Part three of a series on the life of Jonathan: a beautiful friendship begins

His friendship with David would top any list of what’s remembered about Jonathan. In part three of the study of Jonathan’s life and character, we’ll review how they met and consider why the bond between them was so strong.

As the oldest son of King Saul, Jonathan had every reason to think that he would inherit his father’s throne. In Part One, we learned how his father’s disobedience meant that it would never happen.

There’s reason to think he would have been a good King

Jonathan had proved that he was a capable leader and a man of action. As commander of one-third of the Israelite army, he had led an attack on the hated Philistines. His father had taken credit for the attack and had called for all of Israel to turn out to fight the enemy.

The Israelites responded to Saul’s call but became terrified when they saw that the Philistines had also reinforced their army. The new Israelite recruits hid wherever they could, and many of the full-time soldiers deserted, reducing Saul’s fighting force from 3000 down to 600 men.

Part two opened with Jonathan and his armorbearer successfully attacking a Philistine outpost near the region of Michmash, which began a great rout of the enemy. The attack was successful because Jonathan believed God would make it so. And he backed his faith up with action.

Unfortunately, the victory was significantly less than it might have been. That was because King Saul had ordered his soldiers not to eat before going into battle.

Violating the ban carried the penalty of death and was to be imposed regardless of whether the offender was aware of the ban. Jonathan had been absent when his father proclaimed the day-long fast and had innocently eaten some wild honey that he found on the ground while pursuing the Philistines.

When the battle was over, Saul found out what Jonathan had done and was prepared to have his own son executed. But the people reminded the King that Jonathan’s actions had led to the victory they enjoyed that day and that they would not allow his execution.

After the battle of Michmash, we don’t read about Jonathan again until he encounters David. This meeting took place after David killed Goliath and, now, having been summoned, was standing before Saul. In response to the King’s question, David had declared that he was the son of Jesse the Bethlehemite. Let’s set the stage for that scene by providing an overview of what had happened in Saul’s life and how David had entered the narrative.

As for Saul, the Bible, giving credit where it’s due, tells us that he fought for and led Israel against many enemies all the days of his life. (1 Samuel 14:47–48). This detail helps us see that, although his son and later his chief general (which David became) may have performed more memorable deeds, it’s not as if the first King of Israel had no successes of his own.

But jealousy prevented him from accepting others' triumphs as a blessing from God; instead, he perceived them as a direct threat to himself and his authority.

But his refusal to obey God was the main factor in Saul’s downfall

We reviewed one example of Saul’s disobedience in part one. In direct defiance of the instructions he’d received from Samuel, Saul took it on himself to offer sacrifices at Gilgal. The consequence of doing so was being told that his Kingdom would not endure, and that God had chosen another, better man to found the dynasty that would rule over Israel perpetually.

Saul wasn’t told to abdicate the throne; rather, that because of his disobedience, his Kingdom would not endure. Eventually, though, Saul disobeyed again. This time, Samuel told him directly that God had declared he could no longer be King. (1 Samuel 15:22–23)

1 Samuel 15 describes in detail the circumstances of Saul’s defiance and its immediate aftermath. The point is that, once again, Saul’s disobedience affected his son’s life as much as it did his own. For his part, Jonathan accepted his unearned demotion without recorded complaint or comment.

In contrast, Saul did not accept the consequences. He had been told that he had been rejected as King. Clearly, the right thing for him to do was to step down.

This he refused to do. Who knows how God may have been able to use him if he had humbled himself and made himself available to serve God by serving David, the better neighbor to whom God had given the Kingdom? (1 Samuel 15:28)

The new king is revealed

After declaring to Saul that God had rejected him as King, Samuel went to Bethlehem to anoint a new King. For fear of Saul finding out and murdering him, Samuel used the cover of offering a sacrifice to avoid arousing the King’s suspicions. At God’s direction, Samuel invited Jesse and his sons to that sacrifice, because the new King was to be one of them.

David’s seven older brothers presented themselves to Samuel, but God made it clear that none of them was to be ruler. When Samuel asked if these were all his sons, Jesse sent for David. When he arrived, God told Samuel this was the man who was to reign over His chosen people, Israel. And David was anointed King right then and there (1 Samuel 16:1–13).

The account of how David came to serve King Saul (gaining valuable knowledge and experience for his own reign) appears in the latter half of 1 Samuel 16. For a certain period, David split his time between Saul’s court and his father’s sheep. Then the giant Goliath appeared, mocking the Israelites and defying their God. The record of David’s inspiring battle with Goliath is found in 1 Samuel 17.

After the giant’s demise, Saul summoned David and asked who his father was. (1 Samuel 17:58) David, holding the head of Goliath, tells the King that he is the son of Jesse the Bethlehemite. Jonathan, who is also present, is deeply affected.

Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David and Jonathan loved him as himself. (1 Samuel 18:1, NASB 95)

Jonathan saw himself in David

Have you ever wondered why Saul didn’t offer to fight Goliath? After all, he was head and shoulders above all his countrymen (1 Samuel 10:23). Of course, the answer we assume is that he was afraid, indicating a lack of faith. But when I consider what he was up against, that seems a bit unfair: would I have done better?

But what about Jonathan? He had already shown himself to be a man of faith-driven, extravagant, exemplary courage. Here's a question I never considered before: Why didn’t Jonathan fight Goliath?

After all, he had willingly taken on more than 20 Philistine warriors at one time

Perhaps Jonathan was thinking the same thing. It’s clear that he recognized a kindred spirit in David. If you had asked, he may have told you that he saw in David three characteristics that he aspired to for himself, specifically:

First, He saw a man of faith. Jonathan may well have been present when David declared to King Saul that he would fight and overcome Goliath because God would deliver him (1 Samuel 17:37).

Second, Jonathan recognized David’s extreme bravery. Goliath’s head in the King’s tent was proof of that.

Third, Jonathan saw that David had done what he did to uphold God’s honor.

Then David spoke to the men who were standing by him, saying, “What will be done for the man who kills this Philistine and takes away the reproach from Israel? For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God?” 1 Samuel 17:26, NASB 95)

Jonathan was not threatened by David; he was inspired

Saul’s jealousy toward David, which arose when he heard people attributing thousands of battle victims to himself but tens of thousands to David (1 Samuel 18:6–9) is well known.

What’s remarkable is that Jonathan did not have the same reaction. Instead, he saw in David a fellow-worker for God, a man he could look up to, and a friend. And that is why the two made a covenant between them.

Key Takeaways:

1. Don’t be like disobedient Saul and cling to what you’ve legitimately lost.
2. Do be like David and let your zeal for the Lord inspire great deeds.
3. Do be like Jonathan and have the wisdom to join with other persons of like faith in advancing the Kingdom of God.

Next: Jonathan does something remarkable then stands between his new friend and death.

The Best King Who Never Reigned was originally published in Koinonia on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Part 2 of a series on the life of Jonathan

A brief review of part one

In part one of this series, which is based on chapters 13 and 14 of the book of 1st Samuel, we’re introduced to Jonathan, the son of King Saul and heir to his throne.

We learned three important things about him.

1. He was considered capable and trustworthy. As a young man, he was entrusted with command of a third of the Israelite army.
2. He was a man of action. On two separate occasions, he initiated attacks on the occupying pagan Philistine army.
3. He was a man of faith, as evidenced by his words to his armorbearer before the attack on the Philistines at Michmash (1 Samuel 14:6–10)

In contrast, Saul presented himself as a man who did not prioritize obeying God or God’s messenger. He had been told to wait at Gilgal for Samuel, who would join him and offer sacrifices to God. (1 Samuel 10:8) But instead, he used the excuse that since Samuel didn’t come precisely when he said he would to justify making the sacrifices himself.

Consequently, Samuel declared to Saul that, because of his disobedience, God would not establish his dynasty. (1 Samuel 13:13)

Jonathan and his armorbearer start a Philistine rout

We left Jonathan and his armorbearer peering over the top of a cliff they had just climbed. Before they showed themselves, Jonathan had declared that they would know whether God wanted them to attack by how the enemy reacted to seeing them. If the Philistines told them to wait where they were, it wasn’t the time to fight.

“But if they say, ‘Come up to us,’ then we will go up, for the Lord has given them into our hands; and this shall be a sign to us.” (1 Samuel 14:10, NASB 95)

When they spot Jonathan and his servant, the arrogant Philistines do tell the two Israelites to come to them. They are obliged and lose their lives as a consequence. In an unspecified, but necessarily short time, Jonathan and the armorbearer battle and kill 20 of the enemy.

The Philistines panic - an earthquake occurs - Israel stirs - Saul plots

This sets off a sequence of reactions by sundry entities. The Philistines, near and far, panic, and that panic is accompanied by an earthquake. (1 Samuel 14:15).

This tells us clearly that the Lord was behind what was happening and that Jonathan had been acting within God’s will.

The Israelite guards, who are watching the Philistine camp, see their enemy in a panic and report it to Saul, and he reacts in what seems a strange, even inexplicable way.

First, he orders that the army should be mustered so he can tell who is missing. Of course, it’s his own son Jonathan who is absent. That Saul wanted the troops mustered, or numbered, seems innocent enough. It’s only when we consider it in light of an oath he imposed on the Israelites that day that it appears the King’s intentions may have been sinister.

Now the men of Israel were hard-pressed on that day, for Saul had put the people under oath saying, “Cursed be the man who eats food before evening, and until I have avenged myself on my enemies.” so none of the people tasted food. (1 Samuel 14:25, NASB 95)

Remember, Jonathan is not present when his father puts the eating ban in place. That fact alone hints that Saul may have had ulterior motives for the ban.

But why, one wonders, would he do such a thing? Where is the evidence that his motivation may have been selfish and evil? The primary support is seen from the vantage point of reading all that Scripture records about Saul and, through that reading, discovering that he was given to great jealousy.

But he had reason at the time he imposed the eating ban to fear Jonathan. Don’t forget that when Samuel announced God’s displeasure to Saul at Gilgal, he included the detail that God had chosen another man, one better than Saul, to reign over Israel. (1 Samuel 13:14)

Has not Jonathan shown himself to be a better man than Saul? He has greater faith, greater courage, and Saul would not have missed those facts.

In the course of the day’s fighting and pursuit of the enemy, the Israelites enter a forest where honey is flowing on the ground. Those soldiers who were present when Saul imposed the fast, hungry though they are, leave the sweet nutrition where it lies.

But Jonathan had not heard when his father put the people under oath; therefore, he put out the end of the staff that was in his hand and dipped it in the honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth, and his eyes brightened. (1Samuel 14:27, NASB 95)

When his companions tell him about the oath his father imposed, Jonathan doesn’t hesitate to decry his father’s actions:

29 Then Jonathan said, “My father has troubled the land. See now how my eyes have brightened because I tasted a little of this honey.
30 “How much more, if only the people had eaten freely of the spoil of their enemies which they found! For now the slaughter among the Philistines has not been great.” (1 Samuel 14:29–30, NASB 95)

If the results of Saul’s imposition of the no-eating ban had been nothing worse than some stomachs growling, it would have been a footnote hardly worth including in the Bible. But an opportunity had been lost. Yes, Israel was victorious that day, but had they been fighting on full stomachs, it’s possible, even likely, the Philistines could have been subdued for generations if not permanently. Instead, Saul battled them off and on throughout his reign and died in battle against them. But that was decades in the future.

Later that evening, Jonathan’s breach of the ban comes to light. The army had stopped pursuing the Philistines at the city of Aijalon (1 Samuel 14:31), which appears to be located five to ten miles southwest of Michmash. The Israelites, exhausted and famished, slaughter and eat some livestock they find there. But they do so without draining the blood, which was a serious breach of Mosaic law.

Saul, to his credit, puts a stop to this. Afterward, he wants to continue pursuing the Philistines and, with the aid of the Priest, asks God if he should do so. But God doesn’t answer. Because the Lord doesn’t answer, Saul assumes someone has sinned and arranges for lots to be thrown to find the guilty party. This was the accepted method of finding the truth of a matter in situations where it was indiscernible otherwise.

Saul arranges for the lot to be thrown between the people as a whole on one side and him and his son on the other. The lot falls to the pair. Then the lot is thrown between the two, and it falls to Jonathan. Saul demands to know what he has done.

Then Saul said to Jonathan, “tell me what you have done.” So Jonathan told him and said, “I indeed tasted a little honey with the end of the staff that was in my hand. Here I am I must die!” (1 Samuel 14:43, NASB 95)

Saul, wholeheartedly, it appears, agrees with Jonathan, “May God do this to me and more also, for you shall surely die, Jonathan” (1 Samuel 14:44, NASB 95).

But the people prevent Jonathan’s execution. They remind the King that it is because of his son’s actions that they have been victorious and declare that “not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground.” So Jonathan is spared. (1 Samuel 14:45, NASB 95.)

Whether King Saul imposed the eating ban with malice in his heart or not is impossible to say. Matthew Henry, that 18th-century prince of Bible commentators, is much easier on him than I have been here. So that gives me pause, but I stand by what I wrote as, at least, a possible and reasonable assessment of Saul’s motivation for imposing the eating ban on the people.

Takeaways

1. Jonathan showed both wisdom and courage in speaking frankly against his father’s eating ban.
2. God told the Israelites he would give them a land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:17). In the days of Saul, this literally came true. But the benefits of this wonderful blessing weren’t enjoyed because Saul’s eating ban prevented it.

What arbitrary, human-imposed ban or practice am I following that is keeping me from enjoying blessings of God that are right in front of me?

Next: Saul strays further and suffers the consequences. We meet the man after God’s own heart. Jonathan meets a like-minded friend.

The Best King Who Never Reigned was originally published in Koinonia on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.