King James Version
1 Samuel 20
42 verses with commentary
Jonathan Warns David
And David fled from Naioth in Ramah, and came and said before Jonathan, What have I done? what is mine iniquity? and what is my sin before thy father, that he seeketh my life?
View commentary
David's anguished questions to Jonathan - 'What have I done? what is mine iniquity? and what is my sin?' - express the bewilderment of the unjustly persecuted. The threefold query emphasizes his clear conscience before God and man. Fleeing 'from Naioth in Ramah' suggests the Spirit's protection was temporary, requiring renewed wisdom for the next step. Even after divine deliverance, discernment remains necessary.
And he said unto him, God forbid; thou shalt not die: behold, my father will do nothing either great or small, but that he will shew it me: and why should my father hide this thing from me? it is not so. shew: Heb. uncover mine ear
View commentary
Jonathan's confident denial - 'God forbid; thou shalt not die' (chalilah) - expressed loving assurance combined with incomplete information. His assumption that Saul would confide everything to him reveals underestimation of his father's duplicity. The phrase 'nothing either great or small' (gadol o qaton) covers the entire spectrum of decisions. Jonathan's confidence in his father's transparency would soon prove mistaken. Sometimes those closest to a situation have blind spots that outsiders perceive more clearly. Love for family can obscure recognition of that family member's capacity for evil.
And David sware moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but truly as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between me and death.
View commentary
David's oath 'as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth' invokes both divine and human witness. The phrase 'there is but a step between me and death' captures the precariousness of his situation. David's perception differed from Jonathan's optimism; experience had taught him Saul's implacable hatred. Sometimes friends closest to danger perceive its reality more clearly than those at safer distance.
Then said Jonathan unto David, Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even do it for thee. Whatsoever: or, Say what is thy mind and I will do, etc desireth: Heb. speaketh, or, thinketh
View commentary
Jonathan's unconditional offer - 'Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even do it for thee' - exemplifies covenant love's total commitment. The Hebrew nephesh (soul) language echoes their soul-knit friendship (18:1). This blank check of loyalty reflects the self-sacrificing love that marks true friendship. Jonathan would indeed do whatever David asked, at great personal cost.
And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, to morrow 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 unto the third day at even.
View commentary
David's plan leveraged the New Moon feast (rosh chodesh) as test of Saul's intentions. His obligation to 'sit with the king at meat' was formal court protocol; absence would be noticed. The phrase 'hide myself in the field' shows David's continued fear despite Jonathan's assurances. The 'third day' allowed time for Saul's response to develop fully. Prudent planning combined with trust in God - David did not presume on past deliverances but prepared for the worst while hoping for the best.
If thy father at all miss me, then say, David earnestly asked leave of me that he might run to Bethlehem his city: for there is a yearly sacrifice there for all the family. sacrifice: or, feast
View commentary
The prepared excuse - David's attendance at a 'yearly sacrifice' in Bethlehem - used religious obligation to explain absence. Such family sacrifices were legitimate obligations, making the cover story plausible. Jonathan would claim David had 'earnestly asked' (nish'ol nish'al) - intensive Hebrew emphasizing repeated, passionate request. The statement was literally true: David did need to be elsewhere. Yet the stated reason concealed the actual purpose. While Scripture records without condemning, the episode shows how Saul's violence forced others into deception for survival.
If he say thus, It is well; thy servant shall have peace: but if he be very wroth, then be sure that evil is determined by him.
View commentary
David provided clear interpretive criteria for Saul's response: 'It is well' signals peace; 'very wroth' reveals murderous intent. The Hebrew charah (to burn with anger) describes intense rage. David understood that Saul's reaction to his absence would expose his true intentions - acceptance meant safety, while rage confirmed deadly purpose. The test would force Saul to reveal what he had concealed from Jonathan. Sometimes absence serves as better revelation than presence.
Therefore thou shalt deal kindly with thy servant; for thou hast brought thy servant into a covenant of the LORD with thee: notwithstanding, if there be in me iniquity, slay me thyself; for why shouldest thou bring me to thy father?
View commentary
David's appeal to 'the covenant of the LORD' grounds their relationship in sacred commitment. His willingness to be slain by Jonathan if guilty ('if there be in me iniquity, slay me thyself') demonstrates confident innocence. The phrase 'deal kindly' (chesed - covenant loyalty) invokes the faithful love that binds covenant partners. David trusted Jonathan's integrity enough to place his life in covenant hands.
And Jonathan said, Far be it from thee: for if I knew certainly that evil were determined by my father to come upon thee, then would not I tell it thee?
View commentary
Jonathan's rhetorical question - 'would not I tell it thee?' - affirms absolute commitment to David's safety over loyalty to his father. The phrase 'Far be it from thee' (chalilah) expresses horror at the thought of concealing danger. Jonathan's integrity meant he would warn David even of his own father's murderous plans. Such commitment tested the limits of family loyalty, choosing righteousness over blood ties. The answer Jonathan expected was obvious: of course he would warn David. Genuine friendship includes uncomfortable truth-telling.
Then said David to Jonathan, Who shall tell me? or what if thy father answer thee roughly?
View commentary
David's practical concern - 'Who shall tell me?' - moves from commitment to logistics. The question 'what if thy father answer thee roughly?' (qashah, harshly) anticipates the danger Jonathan himself might face in delivering bad news. David's concern extended to Jonathan's safety, not merely his own. True friendship involves mutual protection, not just receiving help. This question prompted the arrow-signal plan that would allow communication while protecting Jonathan from being caught directly warning David.
And Jonathan said unto David, Come, and let us go out into the field. And they went out both of them into the field.
View commentary
Jonathan's invitation - 'Come, and let us go out into the field' - moved their conversation to a place of privacy. The field provided space away from palace observers and listeners. The phrase 'both of them' emphasizes their unity of purpose as they walked together into open ground. This field would become the location for their signal system and their final private farewell. Important conversations often require intentional removal from normal settings. Sometimes we must create space for vulnerability and commitment.
And Jonathan said unto David, O LORD God of Israel, when I have sounded my father about to morrow any time, or the third day, and, behold, if there be good toward David, and I then send not unto thee, and shew it thee; sounded: Heb. searched shew: Heb. uncover thine ear
View commentary
Jonathan's oath beginning 'O LORD God of Israel' formally invokes divine witness to his commitment. The conditional structure - 'when I have sounded my father...if there be good toward David' - acknowledges uncertainty while pledging faithful intelligence. This proto-spy operation for godly purposes demonstrates that wisdom sometimes requires covert information gathering to protect the innocent.
The LORD do so and much more to Jonathan: but if it please my father to do thee evil, then I will shew it thee, and send thee away, that thou mayest go in peace: and the LORD be with thee, as he hath been with my father. shew: Heb. uncover thine ear
View commentary
Jonathan's self-imprecation 'The LORD do so and much more to Jonathan' invokes curses upon himself if he fails David. His acknowledgment 'the LORD be with thee, as he hath been with my father' recognizes divine favor has transferred from Saul to David. Jonathan's extraordinary spiritual perception recognized God's work and submitted to it despite personal loss. Such gracious yielding to divine providence marks mature faith.
And thou shalt not only while yet I live shew me the kindness of the LORD, that I die not:
View commentary
Jonathan's request for 'the kindness of the LORD' (chesed YHWH) anticipates his own death and David's eventual kingship. He asks David to show covenant faithfulness ('that I die not') - a request David would later honor through Mephibosheth (2 Samuel 9). This forward-looking concern for future generations demonstrates how covenant thinking extends beyond individual relationships to enduring commitments.
But also thou shalt not cut off thy kindness from my house for ever: no, not when the LORD hath cut off the enemies of David every one from the face of the earth.
View commentary
Jonathan's remarkable request anticipates David's complete victory: 'when the LORD hath cut off the enemies of David every one.' This acknowledges both David's future triumph and the potential danger to Saul's house. The phrase 'cut off thy kindness' (karat chesed) uses covenant language - Jonathan asks that David's covenant loyalty continue to his descendants. David would fulfill this promise through Mephibosheth (2 Samuel 9). Jonathan secured future protection for his house by trusting David's covenant faithfulness even when David was still a hunted fugitive.
So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, Let the LORD even require it at the hand of David's enemies. made: Heb. cut
View commentary
Jonathan's covenant with 'the house of David' extended beyond personal friendship to dynastic commitment. The phrase 'Let the LORD even require it at the hand of David's enemies' invokes divine enforcement against covenant violators. Remarkably, the heir to Saul's throne formally covenanted with the house that would replace his own family. Jonathan subordinated family dynasty to God's revealed purposes. Such submission to divine sovereignty over personal ambition represents the highest form of faith - accepting God's choices even when they cost everything.
And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him: for he loved him as he loved his own soul. because: or, by his love toward him
View commentary
Jonathan's causing David to swear again 'because he loved him' deepens the covenant's binding force. The phrase 'he loved him as he loved his own soul' repeats 18:1,3, emphasizing the friendship's depth. Mutual oath-taking created reciprocal obligation - Jonathan protected David now; David would protect Jonathan's house later. Such covenant love anticipates the bond between Christ and believers.
Then Jonathan said to David, To morrow is the new moon: and thou shalt be missed, because thy seat will be empty. empty: Heb. missed
View commentary
Jonathan's statement 'thy seat will be empty' acknowledges David's established position at the royal table. The empty seat would force Saul to notice David's absence and reveal his response. The phrase 'thou shalt be missed' (paqad, to visit/attend to) indicates both David's importance and the test's mechanism. Sometimes absence speaks more clearly than presence. David's empty seat would provoke Saul to reveal what he concealed when David was present.
And when thou hast stayed three days, then thou shalt go down quickly, and come to the place where thou didst hide thyself when the business was in hand, and shalt remain by the stone Ezel. quickly: or, diligently: Heb. greatly when the: Heb. in the day of the business Ezel: or, that sheweth the way
View commentary
Jonathan's instructions reference 'the place where thou didst hide thyself when the business was in hand' - a familiar location from a previous crisis. The 'stone Ezel' (possibly meaning 'departure' or 'stone of parting') served as the agreed meeting point. The three-day waiting period allowed events to unfold fully. Jonathan's detailed planning shows that faith does not preclude careful preparation. The stone would witness their final farewell - landmarks often acquire significance from the events that occur there.
And I will shoot three arrows on the side thereof, as though I shot at a mark.
View commentary
Jonathan's arrow-signal plan - shooting 'as though I shot at a mark' - provided innocent cover for communication. Archery practice was normal activity that would not arouse suspicion. The three arrows created unmistakable signal without direct verbal communication. Such creative problem-solving protected both participants while accomplishing the necessary communication. Wisdom often finds indirect means when direct approaches prove dangerous. The mundane activity of target practice would carry life-or-death significance only to those who understood the code.
And, behold, I will send a lad, saying, Go, find out the arrows. If I expressly say unto the lad, Behold, the arrows are on this side of thee, take them; then come thou: for there is peace to thee, and no hurt; as the LORD liveth. no hurt: Heb. not any thing
View commentary
The signal system's positive interpretation: 'arrows on this side' means safety - 'there is peace to thee, and no hurt.' The unwitting lad becomes instrument of communication without understanding its significance. Jonathan's oath 'as the LORD liveth' adds divine witness to the signal's reliability. The phrase 'come thou' indicates David could safely return. Such elaborate signaling protected both friends while accomplishing necessary communication.
But if I say thus unto the young man, Behold, the arrows are beyond thee; go thy way: for the LORD hath sent thee away.
View commentary
The signal's negative interpretation: 'arrows beyond thee' means flee - 'the LORD hath sent thee away.' The theological framing - 'the LORD hath sent thee away' - places David's departure under divine direction rather than mere human circumstance. Even flight would be God's guidance, not defeat. Jonathan's language transformed potential tragedy into providential direction. Whatever the message, God remained sovereign. The arrows 'beyond' pointed David forward into God's purposes even if those purposes led away from everything familiar.
And as touching the matter which thou and I have spoken of, behold, the LORD be between thee and me for ever.
View commentary
Jonathan's declaration 'the LORD be between thee and me for ever' places God at the center of their covenant. This divine mediation transforms human friendship into sacred bond. The 'for ever' ('ad 'olam) extends commitment beyond their lifetimes to eternal significance. Human covenants grounded in divine presence gain stability that merely human arrangements lack.
Jonathan's Sign to David
So David hid himself in the field: and when the new moon was come, the king sat him down to eat meat.
View commentary
The plan begins execution: David hid while the king proceeded with the New Moon feast. The contrast between David hiding in the field and Saul eating at his table captures their respective positions - one hunted, one hunting. The New Moon feast proceeded normally, with Saul unaware his intentions would soon be exposed. Divine providence often works through ordinary occasions; religious festivals became testing ground for Saul's heart. David waited in the field while events unfolded at the table.
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.
View commentary
The scene is carefully described: Saul in his customary seat by the wall (strategically positioned for security), Jonathan standing (perhaps nervous), Abner beside Saul, and David's place empty. The empty seat speaks loudly in a court where position mattered greatly. Every person present would notice the absence. The phrase 'as at other times' suggests normalcy punctuated by David's conspicuous absence. Sometimes what is missing reveals more than what is present.
Nevertheless Saul spake not any thing that day: for he thought, Something hath befallen him, he is not clean; surely he is not clean.
View commentary
Saul's silence on the first day - assuming David was ceremonially unclean - revealed his religious pretense. He would not publicly inquire lest it appear he suspected David. The phrase 'surely he is not clean' uses ritual language to mask murderous intent. Saul maintained the appearance of pious concern while harboring deadly purpose. Religious people sometimes hide violent hearts behind ceremonial scruples. The waiting game continued into the second day.
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?
View commentary
The second day's empty seat forced Saul to speak. His reference to 'the son of Jesse' rather than 'David' deliberately distanced and diminished - reducing David to his father's offspring rather than acknowledging him by name or relationship. The question 'neither yesterday, nor to day' revealed growing agitation. Saul's inability to maintain silence exposed what he had tried to hide from Jonathan. The test was working; Saul's concern about David's whereabouts betrayed his sinister interest.
And Jonathan answered Saul, David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem:
View commentary
Jonathan delivered the prepared explanation: David had 'earnestly asked leave' for Bethlehem. The phrase 'earnestly asked' (nish'ol nish'al) intensifies the request, suggesting David's compelling need. Jonathan addressed his father while walking a dangerous line between truth and protection. His answer was literally accurate - David had indeed requested permission through Jonathan - while concealing the fuller purpose. Sometimes protecting the innocent requires careful speech that is true but not complete.
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.
View commentary
Jonathan expands the explanation with details lending credibility: family sacrifice, brother's command, polite request. The phrase 'if I have found favour in thine eyes' uses deferential language. Mentioning the brother's command shifted responsibility away from David's initiative. Jonathan concluded definitively: 'Therefore he cometh not unto the king's table.' The elaborate explanation provided cover while testing Saul's true response. Every detail had been planned to create plausible reason for absence while provoking revelation of Saul's intentions.
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? Thou: or, Thou perverse rebel: Heb. Son of perverse rebellion
View commentary
Saul's volcanic rage against Jonathan - calling him 'son of the perverse rebellious woman' - attacks both Jonathan and his mother. The accusation that Jonathan has 'chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion' correctly perceives Jonathan's loyalty shift but interprets it as betrayal rather than spiritual discernment. Saul's mention of 'thy mother's nakedness' employs shame language indicating how personal his fury had become.
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 . shall: Heb. is the son of death
View commentary
Saul's demand to 'send and fetch' David 'for he shall surely die' makes Jonathan choose between obedience to father and covenant with friend. The phrase 'thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom' reveals Saul's true concern - dynasty preservation. Ironically, Jonathan's covenant faithfulness to David would ensure his descendants' survival (2 Samuel 9), while Saul's violent methods would destroy his own house.
And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, Wherefore shall he be slain? what hath he done?
View commentary
Jonathan's courageous response - 'Wherefore shall he be slain? what hath he done?' - directly challenged his father's murderous intent with legal argument. These two questions demand justification: what crime deserves death, and what evidence supports it? Jonathan appealed to justice even against his father's rage. The questions exposed the irrational basis for Saul's hatred - there was no legitimate answer. Sometimes the most powerful defense is simply asking what wrong has been done. Jonathan stood between his father and his friend, demanding righteousness.
And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him: whereby Jonathan knew that it was determined of his father to slay David.
View commentary
Saul's casting a javelin at his own son - 'to smite him' - represents the nadir of his spiritual descent. The violence against David now turned against his own heir. Jonathan 'knew that it was determined of his father to slay David' through this unmistakable proof. Sin's trajectory had reached family destruction; Saul would harm anyone who opposed his obsession.
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.
View commentary
Jonathan's 'fierce anger' (chori 'aph) arose from grief for David 'because his father had done him shame.' The refusal to eat expressed mourning and protest. Jonathan's anger was righteous indignation at injustice against his friend. His willingness to openly break with his father over David demonstrated covenant loyalty surpassing filial duty.
And it came to pass in the morning, that Jonathan went out into the field at the time appointed with David, and a little lad with him.
View commentary
Jonathan fulfilled his commitment: 'in the morning...at the time appointed' - precise obedience to the agreed plan. The 'little lad' (na'ar qaton) served as unwitting instrument. His youth and small size emphasized his innocence about the momentous communication he would help convey. The field that had been designated for meeting now became site of farewell. Faithful friends keep appointments even when the news to be delivered is painful. Jonathan came prepared to deliver whatever message the events required.
And he said unto his lad, Run, find out now the arrows which I shoot. And as the lad ran, he shot an arrow beyond him. beyond: Heb. to pass over him
View commentary
The signal unfolds: 'arrow beyond him' communicates the worst - David must flee. Jonathan shot deliberately beyond the boy, encoding danger in distance. The lad ran innocently while Jonathan delivered sentence of separation. The arrow's trajectory pointed to David's future - beyond, away, into exile. Simple archery practice masked heartbreaking farewell. Physical direction carried spiritual meaning; the arrow pointing beyond spoke of journeys ahead and friends left behind.
And when the lad was come to the place of the arrow which Jonathan had shot, Jonathan cried after the lad, and said, Is not the arrow beyond thee?
View commentary
Jonathan's cry - 'Is not the arrow beyond thee?' - ostensibly addressed the servant but spoke to David hiding nearby. The question format emphasized the signal: beyond means danger, beyond means flee. David heard his friend's voice delivering news that would separate them for years. The rhetorical question demanded an answer the boy did not understand but David comprehended completely. Sometimes we must hear life-changing news in coded form, receiving destiny through indirect speech.
And Jonathan cried after the lad, Make speed, haste, stay not. And Jonathan's lad gathered up the arrows , and came to his master.
View commentary
The threefold urgency - 'Make speed, haste, stay not' - intensified the message to David. These words ostensibly hurried the servant but communicated deadly urgency to the hidden fugitive. Each term reinforced danger: speed indicated emergency, haste emphasized immediacy, 'stay not' commanded departure. The boy heard an impatient master; David heard a friend warning him to flee for his life. The innocent servant 'gathered up the arrows' and returned, his simple task complete, utterly unaware of the drama surrounding his actions.
But the lad knew not any thing: only Jonathan and David knew the matter.
View commentary
The narrator's observation - 'the lad knew not any thing' - emphasizes the secrecy's success. Two friends shared knowledge that affected kingdoms while a boy simply retrieved arrows. The phrase 'only Jonathan and David knew the matter' highlights their intimate bond; in a world of intrigue and danger, they alone understood. Such shared secrets deepen friendship. The boy's innocence protected him; what he did not know could not be extracted. Sometimes protecting others means keeping them ignorant of burdens they cannot bear.
And Jonathan gave his artillery unto his lad, and said unto him, Go, carry them to the city. artillery: Heb. instruments his lad: Heb. the lad that was his
View commentary
Jonathan dismissed the servant - 'Go, carry them to the city' - creating privacy for his farewell with David. The term 'artillery' (bow and arrows) represented the tools of communication that had served their purpose. Sending the boy away removed the witness, allowing the friends to meet directly despite the danger. Jonathan's instruction was simple but decisive, ending the coded communication phase and beginning their final private moments. Sometimes we must create space for grief and farewell by dismissing others.
And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.
View commentary
The friends' tearful parting 'until David exceeded' shows depth of grief at separation. David's greater weeping reflected his greater loss - home, position, family, future. The threefold bowing and mutual kissing followed ancient protocols for emotional leave-taking. This poignant scene represents the cost of faithfulness: those who love deeply must sometimes part painfully.
And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD, saying, The LORD be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city. forasmuch: or, the LORD be witness of that which etc
View commentary
Jonathan's benediction - 'Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD' - sends David forth grounded in covenant certainty. The eternal scope 'between my seed and thy seed for ever' extends far beyond their immediate crisis. Jonathan's final words commission David into a future neither would fully share but both trusted to God. Peace (shalom) amid parting comes from trust in covenant faithfulness.