1 Samuel 20:34 Komentář

David, having several times narrowly escaped Saul's fury, begins to consider at last whether it may not be necessary for him to retire into the country and to take up arms in his own defence. But he will not do so daring a thing without consulting his faithful friend Jonathan; how he did this, and what passed between them, we have an account in this chapter, where we have as surprising instances of supernatural love as we had in the chapter before of unnatural hatred. I. David complains to Jonathan of his present distress, and engages him to be his friend (Sa1 20:1-8). II. Jonathan faithfully promises to get and give him intelligence how his father stood affected to him, and renews the covenant of friendship with him (Sa1 20:9-23). III. Jonathan, upon trial, finds, to his grief, that his father was implacably enraged against David (Sa1 20:24-34). IV. He gives David notice of this, according to the appointment between them (Sa1 20:35-42).

INTRODUCTION TO FIRST SAMUEL 20 David fleeing from Naioth came to Jonathan, and acquainted him with his circumstances, and entreated his favour, Sa1 20:1; which Jonathan promised, and renewed the covenant with him, Sa1 20:9; a scheme was formed between them, by which David might know whether Saul was reconciled to him, and he might come to court, Sa1 20:18; which being tried, Jonathan found it was not safe for him to appear, Sa1 20:24; of which he gave notice by the signals agreed on, Sa1 20:35; and they took their leave of one another with strong expressions of affection and attachment to each other, Sa1 20:41.

So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger,.... Resenting his father's attempt to smite him, and his resolution to slay David: and did eat no meat the second day of the month; not then at that meal he was just sat down to, nor at another time that day, his stomach was so full through indignation at his father, and grief for his friend David; and besides, being a mourner on the above accounts, he might not eat of the sacrifices: for he was grieved for David; that his death should be determined upon by his father, and he in so much danger of it; as also that he himself must be parted from and lose so dear a friend, which was one reason he ate no meat that day: and another follows: because his father had done him shame; the copulative "and" being wanting; and this he did by calling him a perverse and rebellious son, and representing him as an arrant fool, and particularly by casting a javelin at him to smite him.

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.

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.

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.

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.

David complains to Jonathan of Saul's enmity against him; Jonathan comforts him, Sa1 20:1-10. They walk out into the field, and renew their covenant, Sa1 20:11-17. David asks Jonathan's leave to absent himself from Saul's court; and Jonathan informs him how he shall ascertain the disposition of his father towards him, Sa1 20:18-23. David hides himself; is missed by Saul; Jonathan is questioned concerning his absence; makes an excuse for David; Saul is enraged, and endeavors to kill Jonathan, Sa1 20:24-33. Jonathan goes out to the field; gives David the sign which they had agreed on, and by which he was to know that the king had determined to take away his life, Sa1 20:34-39. He sends his servant back into the city; and then he and David meet, renew their covenant, and have a very affectionate parting, Sa1 20:40-42.

Jonathan arose - in fierce anger - We should probably understand this rather of Jonathan's grief than of his anger, the latter clause explaining the former: for he was grieved for David. He was grieved for his father - he was grieved for his friend.

DAVID CONSULTS WITH JONATHAN FOR HIS SAFETY. (Sa1 20:1-10) David fled from Naioth in Ramah, and came and said before Jonathan--He could not remain in Naioth, for he had strong reason to fear that when the religious fit, if we may so call it, was over, Saul would relapse into his usual fell and sanguinary temper. It may be thought that David acted imprudently in directing his flight to Gibeah. But he was evidently prompted to go thither by the most generous feelings--to inform his friend of what had recently occurred, and to obtain that friend's sanction to the course he was compelled to adopt. Jonathan could not be persuaded there was any real danger after the oath his father had taken; at all events, he felt assured his father would do nothing without telling him. Filial attachment naturally blinded the prince to defects in the parental character and made him reluctant to believe his father capable of such atrocity. David repeated his unshaken convictions of Saul's murderous purpose, but in terms delicately chosen (Sa1 20:3), not to wound the filial feelings of his friend; while Jonathan, clinging, it would seem, to a hope that the extraordinary scene enacted at Naioth might have wrought a sanctified improvement on Saul's temper and feelings, undertook to inform David of the result of his observations at home.