TRV
Study This Verse
Commentary on 1 Samuel 17 verses 31–39
David is at length presented to Saul for his champion (Sa1 17:31) and he bravely undertakes to fight the Philistine (Sa1 17:32): Let no man's heart fail because of him. It would have reflected too much upon the valour of his prince if he had said, Let not thy heart fail; therefore he speaks generally: Let no man's heart fail. A little shepherd, come but this morning from keeping sheep, has more courage than all the mighty men of Israel, and encourages them. Thus does God often send good words to his Israel, and do great things for them, by the weak and foolish things of the world. David only desires a commission from Saul to go and fight with the Philistine, but says nothing to him of the reward he had proposed, because that was not the thing he was ambitious of, but only the honour of serving God and his country: nor would he seem to question Saul's generosity. Two things David had to do with Saul: -
I. To get clear of the objection Saul made against his undertaking. "Alas!" says Saul, "thou hast a good heart to it, but art by no means an equal match for this Philistine. To engage with him is to throw away a life which may better be reserved for more agreeable services. Thou art but a youth, rash and inconsiderate, weak and unversed in arms: he is a man that has the head and hands of a man, a man of war, trained up and inured to it from his youth (Sa1 17:33), and how canst thou expect but that he will be too hard for thee?" David, as he had answered his brother's passion with meekness, so he answered Saul's fear with faith, and gives a reason of the hope which was in him that he should conquer the Philistine, to the satisfaction of Saul. We have reason to fear that Saul had no great acquaintance with nor regard to the word of God, and therefore David, in reasoning with him, fetched not his arguments and encouragements thence, how much soever he had an eye to it in his own mind. But he argues from experience; though he was but a youth, and never in the wars, yet perhaps he had done as much as the killing of Goliath came to, for he had had, by divine assistance, spirit enough to encounter and strength enough to subdue a lion once and another time a bear that robbed him of his lambs, Sa1 17:34-36. To these he compares this uncircumcised Philistine, looks upon him to be as much a ravenous beast as either of them, and therefore doubts not but to deal as easily with him; and hereby he gives Saul to understand that he was not so inexperienced in hazardous combats as he took him to be.
1.He tells his story like a man of spirit. He is not ashamed to own that he kept his father's sheep, which his brother had just now upbraided him with. So far is he from concealing it that from his employment as a shepherd he fetches the experience that now animated him. But he lets those about him know that he was no ordinary shepherd. Whatever our profession or calling is, be it ever so mean, we should labour to excel in it, and do the business of it in the best manner. When David kept sheep, (1.) He approved himself very careful and tender of his flock, though it was not his own, but his father's. He could not see a lamb in distress but he would venture his life to rescue it. This temper made him fit to be a king, to whom the lives of subjects should be dear and their blood precious (Psa 72:14), and fit to be a type of Christ, the good Shepherd, who gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them in his bosom (Isa 40:11), and who not only ventured, but laid down his life for his sheep. Thus too was David fit to be an example to ministers with the utmost care and diligence to watch for souls, that they be not a prey to the roaring lion. (2.) He approved himself very bold and brave in the defence of his flock. This was that which he was now concerned to give proof of, and better evidence could not be demanded than this: "Thy servant not only rescued the lambs, but, to revenge the injury, slew both the lion and the bear."
2.He applies his story like a man of faith. He owns (Sa1 17:37) it was the Lord that delivered him from the lion and the bear; to him he gives the praise of that great achievement, and thence he infers, He will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine. "The lion and the bear were enemies only to me and my sheep, and it was in defence of my own interest that I attacked them; but this Philistine is an enemy to God and Israel, defies the armies of the living God, and it is for their honour that I attack him." Note, (1.) Our experiences ought to be improved by us as our encouragements to trust in God and venture in the way of duty. He that has delivered does and will. (2.) By the care which common Providence takes of the inferior creatures, and the protection they are under, we may be encouraged to depend upon that special Providence which surrounds the Israel of God. He that sets bounds to the waves of the sea and the rage of wild beasts can and will restrain the wrath of wicked men. Paul seems to allude to this of David (Ti2 4:17, Ti2 4:18), I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion, and therefore, I trust, the Lord shall deliver me. And perhaps David here thought of the story of Samson, and encouraged himself with it; for his slaying a lion was a happy presage of his many illustrious victories over the Philistines in single combat. Thus David took off Saul's objection against his undertaking, and gained a commission to fight the Philistine, with which Saul gave him a hearty good wish; since he would not venture himself, he prayed for him that would: Go, and the Lord be with thee, a good word, if it was not spoken customarily, and in a formal manner, as too often it is. But David has somewhat to do likewise,
II. To get clear of the armour wherewith Saul would, by all means, have him dressed up when he went upon this great action (Sa1 17:38): He armed David with his armour, not that which he wore himself, the disproportion of his stature would not admit that, but some that he kept in his armoury, little thinking that he on whom he now put his helmet and coat of mail must shortly inherit his crown and robe. David, being not yet resolved which way to attack his enemy, girded on his sword, not knowing, as yet, but he should have occasion to make use of it; but he found the armour would but encumber him, and would be rather his burden than his defence, and therefore he desires leave of Saul to put them off again: I cannot go with these, for I have not proved them, that is, "I have never been accustomed to such accoutrements as these." We may suppose Saul's armour was both very fine and very firm, but what good would it do David if it were not fit, or if he knew not how to manage himself in it? Those that aim at things above their education and usage, and covet the attire and armour of princes, forget that that is the best for us which we are fit for and accustomed to; if we had our desire, we should wish to be in our own coat again, and should say, "We cannot go with these;" we had therefore better go without them.
We sometimes see a bad example drawn from good things. For if someone presumes to do the same things but not with the same disposition and orientation or with unlike virtue, he easily falls into the snares of deception and death on account of those very things from which others acquire the fruits of eternal life. That brave boy who was set against the most warlike giant in a contest of arms would certainly have experienced this if he had put on Saul’s manly and heavy armor, with which a person of more robust age would have laid low whole troops of the enemy. This would undoubtedly have imperiled the boy, except that with wise discretion he chose the kind of weaponry that was appropriate for his youth and armed himself against the dreadful foe not with the breastplate and shield that he saw others outfitted with but with the projectiles that he himself was able to fight with.
And Saul clothed David with his garments, etc. The people of the Jews applied to the incarnate Lord the figures of legal observations, by circumcising him on the eighth day, then carrying him to the temple on the thirty-third day, offering a sacrifice for him, teaching carnal sabbaths, and annually providing examples of the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb, and other such things, which in their time were most beneficial, and the spiritual teachers in the law of the Jewish people armed them very usefully against all the fiery darts of the wicked one, almost as the head and body of Saul.
Continue studying 1 Samuel 17:38 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 17:38 marks a pivotal moment in the narrative of David and Goliath, depicting King Saul's attempt to outfit the young shepherd David with his own heavy military armor—a brass helmet and a coat of mail—before David confronts the Philistine giant. This scene powerfully underscores the stark contrast between human reliance on conventional strength and David's unwavering, divinely-inspired trust in God's power, setting the stage for one of the most iconic demonstrations of faith and unconventional victory in biblical history.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is deeply embedded within the dramatic narrative of 1 Samuel 17, which culminates in David's legendary defeat of Goliath. Immediately preceding this, David has arrived at the battlefield and, witnessing Goliath's defiance of the armies of Israel, boldly volunteers to fight him. He recounts his past experiences of protecting his flock from lions and bears, attributing his victories to the Lord's deliverance (see 1 Samuel 17:32-37). Saul, though impressed by David's courage, still operates within the conventional military paradigm, hence his offering of armor in verse 38. This act is crucial as it directly precedes David's rejection of the armor in 1 Samuel 17:39, a decision that highlights David's unique faith and sets the stage for a victory achieved not by human might, but by divine intervention. The narrative tension between human strategy and divine enablement is palpable here.
Historical & Cultural Context: In ancient Near Eastern warfare, personal armor was indispensable for protection, particularly for elite warriors and kings. Such armor, often crafted from bronze or iron, comprised components like helmets, breastplates (coats of mail), greaves, and shields, designed to withstand the brutal realities of close combat. King Saul, as the monarch, would have possessed a formidable and likely custom-fitted set of armor, representing the pinnacle of military protection available at the time. The act of a king lending his personal armor was a significant gesture, symbolizing a transfer of honor, authority, and a profound desire to ensure the wearer's protection. However, this armor was incredibly heavy and restrictive, designed for seasoned warriors who had trained extensively to fight within its confines. For David, a young shepherd boy unaccustomed to such gear, Saul's armor would have been an immense burden, hindering his agility and natural movements rather than providing effective protection against a giant like Goliath, who himself was heavily armored and relied on brute force.
Key Themes: The scene in 1 Samuel 17:38 profoundly contributes to several overarching themes within the book of 1 Samuel and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it vividly illustrates the theme of human strength versus divine provision. Saul's armor symbolizes the world's reliance on physical might, conventional military strategy, and human ingenuity. These are presented as ultimately insufficient when God intends to work in a supernatural way. Secondly, the verse highlights Saul's well-intentioned but limited understanding of God's ways. Despite his concern for David, Saul's perspective is confined to human logic and military standards, failing to grasp the spiritual dimension of the conflict and the unique, unconventional way God intended to secure victory. This stands in stark contrast to David's profound discernment and trust in God's unconventional approach, foreshadowing a triumph achieved not through human weaponry but through divine power, a principle echoed in the prophetic declaration, "Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,' says the LORD of hosts".
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The narrative in 1 Samuel 17:38 masterfully employs several potent literary devices that deepen its theological impact. Symbolism is paramount, with Saul's armor serving as a powerful symbol of human reliance, conventional warfare, and the inherent limitations of worldly wisdom. It represents the "flesh" and its attempts to achieve victory through its own strength and established methods, standing in stark contrast to the spiritual approach David will soon embody. The scene also utilizes foreshadowing, subtly hinting at the unconventional nature of the impending victory. The very act of attempting to fit David with armor that is clearly ill-suited for him foreshadows his rejection of it and his eventual triumph through seemingly inadequate means. This sets up a dramatic contrast between the heavily armed Goliath and the unarmored David, and more broadly, between human might and divine power, a central theme not only of this chapter but of the entire book of 1 Samuel, where God often works through the weak and despised to accomplish His purposes.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
1 Samuel 17:38 stands as a profound theological statement on the nature of spiritual warfare and God's chosen methods for victory. It powerfully illustrates that human wisdom, conventional strength, and the most formidable material resources are often inadequate—and sometimes even counterproductive—when God intends to work through unconventional means to display His glory. Saul's well-intentioned act represents the world's best efforts, which, while logical from a human perspective, fall short of discerning God's unique and often surprising plan. David's subsequent rejection of the armor (in 1 Samuel 17:39) is not an act of disrespect but an act of profound spiritual discernment, recognizing that the battle was ultimately the Lord's, and His chosen instrument would not rely on human might. This moment teaches us to trust in God's power and methods, even when they defy human logic or conventional wisdom, understanding that true victory stems from divine enablement, not human equipment.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The scene in 1 Samuel 17:38 prompts us to examine our own lives and the "armor" we instinctively reach for when confronting daunting challenges. Often, our first inclination is to rely on our accumulated strengths, conventional wisdom, or the resources the world deems essential for success. We might seek more education, accumulate greater wealth, strive for higher positions, or cultivate influential networks, believing these are the necessary "armor" for our battles. However, this verse, especially when read in conjunction with David's subsequent actions, challenges us to ask if our chosen "armor" truly fits God's unique call on our lives. What might seem logical, impressive, or powerful by human standards may, in fact, hinder us from moving in God's specific and often unconventional plan. True victory, particularly in spiritual battles, comes not from adopting the world's best practices, but from discerning and aligning with God's methods, trusting in His strength rather than our own preparedness or external resources. This requires humility, spiritual discernment, and a willingness to step out in faith, even when it means rejecting what appears to be the most sensible or secure path.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did King Saul offer his own armor to David?
Answer: King Saul offered his armor to David primarily out of a conventional military mindset and a genuine desire to protect the young man. From a human perspective, David, a shepherd boy, was completely unprepared to face a heavily armed giant like Goliath in single combat. Saul, as a seasoned warrior and king, understood the necessity of proper equipment for battle. His armor was likely the best available, providing maximum protection and representing the pinnacle of military readiness. By offering it, Saul was attempting to give David the best possible chance of survival and victory according to human logic and military standards. It was a well-intentioned act, reflecting his concern, even if it ultimately proved to be misaligned with God's unique plan for David's victory, as seen in 1 Samuel 17:39.
Was Saul's armor generally effective in ancient warfare?
Answer: Yes, Saul's armor, consisting of a helmet of brass and a coat of mail, would have been highly effective and standard protective gear for a king or elite warrior in ancient warfare. Such armor was designed to withstand blows from swords, spears, and arrows, providing crucial protection to the head and torso. The use of bronze (brass) indicates durable and robust construction, capable of deflecting significant force. However, its effectiveness was contingent on the wearer's training, physical strength, and familiarity with its considerable weight and movement restrictions. For an untrained individual like David, its very effectiveness as protection would have made it cumbersome and impractical, hindering his agility and natural fighting style, which relied on speed and precision.
What is the theological significance of David attempting to wear Saul's armor before rejecting it?
Answer: David's attempt to wear Saul's armor before rejecting it is highly significant. It demonstrates that David was not being rebellious or dismissive of Saul's authority or well-meaning intentions. He was willing to try the conventional approach. However, his quick realization that "he had not proved them" (1 Samuel 17:39) signifies a crucial moment of spiritual discernment. Theologically, it highlights that God's battles are not fought with human strength or conventional means; rather, they are won by divine power. David understood that the victory would be God's, not his own, and therefore, human-designed protection was not only unnecessary but a potential hindrance to the divine method. It underscores the profound biblical theme that God often chooses the weak, the foolish, and the unconventional to confound the strong and wise, ensuring that all glory belongs to Him alone, as powerfully echoed in 1 Corinthians 1:27-29.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The scene of Saul arming David with his armor, and David's subsequent rejection of it, serves as a powerful and poignant foreshadowing of the Christ-centered narrative of salvation. Just as David, the shepherd king-to-be, refused to fight Goliath with the world's conventional might and cumbersome armor, so too did Jesus, the ultimate King and Good Shepherd, refuse to conquer sin and death through worldly power, political influence, or conventional military means. Jesus did not come as an earthly conqueror clad in the "armor" of human armies or earthly prestige; rather, He came in profound humility, clothed in human flesh, and armed with perfect obedience to His Father's will. His ultimate "victory" was not achieved through brute force or strategic might, but through apparent weakness—the self-sacrificial death on the cross, followed by the glorious resurrection, as beautifully described in Philippians 2:7-8. The world's "armor" of power, status, and self-preservation would have been entirely unfitting for the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Instead, Jesus's triumph over sin, death, and the devil was secured through the "armor" of righteousness, faith, and the gospel of peace, which He embodies and graciously offers to all who believe (Ephesians 6:10-17). David's reliance on God's unconventional power, rather than Saul's heavy armor, points directly to Christ's ultimate victory, which was secured not by human might or power, but by the Spirit of God, eternally fulfilling the divine truth that God's strength is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9).