1 Samuel 20:27

KJV

And it came to pass on the morrow, [which was] the second [day] of the month, that David's place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day?

KJV (with Strong's)

And it came to pass on the morrow {H4283}, which was the second {H8145} day of the month {H2320}, that David's {H1732} place {H4725} was empty {H6485}: and Saul {H7586} said {H559} unto Jonathan {H3083} his son {H1121}, Wherefore cometh {H935} not the son {H1121} of Jesse {H3448} to meat {H3899}, neither yesterday {H8543}, nor to day {H3117}?

Complete Jewish Bible

The day after Rosh-Hodesh, the second day, David's place was empty; and Sha'ul said to Y'honatan his son, "Why hasn't Yishai's son come to the meal either yesterday or today?"

Berean Standard Bible

But on the day after the New Moon, the second day, David’s place was still empty, and Saul asked his son Jonathan, “Why hasn’t the son of Jesse come to the meal either yesterday or today?”

American Standard Version

And it came to pass on the morrow after the new moon, which was the second day, that David’s place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to-day?

Commentary

### SUMMARY
1 Samuel 20:27 marks a critical juncture in the deteriorating relationship between King Saul and David, exposing Saul's escalating paranoia and murderous intent. David's calculated absence from the royal feast for a second consecutive day removes any lingering doubt for Saul, confirming his suspicions and igniting a furious confrontation with his son, Jonathan, thereby setting the stage for David's ultimate flight and the deepening chasm between the king and his anointed successor.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** This verse is situated within a highly dramatic and suspenseful narrative arc in 1 Samuel, specifically detailing the final, decisive break between Saul and David. Chapters 18-19 establish Saul's intense jealousy and repeated attempts on David's life, culminating in David's flight from the court. Chapter 20 then describes the poignant covenant between David and Jonathan, where they devise a plan to ascertain Saul's true intentions toward David. Jonathan's initial excuse for David's absence on the first day of the New Moon feast (1 Samuel 20:6) temporarily defers Saul's wrath. However, David's continued absence on the second day, as highlighted in this verse, exposes the ruse and directly leads to Saul's violent outburst against Jonathan in the subsequent verses ([1 Samuel 20:30-34](/1_samuel/20-30 "1 Samuel 20:30-34 - Saul's Rage Against Jonathan")). This moment is pivotal, confirming that David can no longer safely remain in Saul's presence and must become a fugitive.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** The "New Moon" (Hebrew: *Rosh Chodesh*) was a significant monthly religious festival in ancient Israel, marked by special sacrifices and communal feasting (Numbers 28:11-15; [1 Samuel 20:5](/1_samuel/20-5 "1 Samuel 20:5 - David's Absence from the Feast")). It was customary for prominent figures, especially those connected to the royal family, to attend such gatherings at the king's table. David, as the king's son-in-law, a national hero, and a high-ranking military commander, would have been expected to be present. His absence, particularly on the second day, would have been highly conspicuous and culturally disrespectful, providing Saul with a public pretext for his anger. The setting of a communal meal, often a symbol of fellowship and peace, becomes a stage for the revelation of deep-seated animosity and betrayal, a stark contrast to the expected harmony.
* **Key Themes:** This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes within 1 Samuel. Firstly, it underscores **Saul's escalating hostility and paranoia**, revealing his obsession with eliminating David, whom he perceives as a threat to his throne. His question about David's absence is not one of concern but of deeply rooted suspicion and anger, reflecting the spiritual decline detailed in earlier chapters, such as when an evil spirit tormented him ([1 Samuel 16:14](/1_samuel/16-14 "1 Samuel 16:14 - Saul Tormented by an Evil Spirit")). Secondly, it highlights **David's prudence and reliance on divine guidance**, as his strategic absence, orchestrated with Jonathan, demonstrates his wisdom in discerning danger and his trust in God's protection. This aligns with the broader narrative of God preserving His chosen king. Thirdly, the verse implicitly sets the stage for **Jonathan's unwavering loyalty and covenant faithfulness** to David, emphasizing a friendship that transcends familial obligations and political pressures, a theme beautifully articulated in their covenant vows ([1 Samuel 20:16-17](/1_samuel/20-16 "1 Samuel 20:16-17 - Jonathan's Covenant with David")). Finally, it subtly points to **divine providence**, as David's successful evasion of Saul's trap is ultimately part of God's sovereign plan to protect His anointed future king and ensure the fulfillment of His promises, despite human treachery.

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **"empty" (Hebrew, _paqad'_):** While literally meaning "empty" or "missing," the Hebrew verb *paqad* carries a broader semantic range, often implying "to visit," "to inspect," "to muster," or "to miss." In this context, "David's place was empty" means not merely that he was absent, but that his absence was noted, observed, and significant. It implies a deliberate, conspicuous vacancy that could not be overlooked, drawing attention to his non-attendance and prompting Saul's inquiry.
* **"son of Jesse" (Hebrew, _ben Yishai'_):** Saul's use of this phrase to refer to David is highly significant and deeply derogatory. By refusing to use David's name or acknowledge his status as a national hero, the king's son-in-law, or a commander, Saul deliberately reduces him to a common, unremarkable lineage. This is a contemptuous expression of disdain, a public stripping of David's honor and a refusal to recognize his God-given anointing and prominence. It reveals the depth of Saul's bitterness and his desire to diminish David in the eyes of the court.
* **"to meat" (archaic English):** This is an archaic English expression from the King James Version, simply meaning "to eat" or "to dine." It refers to the act of partaking in a meal, specifically the royal feast. The phrase underscores the social and ceremonial importance of the occasion from which David was absent.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And it came to pass on the morrow, [which was] the second [day] of the month,"**: This opening clause establishes the precise timing of the event. It signifies the continuation of the New Moon festival, specifically on its second day. The "morrow" indicates the day after the initial absence was noted, building suspense and highlighting David's continued, deliberate non-attendance.
* **"that David's place was empty:"**: This is the central observation of the verse. David's seat at the royal table, which he was expected to occupy, remained conspicuously vacant. This absence was not accidental or easily explained away, especially after Jonathan's fabricated excuse the previous day. It serves as a visual confirmation of David's strategic withdrawal and a clear signal to Saul.
* **"and Saul said unto Jonathan his son,"**: This identifies the speaker and the direct recipient of his inquiry. Saul's addressing Jonathan directly underscores the king's suspicion that Jonathan is involved or knows the truth about David's whereabouts, setting the stage for the dramatic confrontation between father and son.
* **"Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day?"**: This is Saul's loaded question, revealing his simmering anger and suspicion. The phrase "son of Jesse" is a deliberate insult, stripping David of his titles and reducing him to his humble origins. The question itself is rhetorical, designed not for information but to express Saul's indignation and to challenge Jonathan, implying that David's absence is a deliberate affront or a sign of conspiracy. The emphasis on "neither yesterday, nor to day" highlights the sustained nature of David's absence, making it undeniable and inexcusable in Saul's eyes.

#### Literary Devices
The verse employs several key **Literary Devices**. **Foreshadowing** is prominent, as Saul's question and the conspicuous absence of David clearly presage the violent outburst that follows, confirming the king's murderous intent and the irreversible break between him and David. The scene is imbued with **Dramatic Irony**, as the audience is privy to the secret pact between David and Jonathan (1 Samuel 20:1-23), understanding the true reason for David's absence, while Saul remains ignorant of the full extent of their plan, only sensing betrayal. Saul's use of "son of Jesse" is a powerful example of **Derogatory Epithet** or **Insult**, serving as a means of **Characterization**, revealing his deep-seated contempt, jealousy, and the extent of his psychological deterioration. The contrast between the expected communal harmony of a feast and the underlying tension and impending violence creates a sense of **Pathos** and highlights the tragic unraveling of Saul's reign.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
This pivotal moment in 1 Samuel 20:27 profoundly illustrates the clash between human treachery and divine protection. Saul's escalating rage and his contemptuous reference to David as "the son of Jesse" reveal the depth of his spiritual decline and his futile attempts to thwart God's sovereign plan. Yet, David's strategic absence, orchestrated through Jonathan's unwavering loyalty, serves as a testament to God's faithfulness in preserving His anointed one, even amidst intense persecution. It underscores the biblical principle that while human wickedness may plot destruction, the Lord's purposes will ultimately prevail, safeguarding those He has chosen for His service. This narrative reminds believers that discernment and reliance on faithful friends can be instruments of God's providence in times of danger.

* [Psalm 37:32-33](/psalms/37-32 "Psalm 37:32-33 - The Wicked Watch the Righteous")
* [Proverbs 27:6](/proverbs/27-6 "Proverbs 27:6 - Wounds from a Friend")
* [Matthew 10:23](/matthew/10-23 "Matthew 10:23 - Fleeing Persecution")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
1 Samuel 20:27 serves as a potent reminder of the importance of spiritual discernment and the courage to act upon it, even when it means deviating from expectations or enduring misunderstanding. David's decision to absent himself, guided by Jonathan's intelligence and their shared trust, illustrates the wisdom of avoiding unnecessary confrontation when danger is clear. In our own lives, this might mean setting boundaries, withdrawing from toxic relationships, or discerning when to speak and when to remain silent in the face of hostility. Furthermore, the unwavering loyalty of Jonathan, even at great personal cost, challenges us to cultivate and cherish friendships rooted in integrity and mutual commitment, friendships that reflect God's covenant faithfulness. Ultimately, this passage encourages us to trust in God's sovereign protection, knowing that He can use various means—including the discernment of His servants and the loyalty of true friends—to preserve us through trials and fulfill His purposes in our lives.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **How do you discern when to confront a difficult situation and when to strategically withdraw, as David did?**
* **What qualities do you value most in a loyal friend, and how can you cultivate such friendships in your own life?**
* **In what areas of your life do you need to trust more deeply in God's protective hand, even when facing opposition or uncertainty?**
* **How might Saul's reaction to David's absence reflect the dangers of unchecked jealousy and paranoia in leadership?**

### FAQ
**What was the significance of David's absence on the "second day of the month"?**

Answer: The "month" refers to the New Moon festival, a significant religious and social celebration in ancient Israel, typically lasting two days. David's absence on the first day was explained by Jonathan as a visit to Bethlehem for a family sacrifice ([1 Samuel 20:6](/1_samuel/20-6 "1 Samuel 20:6 - Jonathan's Excuse for David")). However, his continued absence on the second day made it impossible to maintain the deception. It signaled to Saul that David's non-attendance was deliberate and not merely a temporary commitment, confirming Saul's suspicions of a deeper conspiracy or defiance, and ultimately provoking his wrath.

**Why did Saul refer to David as "the son of Jesse" instead of by his name or title?**

Answer: Saul's use of "the son of Jesse" was a deliberate and deeply insulting derogatory epithet. By refusing to use David's name or acknowledge his status as a national hero, the king's son-in-law, or a commander, Saul was attempting to strip David of his honor, reduce him to his humble, common origins, and publicly express his profound contempt and disdain. It was a verbal act of dehumanization, reflecting the depth of Saul's jealousy and his refusal to recognize David's God-given prominence and anointing, which he perceived as a threat to his own throne ([1 Samuel 18:8-9](/1_samuel/18-8 "1 Samuel 18:8-9 - Saul's Jealousy of David")).

**What does this verse reveal about Saul's character?**

Answer: This verse is highly revealing of Saul's character in his spiritual decline. His question, filled with suspicion and contempt, demonstrates his escalating paranoia, his deep-seated jealousy of David, and his increasing instability. He is no longer concerned with justice or the welfare of his kingdom but consumed by a personal vendetta. His immediate assumption of David's guilt and his public display of anger, even before hearing an explanation, show a king who has lost his capacity for rational judgment and is driven by uncontrolled malice, foreshadowing his violent outburst against Jonathan in the verses that follow ([1 Samuel 20:30](/1_samuel/20-30 "1 Samuel 20:30 - Saul's Rage at Jonathan")).

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The dramatic tension in 1 Samuel 20:27, where David, God's anointed but persecuted king, is forced to absent himself from the royal table due to the murderous intent of the reigning monarch, powerfully foreshadows the experience of Jesus Christ. Like David, Jesus was God's chosen King, yet He was rejected and persecuted by the very leaders of His own people (John 1:11). The hostility Saul harbored against David finds its ultimate expression in the unjust hatred directed at Christ, who continually faced plots against His life (John 7:1, [John 8:59](/john/8-59 "John 8:59 - Jesus Escapes")). Just as David's life was preserved through divine providence and the loyalty of Jonathan, so too was Christ's life protected until His appointed time, and He was sustained by the Father's will and the devotion of His true disciples. Ultimately, David's flight from Saul's table points to Christ, the true [Lamb of God](/john/1-29 "John 1:29 - Jesus, the Lamb of God"), who willingly absented Himself from the glory of heaven to come to earth, not to avoid a feast, but to become the ultimate sacrifice. His "absence" from the world through death was a temporary one, leading to His glorious resurrection and ascension, where He now sits at the right hand of God, awaiting the day when all His enemies will be made a footstool for His feet ([Hebrews 10:12-13](/hebrews/10-12 "Hebrews 10:12-13 - Christ's Perfect Sacrifice")). The empty seat at Saul's table for David prefigures the empty tomb of Christ, signifying not defeat, but ultimate victory and the establishment of an eternal kingdom where the true King reigns forever.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.

Cross-References

1 Samuel 22:13

And Saul said unto him, Why have ye conspired against me, thou and the son of Jesse, in that thou hast given him bread, and a sword, and hast enquired of God for him, that he should rise against me, to lie in wait, as at this day?

1 Samuel 22:14

Then Ahimelech answered the king, and said, And who [is so] faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son in law, and goeth at thy bidding, and is honourable in thine house?

Matthew 13:55

Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

1 Samuel 19:9

And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with [his] hand.

1 Samuel 19:10

And Saul sought to smite David even to the wall with the javelin; but he slipped away out of Saul's presence, and he smote the javelin into the wall: and David fled, and escaped that night.

1 Samuel 22:7

Then Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, Hear now, ye Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards, [and] make you all captains of thousands, and captains of hundreds;

1 Samuel 22:9

Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech the son of Ahitub.