1 Samuel 20:11

WEB

¹¹Jonathan said to David, “Come! Let’s go out into the field.” They both went out into the field.

KJV

¹¹¶ And Jonathan said unto David, Come, and let us go out into the field. And they went out both of them into the field.

BSB

¹¹“Come,” he replied, “let us go out to the field.” So the two of them went out into the field,

FBV

¹¹“Come on, let's go out into the countryside,” Jonathan said. So they both went out into the countryside.

More resources on 1 Samuel →

Study

Sources · 7

Matthew Henry Matthew Henry, 1708–1710 · Public domain

20:9-23

Here, I. Jonathan protests his fidelity to David in his distress. Notwithstanding the strong confidence David had in Jonathan, yet, because he might have some reason to fear that his father's influence, and his own interest, should make him warp, or grow cool towards him, Jonathan thought it requisite solemnly to renew the professions of his friendship to him (Sa1 20:9): "Far be it from thee to think that I suspect thee of any crime for which I should either slay thee myself or deliver thee to my father; no, if thou hast any jealousy of that, Come let us go into the field (Sa1 20:11), and talk it over more fully." He did not challenge him to the field to fight him for an affront, but to fix him in his friendship. He faithfully promised him that he would let him know how, upon trial, he found his father affected towards him, and would make the matter neither better nor worse than it was. "If there be good towards thee, I will show it thee, that thou mayest be easy (Sa1 20:12), if evil, I will send thee away, that thou mayest be safe" (Sa1 20:13); and thus he would help to deliver him from the evil if it were real and from the fear of evil if it were but imaginary. For the confirmation of his promise he appeals to God, 1. As a witness (Sa1 20:12): "O Lord God of Israel, thou knowest I mean sincerely, and think as I speak." The strength of his passion made the manner of his speaking concise and abrupt. 2. As a judge: "The Lord do so and much more to Jonathan (Sa1 20:13), if I speak deceitfully, or break my word with my friend." He expressed himself thus solemnly that David might be abundantly assured of his sincerity. And thus God has confirmed his promises to us, that we might have strong consolation, Heb 6:17, Heb 6:18. Jonathan adds to his protestations his hearty prayers: "The Lord be with thee, to protect and prosper thee, as he has been formerly with my father, though now he has withdrawn." Thus he imitates his belief that David would be in his father's place, and his good wishes that he might prosper in it better than his father now did.
II. He provides for the entail of the covenant of friendship with David upon his posterity, Sa1 20:14-16. He engages David to be a friend to his family when he was gone (Sa1 20:15): Thou shalt promise that thou wilt not cut off thy kindness from my house for ever. This he spoke from a natural affection he had to his children, whom he desired it might go well with after his decease, and for whose future welfare he desired to improve his present interest. It also intimates his firm belief of David's advancement, and that it would be in the power of his hand to do a kindness or unkindness to his seed; for, in process of time, the Lord would cut off his enemies, Saul himself was not expected; then "Do not thou cut off thy kindness from my house, nor revenge my father's wrongs upon my children." The house of David must likewise be bound to the house of Jonathan from generation to generation; he made a covenant (Sa1 20:16) with the house of David. Note, True friends cannot but covet to transmit to theirs after them their mutual affections. Thy own friend, and thy father's friend, forsake not. This kindness, 1. He calls the kindness of the Lord, because it is such kindness as God shows to those he takes into covenant with himself; for he is a God to them and to their seed; they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. 2. He secures it by an imprecation (Sa1 20:16): The Lord require it at the hand of David's seed (for of David himself he had no suspicion) if they prove so far David's enemies as to deal wrongfully with the posterity of Jonathan, David's friend. He feared lest David, or some of his, should hereafter be tempted, for the clearing and confirming of their title to the throne, to do by his seed as Abimelech had done by the sons of Gideon (Jdg 9:5), and this he would effectually prevent; but the reason given (Sa1 20:17) why Jonathan was so earnest to have the friendship entailed is purely generous, and has nothing of self in it; it was because he loved him as he loved his own soul, and therefore desired that he and his might be beloved by him. David, though now in disgrace at court and in distress, was as amiable in the eyes of Jonathan as ever he had been, and he loved him never the less for his father's hating him, so pure were the principles on which his friendship was built. Having himself sworn to David, he caused David to swear to him, and (as we read it) to swear again, which David consented to (for he that bears an honest mind does not startle at assurances), to swear by his love to him, which he looked upon as a sacred thing. Jonathan's heart was so much upon it that, when they parted this time, he concluded with a solemn appeal to God: The Lord be between me and thee for ever (Sa1 20:23), that is, "God himself be judge between us and our families for ever, if on either side this league of friendship be violated." It was in remembrance of this covenant that David was kind to Mephibosheth, Sa2 9:7; Sa2 21:7. It will be a kindness to ourselves and ours to secure an interest in those whom God favours and to make his friends ours.
III. He settles the method of intelligence, and by what signs and tokens he would give him notice how his father stood affected towards him. David would be missed the first day, or at least the second day, of the new moon, and would be enquired after, Sa1 20:18. On the third day, by which time he would have returned from Bethlehem, he must be at such a place (Sa1 20:19), and Jonathan would come towards that place with his bow and arrows to shoot for diversion (Sa1 20:20), would send his lad to fetch his arrows, and, if they were shot short of the lad, David must take it for a signal of safety, and not be afraid to show his head (Sa1 20:21); but, if he shot beyond the lad, it was a signal of danger, and he must shift for his safety, Sa1 20:22. This expedient he fixed lest he should not have the opportunity, which yet it proved he had, of talking with David, and making the report by word of mouth.

Keil & Delitzsch Carl Friedrich Keil, Franz Delitzsch, 1861–1875 · Public domain

20:1-11

After the occurrence which had taken place at Naioth, David fled thence and met with Jonathan, to whom he poured out his heart.
(Note: According to Ewald and Thenius, this chapter was not written by the author of the previous one, but was borrowed from an earlier source, and Sa1 20:1 was inserted by the compiler to connect the two together. But the principal reason for this conjecture - namely, that David could never have thought of sitting at the royal table again after what had taken place, and that Saul would still less have expected him to come - is overthrown by the simple suggestion, that all that Saul had hitherto attempted against David, according to Sa1 19:8., had been done in fits of insanity (cf. Sa1 19:9.), which had passed away again; so that it formed no criterion by which to judge of Saul's actual feelings towards David when he was in a state of mental sanity.)
Though he had been delivered for the moment from the death which threatened him, through the marvellous influence of the divine inspiration of the prophets upon Saul and his messengers, he could not find in this any lasting protection from the plots of his mortal enemy. He therefore sought for his friend Jonathan, and complained to him, "What have I done? what is my crime, my sin before thy father, that he seeks my life?"
Sa1 20:2
Jonathan endeavoured to pacify him: "Far be it! thou shalt not die: behold, my father does nothing great or small (i.e., not the smallest thing; cf. Sa1 25:36 and Num 22:18) that he does not reveal to me; why should my father hide this thing from me? It is not so." The לו after הנּה stands for לא: the Chethibh עשׂה is probably to be preferred to the Keri יעשׂה, and to be understood in this sense: "My father has (hitherto) done nothing at all, which he has not told to me." This answer of Jonathan does not presuppose that he knew nothing of the occurrences described in 1 Samuel 19:9-24, although it is possible enough that he might not have been with his father just at that time; but it is easily explained from the fact that Saul had made the fresh attack upon David's life in a state of madness, in which he was no longer master of himself; so that it could not be inferred with certainty from this that he would still plot against David's life in a state of clear consciousness. Hitherto Saul had no doubt talked over all his plans and undertakings with Jonathan, but he had not uttered a single word to him about his deadly hatred, or his intention of killing David; so that Jonathan might really have regarded his previous attacks upon David's life as nothing more than symptoms of temporary aberration of mind.
Sa1 20:3
But David had looked deeper into Saul's heart. He replied with an oath ("he sware again," i.e., a second time), "Thy father knoweth that I have found favour in thine eyes (i.e., that thou art attached to me); and thinketh Jonathan shall not know this, lest he be grieved. But truly, as surely as Jehovah liveth, and thy soul liveth, there is hardly a step (lit. about a step) between me and death." כּי introduces the substance of the oath, as in Sa1 14:44, etc.
Sa1 20:4-5
When Jonathan answered, "What thy soul saith, will I do to thee," i.e., fulfil every wish, David made this request, "Behold, to-morrow is new moon, and I ought to sit and eat with the king: let me go, that I may conceal myself in the field (i.e., in the open air) till the third evening." This request implies that Saul gave a feast at the new moon, and therefore that the new moon was not merely a religious festival, according to the law in Num 10:10; Num 28:11-15, but that it was kept as a civil festival also, and in the latter character for two days; as we may infer both from the fact that David reckoned to the third evening, i.e., the evening of the third day from the day then present, and therefore proposed to hide himself on the new moon's day and the day following, and also still more clearly from Sa1 20:12, Sa1 20:27, and Sa1 20:34, where Saul is said to have expected David at table on the day after the new moon. We cannot, indeed, conclude from this that there was a religious festival of two days' duration; nor does it follow, that because Saul supposed that David might have absented himself on the first day on account of Levitical uncleanness (Sa1 20:26), therefore the royal feast was a sacrificial meal. It was evidently contrary to social propriety to take part in a public feast in a state of Levitical uncleanness, even though it is not expressly forbidden in the law.
Sa1 20:6
"If thy father should miss me, then say, David hath asked permission of me to hasten to Bethlehem, his native town; for there is a yearly sacrifice for the whole family there." This ground of excuse shows that families and households were accustomed to keep united sacrificial feasts once a year. According to the law in Deu 12:5., they ought to have been kept at the tabernacle; but at this time, when the central sanctuary had fallen into disuse, they were held in different places, wherever there were altars of Jehovah - as, for example, at Bethlehem (cf. Sa1 16:2.). We see from these words that David did not look upon prevarication as a sin.
Sa1 20:7
"If thy father says, It is well, there is peace to thy servant (i.e., he cherishes no murderous thoughts against me); but if he be very wroth, know that evil is determined by him." כּלה, to be completed; hence to be firmly and unalterably determined (cf. Sa1 25:17; Est 7:7). Seb. Schmidt infers from the closing words that the fact was certain enough to David, but not to Jonathan. Thenius, on the other hand, observes much more correctly, that "it is perfectly obvious from this that David was not quite clear as to Saul's intentions," though he upsets his own previous assertion, that after what David had gone through, he could never think of sitting again at the king's table as he had done before.
Sa1 20:8
David made sure that Jonathan would grant this request on account of his friendship, as he had brought him into a covenant of Jehovah with himself. David calls the covenant of friendship with Jonathan (Sa1 18:3) a covenant of Jehovah, because he had made it with a solemn invocation of Jehovah. But in order to make quite sure of the fulfilment of his request on the part of Jonathan, David added, "But if there is a fault in me, do thou kill me (אתּה used to strengthen the suffix); for why wilt thou bring me to thy father?" sc., that he may put me to death.
Sa1 20:9
Jonathan replied, "This be far from thee!" sc., that I should kill thee, or deliver thee up to my father. חלילה points back to what precedes, as in Sa1 20:2. "But (כּי after a previous negative assertion) if I certainly discover that evil is determined by my father to come upon thee, and I do not tell it thee," sc., "may God do so to me," etc. The words are to be understood as an asseveration on oath, in which the formula of an oath is to be supplied in thought. This view is apparently a more correct one, on account of the cop. ו before לא, than to take the last clause as a question, "Shall I not tell it thee?"
Sa1 20:10
To this friendly assurance David replied, "Who will tell me?" sc., how thy father expresses himself concerning me; "or what will thy father answer thee roughly?" sc., if thou shouldst attempt to do it thyself. This is the correct explanation given by De Wette and Maurer. Gesenius and Thenius, on the contrary, take או in the sense of "if perchance." But this is evidently incorrect; for even though there are certain passages in which או may be so rendered, it is only where some other case is supposed, and therefore the meaning or still lies at the foundation. These questions of David were suggested by a correct estimate of the circumstances, namely, that Saul's suspicions would leave him to the conclusion that there was some understanding between Jonathan and David, and that he would take steps in consequence to prevent Jonathan from making David acquainted with the result of his conversation with Saul.
Sa1 20:11
Before replying to these questions, Jonathan asked David to go with him to the field, that they might there fix upon the sign by which he would let him know, in a way in which no one could suspect, what was the state of his father's mind.