Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
1 Samuel 20:1-9
David Seeks Out Jonathan (1 Samuel 20:1).
While Saul was rendered incapable of doing anything by the working of God's Spirit on him, David was able to flee from Naioth, and his first action was to take advantage of the fact that Saul was busy elsewhere to seek out Jonathan, presumably in Gibeah. He was genuinely puzzled as to why Saul was behaving in the way that he was because he did not know what he had done wrong. And if anyone would know, surely it would be Jonathan.
Analysis.
a And David fled from Naioth in Ramah, and he came and said before Jonathan, “What have I done? what is my iniquity? and what is my sin before your father, that he seeks my life?” (1 Samuel 20:1).
b And he said to him, “Far from it. You will not die. Look, my father does nothing, either great or small, but that he discloses it to me. And why should my father hide this thing from me? It is not so” (1 Samuel 20:2).
c And David swore moreover, and said, Your father knows well that I have found favour in your eyes, and he says, “Do not let Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved,” but truly as YHWH lives, and as your soul lives, there is but a step between me and death” (1 Samuel 20:3).
d Then Jonathan said to David, “Whatever your soul desires, I will even do it for you” (1 Samuel 20:4).
c And David said to Jonathan, “Look, tomorrow is the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat, but let me go, that I may hide myself in the field until the third day in the evening. If your father misses me at all, then say, ‘David earnestly asked leave of me that he might run to Bethlehem his city, for it is the yearly sacrifice there for all the family.' If he say thus, ‘It is well,' your servant will have peace, but if he is angry, then know that evil is determined by him” (1 Samuel 20:5).
b “Therefore deal kindly with your servant, for you have brought your servant into a covenant of YHWH with you, but if there be in me iniquity, kill me yourself; for why should you bring me to your father?” (1 Samuel 20:8).
a And Jonathan said, “Far be it from you, for if I should at all know that evil were determined by my father to come on you, then would I not inform you?” (1 Samuel 20:9).
Note that in ‘a' David declares that he is innocent and asks why Saul seeks his life, and in the parallel Jonathan basically declares by his words that his father does not seek his life. In ‘b' Jonathan declares that Saul has no intention of putting David to death (‘it is not so'), while in the parallel David asks that if Jonathan knows of any evil in him, Jonathan himself will put him to death. In ‘c' David stresses that that is Saul's intention (‘there is but a step between me and death'), and in the parallel David asks Jonathan to put the question to the test so as to ascertain whether Saul does intend to put him to death. Central in ‘d' is Jonathan's heartfelt assurance that he will do whatever David desires.
‘ And David fled from Naioth in Ramah, and he came and said before Jonathan, “What have I done? what is my iniquity? and what is my sin before your father, that he seeks my life?” '
Strictly ‘and David fled from Naioth in Ramah' closes off the last passage. It is, however, also a connecting link between the two.
Having ‘fled' he arrived at Jonathan's house, and gaining admittance he asked Jonathan man to man what the problem was. He was genuinely concerned. He wanted to know what he had done that made Saul want to have him executed. Note the earnestness expressed by the three fold request, ‘What have I done?', What is my iniquity?' ‘What is my sin before your father?' He was baffled.
‘ And he said to him, “Far from it. You will not die. Look, my father does nothing, either great or small, but that he discloses it to me. And why should my father hide this thing from me? It is not so.”
Jonathan, who was seemingly unaware of the attempts made to arrest David, was astounded, and thought that David must have got it wrong. He could not believe that his father could do such a thing without consulting him. Why, did not his father discuss everything with him? Why then should he hide this? Thus his conclusion was that David must be mistaken.
‘ And David swore moreover, and said, Your father knows well that I have found favour in your eyes, and he says, “Do not let Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved,” but truly as YHWH lives, and as your soul lives, there is but a step between me and death.” '
David then asserted strongly to Jonathan (‘David swore') that the reason why he did not know was because his father knew of the great bond that there was between them, and was thus trying to avoid grieving him. Saul no doubt felt that once David was safely dead he could then explain to Jonathan why it had been necessary. Men in Saul's state of mind always think that they can justify what they do. David then further pressed Jonathan with the utmost force (‘as YHWH lives and as your soul lives') to recognise that there could really be no doubt about it, and that in fact his life hung by a thread. He was but one step from death.
‘ Then Jonathan said to David, “Whatever your soul desires, I will even do it for you.” '
Jonathan then assured David that he would do anything that he asked of him. He had only to make his request and it would be granted. This not only revealed his love for David, but also that there was not a shadow of doubt in Jonathan's heart, that David was innocent.
‘ And David said to Jonathan, “Look, tomorrow is the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat, but let me go, that I may hide myself in the countryside until the third day in the evening. If your father misses me at all, then say, ‘David earnestly asked leave of me that he might run to Bethlehem his city, for it is the yearly sacrifice there for all the family.' If he say thus, ‘It is well,' your servant will have peace, but if he is angry, then know that evil is determined by him.”
David then explained to him his dilemma. On the morrow it was the new moon festival. The new moon festival was a time for offering burnt offerings and sacrifices (and for partaking of some of them) and for the blowing of ram's horns (Numbers 28:11; Numbers 10:10). It was a time of celebration of YHWH's goodness, and was a special sabbath (Psalms 81:3). It was also seemingly a time for the most important men in the kingdom to express their loyalty to the king by their presence, although in this case it might be that it was a special new moon, such as one when it occurred on the day following the Sabbath, or at the new year. At that festival all courtiers and commanders were seemingly expected to attend, and not to do so without reasonable excuse would therefore be seen an insult to the king and to YHWH. What David certainly did not want to do at this stage was cause an irrevocable break if it was not necessary. He was no doubt still hoping that what Saul was doing was simply a phase of his illness and would pass.
In the affairs of kingdoms such situations often arise when men with whom the king is displeased find themselves in a position where tradition demands that they present themselves before him on some important occasion. Sometimes they simply solve the problem by means of the power of the forces that accompany them. At others they have to find reasonable grounds for exempting themselves.
David chose the latter course. What he required from Jonathan, therefore, was his royal authority to absent himself from the meal in order that he might attend at his family's yearly sacrifice. Then if Saul asked why he was not there, Jonathan could explain, and there would be no insult because it would be an important family occasion, and he would have received royal permission to be absent, and what was more he would be attending a like festival in praise of YHWH. Thus he would not be failing in his religious duty.
Furthermore his thought was that Jonathan would then be able to discern from his father's reaction what his intentions had been. If Saul was quite content with the idea of his absence and was calm about it, it would indicate that he had responded to what had happened to him at Naioth and was now reconciled in his heart towards David. On the other hand, if he was angry it would indicate that he still had designs on David's life, for it would demonstrate that he had been planning to move against David at the feast. Meanwhile David would hide himself in the countryside for three days and await results. ‘Hide in the countryside' may well have been intended to include attendance at Bethlehem for the family sacrifice, for Bethlehem was away from the centres of activity and could be said to be ‘in the countryside'. It did not mean that David's excuse was a lie. Indeed such a lie would have been foolish, for it would have been uncovered later.
We should not underrate the importance of the new moon in Israel, and indeed in the ancient world. The new moon was the means by which time was determined. It determined when the ‘months' of the year began and ended. Its arrival was therefore carefully observed. And it may well be that this particular new moon was that which commenced the seventh month, and therefore of special importance (Leviticus 23:24). The two day feast may well have been simply in order to ensure that in case there was an error in determining when the new moon took place the correct day was always celebrated.
“ Therefore act in covenant love (chesed) with your servant, for you have brought your servant into a covenant of YHWH with you, but if there be in me iniquity, kill me yourself; for why should you bring me to your father?”
David then deliberately submitted himself to royal authority. He called on Jonathan, who has brought him into covenant with him, to act with covenant love towards him by being his judge in this case,. By this he emphasised the distinction in their positions. He acknowledged that he was in service to the royal household, and especially to Jonathan because Jonathan had entered into a solemn covenant of YHWH with him. Thus if he knew of any just cause against David let him act in accordance with their covenant and arrange for his execution. He was prepared to submit himself to Jonathan's judgment, and die at Jonathan's hands. If he really was guilty then it was unnecessary for Saul to be involved, for as the firstborn son of the royal household Jonathan had an equal right and responsibility to act as his judge. Let Jonathan then make his own decision about it. By citing this the writer is making David's innocence absolutely clear. (It was not David's fault what future YHWH had in store for him. All he could do was not make any move that suggested that he was aiming at the throne).
‘ And Jonathan said, “Far be it from you, for if I should at all know that evil were determined by my father to come on you, then would I not inform you?” '
Jonathan dismissed the idea that David could be guilty. He was quite well aware that David was totally innocent. On the contrary, he made it clear that far from than wanting to pass judgment on David, if he had known of any evil determined against him by Saul he would have informed him of it.