justice, loves mercy, and walks humbly with Him. We are called to exercise wisdom, compassion, and discernment, particularly when our actions impact others. This narrative also encourages us to speak up against injustice, as the people did for Jonathan, demonstrating that God can use the collective voice of His people to uphold righteousness and prevent harm. It is a call to evaluate whether our "zeal" is truly for God's glory or for our own reputation, control, or a misguided sense of duty.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why was Saul so determined to kill Jonathan, even after discovering his innocence?
Answer: Saul's determination stemmed primarily from his rash oath, which he believed was divinely binding and necessary to secure God's favor and a decisive victory. In ancient Israelite culture, oaths were extremely serious, and breaking one, especially a king's oath, was seen as a grave offense against God, potentially bringing divine wrath upon the entire nation. Saul, despite Jonathan's innocence and the positive outcome of his actions, felt compelled to uphold the letter of his vow to maintain his perceived religious integrity and authority as king. His fear of God's judgment for a broken oath, combined with his own insecurity and rigid, legalistic mindset, outweighed his paternal affection and the clear evidence of Jonathan's valor and God's blessing upon him. This rigid adherence to his own word, even when it contradicted God's apparent work through Jonathan, highlights Saul's flawed character and his declining spiritual state, as seen throughout 1 Samuel.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
1 Samuel 14:44, with its depiction of an innocent son condemned by a misguided father's oath, finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jonathan, though innocent of malicious intent, was condemned to death by a human king's flawed decree, a death he did not deserve. This foreshadows the ultimate innocent Son, Jesus, who was condemned to death not by a misguided human oath, but by the just demands of God's holy law against humanity's sin, as universally declared in Romans 3:23. Unlike Jonathan, who was saved by the intervention of the people, Jesus willingly laid down His life, becoming the true Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, thereby fulfilling the righteous requirements of God's justice on our behalf. His death was not a tragedy averted, but a divine plan accomplished, as He became the ultimate sacrifice, the propitiation for our sins. Through His perfect obedience and sacrificial death, Jesus delivers us from the curse of the law and the condemnation we justly deserve, offering us life and salvation, a far greater and eternal rescue than Jonathan's, as powerfully proclaimed in Galatians 3:13.