TRV
Translation
King James Version
So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no meat the second day of the month: for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
Complete Jewish Bible
Y'honatan got up from the table in a fury, and he ate no food the second day of the month, both because he was upset over David and because his father had put him to shame.
Berean Standard Bible
Jonathan got up from the table in fierce anger and did not eat any food that second day of the month, for he was grieved by his father’s shameful treatment of David.
American Standard Version
So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no food the second day of the month; for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
World English Bible Messianic
So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and ate no food the second day of the month; for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
Geneva Bible (1599)
So Ionathan arose from the table in a great anger, and did eate no meate the seconde day of the moneth: for he was sorie for Dauid, and because his father had reuiled him.
Young's Literal Translation
And Jonathan riseth from the table in the heat of anger, and hath not eaten food on the second day of the new moon, for he hath been grieved for David, for his father put him to shame.
Study This Verse
Commentary on 1 Samuel 20 verses 24–34
24 ¶ So David hid himself in the field: and when the new moon was come, the king sat him down to eat meat.
25 And the king sat upon his seat, as at other times, even upon a seat by the wall: and Jonathan arose, and Abner sat by Saul's side, and David's place was empty.
26 Nevertheless Saul spake not any thing that day: for he thought, Something hath befallen him, he is not clean; surely he is not clean.
27 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?
28 And Jonathan answered Saul, David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem:
29 And he said, Let me go, I pray thee; for our family hath a sacrifice in the city; and my brother, he hath commanded me to be there: and now, if I have found favour in thine eyes, let me get away, I pray thee, and see my brethren. Therefore he cometh not unto the king's table.
30 Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?
31 For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom. Wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die.
32 And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, Wherefore shall he be slain? what hath he done?
33 And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him: whereby Jonathan knew that it was determined of his father to slay David.
34 So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no meat the second day of the month: for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him shame.
Jonathan is here effectually convinced of that which he was so loth to believe, that his father had an implacable enmity to David, and would certainly be the death of him if it were in his power; and he had like to have paid very dearly himself for the conviction.
I. David is missed from the feast on the first day, but nothing is said of him. The king sat upon his seat, to feast upon the peace-offerings as at other times (Sa1 20:25), and yet had his heart as full of envy and malice against David as it could hold. He should first have been reconciled to him, and then have come and offered his gift; but, instead of that, he hoped, at this feast, to drink the blood of David. What an abomination was that sacrifice which was brought with such a wicked mind as this! Pro 21:27. When the king came to take his seat Jonathan arose, in reverence to him both as a father and as his sovereign; every one knew his place, but David's was empty. It did not use to be so. None more content than he in attending holy duties; nor had he been absent now but that he must have come at the peril of his life; self-preservation obliged him to withdraw. In imminent peril present opportunities may be waived, nay, we ought not to throw ourselves into the mouth of danger. Christ himself absconded often, till he knew that his hour had come. But that day Saul took no notice that he missed David, but said within himself, "Surely he is not clean, Sa1 20:26. Some ceremonial pollution has befallen him, which forbids him to eat of the holy things till he has washed his clothes, and bathed his flesh in water, and been unclean until the evening." Saul knew what conscience David made of the law, and that he would rather keep away from the holy feast than come in his uncleanness. Blessed be God, no uncleanness is now a restraint upon us, but what we may by faith and repentance be washed from in the fountain opened, Psa 26:6.
II. He is enquired for the second day, Sa1 20:27. Saul asked Jonathan, who he knew was his confidant, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat? He was his own son by marriage, but he calls him in disdain, the son of Jesse. He asks for him as if he were not pleased that he should be absent from a religious feast; and so it should be example to masters of families to see to it that those under their charge be not absent from the worship of God, either in public or in the family. It is a bad thing for us, except in case of necessity, to omit an opportunity of statedly attending on God in solemn ordinances. Thomas lost a sight of Christ by being once absent from a meeting of the disciples. But that which displeased Saul was that hereby he missed the opportunity he expected of doing David a mischief.
III. Jonathan makes his excuse, Sa1 20:28, Sa1 20:29. 1. That he was absent upon a good occasion, keeping the feast in another place, though not here, sent for by his elder brother, who was now more respectful to him than he had been (Sa1 17:28), and that he had gone to pay his respects to his relations, for the keeping up of brotherly love; and no master would deny a servant liberty to do that in due time. He pleads, 2. That he did not go without leave humbly asked and obtained from Jonathan, who, as his superior officer, was proper to be applied to for it. Thus he represents David as not wanting in any instance of respect and duty to the government.
IV. Saul hereupon breaks out into a most extravagant passion, and rages like a lion disappointed of his prey. David was out of his reach, but he falls upon Jonathan for his sake (Sa1 20:30, Sa1 20:31), gives him base language, not fit for a gentleman, a prince, to give to any man, especially his own son, heir apparent to his crown, a son that served him, the greatest stay and ornament of his family, before a great deal of company, at a feast, when all should be in good humour, at a sacred feast, by which all irregular passions should be mortified and subdued; yet he does in effect call him, 1. A bastard: Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman; that is, according to the foolish filthy language of men's brutish passion now a day, "Thou son of a whore." He tells him he was born to the confusion of his mother, that is, he had given the world cause to suspect that he was not the legitimate son of Saul, because he loved him whom Saul hated and supported him who would be the destruction of their family. 2. A traitor: Thou son of a perverse rebellion (so the word is), that is, "thou perverse rebel." At other times he reckoned no counsellor or commander that he had more trusty and well-beloved than Jonathan; yet now in this passion he represents him as dangerous to his crown and life. 3. A fool: Thou hast chosen the son of Jesse for thy friend to thy own confusion, for while he lives thou shalt never be established. Jonathan indeed did wisely and well for himself and family to secure an interest in David, whom Heaven had destined to the throne, yet, for this, he is branded as most impolitic. It is good taking God's people for our people and going with those that have him with them. It will prove to our advantage at last, however for the present it may be thought a disparagement, and a prejudice to our secular interest. It is probable Saul knew that David was anointed to the kingdom by the same hand that anointed him, and then not Jonathan, but himself, was the fool, to think to defeat the counsels of God. Yet nothing will serve him but David must die, and Jonathan must fetch him to execution. See how ill Saul's passion looks, and let it warn us against the indulgence of any thing like it in ourselves. Anger is madness, and he that hates his brother is a murderer.
V. Jonathan is sorely grieved and put into disorder by his father's barbarous passion, and the more because he had hoped better things, Sa1 20:2. He was troubled for his father, that he should be such a brute, troubled for his friend, whom he knew to be a friend of God, that he should be so basely abused; he was grieved for David (Sa1 20:34), and troubled for himself too, because his father had done him shame, and, though most unjustly, yet he must submit to it. One would pity Jonathan to see how he was put, 1. Into the peril of sin. Much ado that wise and good man had to keep his temper, upon such a provocation as this. His father's reflections upon himself made no return to; it becomes inferiors to bear with meekness and silence the contempts put upon them in wrath and passion. When thou art the anvil lie thou still. But his dooming David to die he could not bear: to that he replied with some heat (Sa1 20:32), Wherefore shall he be slain? What has he done? Generous spirits can much more easily bear to be abused themselves than to hear their friends abused. 2. Into the peril of death. Saul was now so outrageous that he threw his javelin at Jonathan, Sa1 20:33. He seemed to be in great care (Sa1 20:31) than Jonathan should be established in his kingdom, and yet now he himself aims at his life. What fools, what savage beasts and worse does anger make men! How necessary it is to put a hook in its nose and a bridle in its jaws! Jonathan was fully satisfied that evil was determined against David, which put him out of frame exceedingly: he rose from table, thinking it high time when his life was struck at, and would eat no meat, for they were not to eat of the holy things in their mourning. All the guests, we may suppose, were discomposed, and the mirth of the feast was spoiled. He that is cruel troubles his own flesh, Pro 11:17.
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 24–34. Public domain.
Copy as
Ambrose of MilanAD 397
On the Duties of the Clergy 3.21.124
For that commendable friendship which maintains virtue is to be preferred most certainly to wealth or honors or power. It is not apt to be preferred to virtue indeed, but to follow after it. So it was with Jonathan, who for his affection’s sake avoided neither his father’s displeasure nor the danger to his own safety.
Ambrose of MilanAD 397
On the Duties of the Clergy 2.7.36
Who would not have loved him [David], when they saw how dear he was to his friends? For as he truly loved his friends, so he thought that he was loved as much in return by his own friends. No, parents put him even before their own children, and children loved him more than their parents. Therefore Saul was very angry and strove to strike Jonathan his son with a spear because he thought that David’s friendship held a higher place in his esteem than either filial piety or a father’s authority.
John ChrysostomAD 407
HOMILIES ON 1 CORINTHIANS 33.2
For love “does nothing unseemly,” but as it were with certain golden wings covers up all the offenses of the beloved. Thus also Jonathan loved David and heard the scorn of his father as one … “who has nothing of a man, but lives to the shame of himself and the mother who bore you.” What then? Did he grieve at these things, and hide his face and turn away from his beloved [David]? No, quite the contrary; he displayed his fondness as an ornament. And yet the one was at that time a king, and a king’s son, even Jonathan; the other a fugitive and a wanderer, David. But not even in this circumstance was he ashamed of his friendship. “For love does not act inappropriately.” This is its remarkable quality that it not only does not suffer the injured to grieve and feel irritated but even disposes him to rejoice. Accordingly, the one of whom we are speaking, after all these things, just as though he had a crown put on him, went away and fell on David’s neck. For love does not know what sort of thing shame is. Therefore it glories in those things for which another hides his face. The shame is in “not knowing how to love” rather than “incurring danger and enduring all for the beloved” when you do love.
BedeAD 735
Commentary on Samuel
Therefore Jonathan rose from the table in a fit of anger, etc. When persecution arose because of the word, the apostles and the foremost teachers of the Church gradually withdrew from the very custom of Judaizing, which they had maintained for some time to avoid scandalizing the persecutors, as both the Epistle to the Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles bear fuller witness. And to those who did not refuse to listen to the words of the law that sounded carnally (which is, as we have explained above, the beginning of intellectual new moon), they neither wished to agree nor be absent in observing these things carnally. For there was great sorrow and continuous grief over Christ in their hearts, because their brothers and kinsmen, who did not believe in Him, did not listen to them when they taught. He, who was blessed God over all forever, had been born among them according to the flesh and had deigned to become a curse for the good of others, in order to rescue us from the curse of the law.
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 20:34 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 20:34 vividly portrays Jonathan's profound emotional and moral reaction to King Saul's escalating and murderous rage against David during the new moon feast. This pivotal moment underscores Jonathan's unwavering loyalty to David, his deep grief over David's unjust persecution, and his overwhelming shame at Saul's public display of tyrannical and ungodly behavior, which ultimately confirms David's need to flee and solidifies the tragic trajectory of Saul's reign, leading to the inevitable separation of David from the royal court.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The verse employs several powerful literary devices to convey its profound meaning. Symbolism is evident in Jonathan's refusal to eat, which is not merely a physical act but a potent symbolic expression of deep grief, protest, and moral condemnation. This act communicates his inner turmoil and his definitive break from complicity with his father's evil. The narrative also utilizes Contrast, starkly juxtaposing Jonathan's unwavering loyalty, integrity, and selflessness against Saul's escalating paranoia, jealousy, and tyrannical behavior. This contrast highlights the moral chasm that has opened between father and son, emphasizing Jonathan's righteous character. Furthermore, the description of Saul's "fierce anger" and Jonathan's "grief" and "shame" relies on vivid Emotional Language to convey the intense psychological and relational stakes of the moment, drawing the reader into the profound human drama unfolding within the royal court.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Jonathan's righteous anger and profound grief in this verse are deeply theological. They reflect a heart aligned with God's justice, mourning the injustice inflicted upon God's chosen one, David, and lamenting the spiritual decay of Saul, God's rejected king. Jonathan's loyalty to David, even at the cost of his own inheritance, foreshadows the ultimate divine loyalty of God to His chosen king, and the eventual establishment of David's eternal dynasty. His willingness to suffer with David, and to bear the shame of his father's sin, speaks to the sacrificial nature of true love and covenant faithfulness, echoing themes of redemptive suffering and the cost of discipleship.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Jonathan's response in 1 Samuel 20:34 offers a profound lesson in integrity, loyalty, and the righteous response to injustice. His anger was not a selfish outburst but a holy indignation against the sin and cruelty displayed by his father. His grief was not self-pity but deep empathy for his friend and sorrow over the moral decay of his own family and the kingdom. In a world often characterized by self-preservation, political expediency, and moral compromise, Jonathan stands as a beacon of unwavering faithfulness. He demonstrates that true friendship demands costly commitment and that righteous anger, properly directed, can be a catalyst for moral clarity and courageous action. We are called to cultivate such loyalty, to mourn over injustice, and to stand against evil, even when it comes from unexpected or powerful sources. His actions challenge us to consider where our ultimate loyalties truly lie and whether we are willing to bear personal cost for the sake of truth and righteousness, prioritizing God's will above all else.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What is the significance of Jonathan's refusal to eat ("did eat no meat") in this context?
Answer: Jonathan's refusal to eat meat, particularly on the second day of the new moon feast, is highly significant. In ancient Near Eastern cultures, fasting or abstaining from food was a common and powerful expression of deep emotional distress, mourning, protest, or spiritual anguish. It was not merely a physical act but a public and symbolic declaration of one's inner state. In this instance, it signifies Jonathan's profound grief for David's plight, his moral outrage at his father Saul's unhinged and murderous behavior, and the immense shame he felt for the disgrace Saul brought upon their family and the royal house. By refusing to partake in the communal meal, Jonathan publicly disassociated himself from Saul's actions and expressed his solidarity with David, underscoring the severity of the situation and the depth of his emotional and moral condemnation. This act was a clear signal to all present that something fundamentally broken had occurred at the king's table, demonstrating a moral conviction that transcended social obligation.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Jonathan's self-sacrificial loyalty and righteous indignation in 1 Samuel 20:34 powerfully foreshadow the ultimate friend and deliverer, Jesus Christ. Jonathan, the rightful heir to the throne of Israel, willingly relinquishes his claim and endangers his own life to protect David, God's anointed king. This mirrors Christ, who, though eternally King and heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2), "made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant" (Philippians 2:7), laying down His life for His friends (John 15:13) and indeed for His enemies (Romans 5:8). Jonathan's grief for David's unjust suffering resonates with Christ's empathy for humanity's suffering and His own bearing of our griefs and sorrows, becoming a "man of sorrows" (Isaiah 53:3-4). Furthermore, Jonathan's shame over his father's sin finds its ultimate resolution in Christ, who, though sinless, bore our shame and disgrace on the cross (Hebrews 12:2), becoming a curse for us to redeem us from the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13). Jonathan's unwavering commitment to David, the type of the coming King, points us to the perfect, unfailing covenant love of God manifested in Jesus, who secures an eternal kingdom not through human might or inheritance, but through His perfect obedience and ultimate sacrifice, establishing a spiritual lineage that transcends earthly dynasties.