Michael's Abbey Bible Study - 1 Samuel Chapter 14

1 Now the day came that Jonathan, the son of Saul, said to the young man who was carrying his armor, "Come and let us cross over to the Philistines' garrison that is on the other side." But he did not tell his father. This verse is not opening with a "once upon a time" type of saying. It is merely saying that the day the Philistine garrison sortied out in the pass of Michmash is when these things happened. (See 13:23.) However, day is likely not literal but figurative. It may have been a day or more since the Philistines went out.
That Jonathan and Saul are son and father is first mentioned here. And the status of their relationship is indicated by the fact that Jonathan acts without Saul's knowledge. It seems that Jonathan has a different view of how to deal with the threat to Israel than Saul. It seems clear that Saul was operating on his own ability and was thinking in terms of what he and his remaining troops were capable of on their own. Whereas Jonathan was operating in faith as one who is backed by the one true and all-powerful God. Jonathan's armor bearer operated with faith in Jonathan and Yahweh as we will see in the coming verses.
2 Saul was staying in the outskirts of Gibeah under the pomegranate tree which is in Migron. And the people who were with him were about six hundred men, Scripture doesn't say why Saul is camping outside the city instead of in it. Being in the in the countryside instead of in a city would make it easier to withdraw and evacuate to another location, as well as to conceal their location. On the other hand, it would also make it easier to quickly move to intercept the enemy should an advantage present itself.
While the text does not indicate if this tree was a deliberate choice, when the text notes something like the fact that Saul was under a pomegranate tree it often means the author was making a point. Pomegranates were one of the seven products associated with the Promised Land in Deuteronomy 8:8. The spies brought grapes and pomegranates as evidence of the goodness of the land. Aaron's lower garments were embroidered with them, and the bottom of the priest's ephod would be decorated with them. The priest with Saul in verse 3 is wearing an ephod which would definitely have embroidered pomegranates around the lower edge. The top of the pillars of Solomon's temple were decorated with pomegranate carvings on chains in 2 Chronicles 3:15. Thus pomegranates are a symbol of the temple and priesthood. There is more symbolism in pomegranates, although those aren't significant here.
Also, being under a tree is significant. in 1 Samuel 22:6 Saul is under a tamarisk tree at Gibeah when he gets the news that the location of David has been discovered. And he is buried under a tamarisk tree at Jabesh when he dies in 1 Samuel 31:13. A tree is a symbol of long lasting life. And to rule under one is to acknowledge that one is under Yahweh and his creation rather than the works and buildings of man. It was an act of humility. In Judges 4:5, when Deborah was judge of Israel she would serve as judge under a palm tree. She remained humble despite being the highest civilian authority, the one the elders of villages and cities would come to. And she was one of the few judges, if not the only one, who didn't mess things up in the end. Thus being under a tree symbolizes leadership.
The significance of the pomegranate tree is that it combines the symbolism of leadership with the symbolism of the priesthood. Thus there is good reason to think that the author noted this detail as a connection to Saul's sin in 13:9 when he tried to take on both king and priest roles for himself, something God did not allow. This is backed up by the repetition that Saul is down to 600 men, a huge decrease in troops that his sin caused. Thus the author is subtly pointing out that the current circumstances are due to Saul's sin. This could also be inferring that Saul is still unrepentant from that sin.
3 and Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the priest of the Lord at Shiloh, was wearing an ephod. And the people did not know that Jonathan had gone. It was common for both Israeli and pagan kings to have religious leaders with them on military campaigns. This was especially true for those that could operate as oracles. Ahijah was the great-grandson of Eli who served as high priest and judge at Shiloh. It is interesting that the failed house of Eli is serving the failed house of Saul here. In both cases only one will be left at the end. One wonders if Saul turned to Ahijah after being rebuked by Samuel. If so, that would be piling a bad decision on top of another. Ahijah is wearing an ephod, which meant he was there to operate as priest of Israel.
It is notable that Jonathan's departure was unknown to the people as well, not just Saul. While Jonathan operated outside his father and king's direction as he rightly sought to do Yahweh's will, he did so quietly avoiding open and public defiance.
4 Between the passes by which Jonathan sought to cross over to the Philistines' garrison, there was a sharp crag on the one side and a sharp crag on the other side, and the name of the one was Bozez, and the name of the other Seneh. 5 The one crag rose on the north opposite Michmash, and the other on the south opposite Geba. The majority of the Philistine garrison had sortied out, mostly likely with the intent of forcing a battle with Israeli forces. The setting is describing a nearly impossible crossing. The sharp crags named Bozez, which means shiny, gleaming or miry, and Seneh, which means thorny one or thorn bush, are sharp cliffs with a ravine between such that the Philistines wouldn't even think of attack coming from that direction. Just crossing here was a heroic act.
6 Then Jonathan said to the young man who was carrying his armor, "Come and let us cross over to the garrison of these uncircumcised; perhaps the Lord will work for us, for the Lord is not restrained to save by many or by few." When Jonathan says "perhaps" he is not doubting God or His power. The fact that he states that God can bring victory by many or a few shows the exact opposite. Jonathan knew God had saved Israel through Gideon and only 300 soldiers. So this is not doubt, it is the humility of a true believer that God's will may not be with this, unlike the Israelites who thought they could force the hand of God by bringing the Ark to Ebenezer against the Philistines. Jonathan understood that he needed to be humble and not just assume that what he wanted to do was within God's will.
Some commentators wrongly use Jonathan's going against his father as evidence Saul was always a bad guy. That is contradictory to logic and reason. Jonathan was a man who would do what is right no matter the cost to himself. That is evidence of being raised right. And Saul's behavior before chapter 13 reflected the same temperament. However, after Saul fully became king he became willing to compromise his character. What fits the biblical evidence best is that once he was fully king, (and had been king for some time,) he wanted to stay king more than he wanted to do what is right. Whereas Jonathan was willing to lose becoming king in order to do what is right. He would not bend or yield to temptation or fear. Unfortunately, Saul didn't understand what Jonathan knew, that only if you are willing to lose something, even your life, you will not be able to keep it.
7 His armor bearer said to him, "Do all that is in your heart; turn yourself, and here I am with you according to your desire." An armor bearer is one who helped lighten the load of a warrior when traveling. This would allow the warrior to be fresh to fight at all times. He was also capable of fighting himself, and would guard the back of the man he served, preventing him from being attacked on all sides.
Jonathan's armor bearer demonstrated faith in Jonathan. As Jonathan served Yahweh with all his heart, following his leadership was to put his faith in Yahweh as well. Jonathan's faith and integrity was an example to those around him, just like Naomi was with Ruth.
8 Then Jonathan said, "Behold, we will cross over to the men and reveal ourselves to them. 9 "If they say to us, 'Wait until we come to you'; then we will stand in our place and not go up to them. 10 "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 the sign to us." Again, remembering Gideon's good examples, (and staying away from the bad ones,) Jonathan sets out a fleece for God to show him what is the right path. This is one of the ways the Old Testament can help us in our daily lives, learning from others' mistakes and copying others' wins.
If the Philistines tell them to come up, then they will know Yahweh is behind them. What is unsaid is what will happen if they say to wait. Jonathan says they will stay, but God will have told them this is not the right fight. Implied is that they will make an orderly retreat from the confrontation while the Philistines are finding a way down to them.
11 When both of them revealed themselves to the garrison of the Philistines, the Philistines said, "Behold, Hebrews are coming out of the holes where they have hidden themselves." So Jonathan and his armor bearer in the ravine between the cliffs step into sight of the Philistine garrison. Calling them Hebrews was a term non-Israelites used to refer to them, and the Israelites would use to refer to themselves when dealing with outsiders. The Philistines would often use it in an insulting manner, and that appears to be the case here. They were insulting the Israelite's honor and bravery. The meaning of the insult is that the Hebrews had been hiding because they were scared.
12 So the men of the garrison hailed Jonathan and his armor bearer and said, "Come up to us and we will tell you something." And Jonathan said to his armor bearer, "Come up after me, for the Lord has given them into the hands of Israel." Jonathan's fleece test showed that Yahweh had given the Philistines into Jonathan's hand. And he told his armor bearer to follow behind him. This would mean that Jonathan would meet the enemy first, allowing his armor bearer to complete the climb safely. Then he could then defend Jonathan's back. However, it seems the Philistines allowed Jonathan to finish his climb before engaging.
13 Then Jonathan climbed up on his hands and feet, with his armor bearer behind him; and they fell before Jonathan, and his armor bearer put some to death after him. It is likely that Jonathan climbed up wearing his full armor, with his weapons on his back. In protecting Jonathan's back the armor bearer would have to fight attackers, and he killed some of them. More skilled enemy fighters would be delayed and deflected long enough for Jonathan to dispatch them between the opponents in front.
14 That first slaughter which Jonathan and his armor bearer made was about twenty men within about half a furrow in an acre of land. Two men killed 20 Philistine warriors. These were not militia, but were trained and full-time soldiers in a culture that focused on martial skills and conquest. They would feed their population on what was taken by warriors as much as what their own farmers grew.
An acre is a little more than half a soccer field, or about 80% of a football field. The description of this battle would be about 35 yards. This means Jonathan was cutting his way through the Philistines like he was harvesting wheat. It probably took less than 5 minutes, and could have been only 2.
15 And there was a trembling in the camp, in the field, and among all the people. Even the garrison and the raiders trembled, and the earth quaked so that it became a great trembling. The trembling was among the Philistines who were camped at Michmash, those in the field searching for Israelites, those left in the garrison, and the raiders who were harassing Israelite camps. In other words, all the Philistines in the area were terrified. Jonathan had carved through their professional troops better than the Terminator. That the earth shook from their fear is almost certainly hyperbolic or poetic language rather than literal. But it could have been literal since Yahweh was operating in this encounter. Since Saul doesn't know about it when trying to discern what the Philistines are up to, it is almost certainly hyperbole.
16 Now Saul's watchmen in Gibeah of Benjamin looked, and behold, the multitude melted away; and they went here and there. The Philistines realized that if one Hebrew could do this, then they were in big trouble and melted away in retreat. There are several hills around Gibeah that have an unobstructed view of Michmash where Saul and his watchmen could see this happening from a distance.
17 Saul said to the people who were with him, "Number now and see who has gone from us." And when they had numbered, behold, Jonathan and his armor bearer were not there. To number is like taking roll call. This was a jump in logic on Saul's part. The Philistines didn't retreat unless they were sure they would be destroyed. Therefore, someone must be responsible for it. It doesn't say whether or not he considered this to be because of Yahweh or not. But the next verse seems to indicate he didn't.
18 Then Saul said to Ahijah, "Bring the ark of God here." For the ark of God was at that time with the sons of Israel. From Saul's perspective, the Philistines leaving view was ominous. They could be staging for a massive attack, which would be in character for them. Or it could be a trap. There was no way for him to safely find out what was happening on his own. So he turns to ask Yahweh. It doesn't say why the Ark was with them at this time. Having it nearby would make it easy to inquire of God. At the least, it appears that Saul was not so foolish as the Israelites at Ebenezer using the Ark to force Yahweh to act. Some commentators point out that Saul was again wrongly stepping into priestly matters by giving specific instructions to the priest instead of just asking him to inquire of God and letting the priest take the appropriate actions. This is a valid viewpoint.
19 While Saul talked to the priest, the commotion in the camp of the Philistines continued and increased; so Saul said to the priest, "Withdraw your hand." While Saul was talking to the priest, the priest was using the ephod he was wearing in front of the Ark to inquire of Yahweh. When Saul tells the priest to withdraw his hand, the meant to take his hand away from one of the stones on the ephod, not the Ark. One did not touch the Ark except for very special circumstances. Basically, Saul was hanging up the phone on his inquiry to Yahweh.
The noise and tumult in the Philistine camp became so pronounced that Saul realized this was not a strategic maneuver, but a panicked retreat.
20 Then Saul and all the people who were with him rallied and came to the battle; and behold, every man's sword was against his fellow, and there was very great confusion. The Philistines were the ones whose swords were against his fellow killing each other in the confusion, not the Israelites. As the majority of the Israelites were poorly armed, having the Philistines use their own swords on other Philistines would be a big help.
21 Now the Hebrews who were with the Philistines previously, who went up with them all around in the camp, even they also turned to be with the Israelites who were with Saul and Jonathan. Here the use of "Hebrews" is not insulting and is not from the perspective of the Philistines. In this context it refers to the Israelites who had become collaborators with the Philistines, differentiating them from the Israelites who did not. They turned against the Philistines and joined with Saul and Jonathan. It is notable that there is no condemnation of these collaborators in the Hebrew wording used. The implication is that they did what they had to in order to survive. But their true loyalty was to Israel and Yahweh. This is much like Naaman in 2 Kings 5:18 asking for pardon for assisting his King in worship of Rimmon because it is his duty, but he will personally only offer sacrifices to Yahweh.
22 When all the men of Israel who had hidden themselves in the hill country of Ephraim heard that the Philistines had fled, even they also pursued them closely in the battle. Again, there is no condemnation of those who were hiding. The reference to Ephraim is a sign that Saul's leadership was still accepted outside the tribe of Benjamin.
23 So the Lord delivered Israel that day, and the battle spread beyond Beth-aven. With just one man, Jonathan, who was willing to serve Him with all his heart, Yahweh brought about a huge victory.
24 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. Chronologically, Saul must have given this oath with a conditional curse back in verse 20 when he rallied the troops to battle and pursue the fleeing Philistines. Saul is the last one documented to make such an oath in the Old Testament. Perhaps later leaders learned from his mistake. Perhaps Saul thought this self-denial would please Yahweh. But it seems clear this was a foolish mistake. Being hard-pressed is normally a description of a military unit that is in hard battle, usually because the opponent is of greater strength and/or numbers. Here, Saul's oath is having the same effect as a superior force.
25 All the people of the land entered the forest, and there was honey on the ground. This verse provides the setting for the next two. The relevant facts are clear, they entered a forest and there was honey on the ground.
There is a minor difference in how the beginning of the verse is translated that does not affect the meaning in the slightest. The Hebrew is literally all the land entered the forest. Many, like the NASB, take this to be hyperbole for all the people of the land. This could mean the Israelites or everyone present including the fleeing Philistines. This could also be a poetic description of the geography. This would mean all the land, meaning the open land, transitioned to a forest as they pursued the Philistines.
26 When the people entered the forest, behold, there was a flow of honey; but no man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the oath. The oath here is the oath Saul made with a conditional curse detailed in verse 24 and was taken during the time described in verse 20. The men feared this oath because to violate it could bring the wrath of the king, as well as divine retribution.
27 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. At this point Jonathan and his armor bearer had been joined by those under Saul in the pursuit of the Philistines. But since Jonathan had been instigating this rout by attacking the men at the garrison, he was not present to hear his father's oath.
Battle over a distance, especially wearing armor, was a physically taxing action. The calories burned just in fighting were enormous. Anyone who has done something physically demanding knows what a boost in energy we get by eating anything, especially something sweet.
28 Then one of the people said, "Your father strictly put the people under oath, saying, 'Cursed be the man who eats food today.'" And the people were weary. The Israelites were either spread out to comb through the forest for Philistines, or the men near Jonathan were too shocked by his action to speak up before he had eaten the honey. But at least one sees what Jonathan had done and tells him about the oath of Saul.
That the people were weary was an editorial comment against Saul that it is his fault his people were losing energy and that the oath was a bad action.
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. Jonathan was not one to be disrespectful towards his father and king. And disrespect towards God's anointed was not the intent here. Jonathan defended himself from a charge that meant he was rebelling against the king and Yahweh. He responded with the truth, but with a soft wording. He could have called out his father as wrong on this, not to mention that he wasn't following Yahweh.
30 "How much more, if only the people had eaten freely today of the spoil of their enemies which they found! For now the slaughter among the Philistines has not been great." The Philistines were powered by the adrenaline of their fear. The Israelites were running out of steam. Jonathan's point was that if they had been allowed to eat from the plunder they could have caught many more of the fleeing Philistines.
31 They struck among the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon. And the people were very weary. It was about 20 miles from Michmash to Aijalon. Searching and fighting all that way would have been a tiring day if they had been allowed to eat. Doing so on an empty stomach would be exhausting.
32 The people rushed greedily upon the spoil, and took sheep and oxen and calves, and slew them on the ground; and the people ate them with the blood. Saul's oath expired at sundown. In Judaism, a day lasted from sundown to sundown. The night was viewed as belonging to the following day. Anyone who has had a sleepless night can understand how the night before impacts the following day. Thus, Paul's call not to let the sun go down on our anger means not to hold onto it beyond today.
The significance of killing the animals on the ground means the blood could not drain away. Eating blood was prohibited in the law of Moses. Even before the law God forbade consuming blood with meat to Noah after the flood in Genesis 9:4.
33 Then they told Saul, saying, "Behold, the people are sinning against the Lord by eating with the blood." And he said, "You have acted treacherously; roll a great stone to me today." 34 Saul said, "Disperse yourselves among the people and say to them, 'Each one of you bring me his ox or his sheep, and slaughter it here and eat; and do not sin against the Lord by eating with the blood.'" So all the people that night brought each one his ox with him and slaughtered it there. When he received the report of the people eating blood, Saul understood this was a sin against Yahweh. As king, he took steps to stop this sin. He set up the place to butcher animals and let the blood drain away next to where he was camped, and sent men out to spread the instructions to follow the law there. Of course, it was his own bad decision that motivated his men towards this sin. Regardless, this was an act of righteousness. He was taking a stand for the law and Yahweh. Whether he did this sincerely or out of an obligation as king is not stated. However, the next verse implies it was for right motives.
35 And Saul built an altar to the Lord; it was the first altar that he built to the Lord. Saul builds his first altar to Yahweh. Implied is there were more to follow. The stone for killing the animals could have been declared an altar, but that stone was for the commonplace proper killing of animals for eating. This verse means another stone or stones were set up as an altar for sacrifice to Yahweh. Implied is that Saul made a sacrifice there. While Saul had been rejected as king, he was still a follower of Yahweh and one of the chosen people.
36 Then Saul said, "Let us go down after the Philistines by night and take spoil among them until the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them." And they said, "Do whatever seems good to you." So the priest said, "Let us draw near to God here." Saul gets another of his ideas here. Now that the men were fed, he thought they should now continue going after the Philistines through the night. Unfortunately, the human body does not work that way. The exhaustion brought by Saul's oath would not be counteracted by eating now. If they had been allowed to eat during the day pursuit, they would have energy reserves to draw on and continue through the night. Despite this, his men agree to do as the king asks.
At this point Ahijah inserts that they should inquire of Yahweh. The text is neutral as to whether this was proper or not.
37 Saul inquired of God, "Shall I go down after the Philistines? Will You give them into the hand of Israel?" But He did not answer him on that day. Saul's response is to inquire to Yahweh through the priest Ahijah. It is possible that the Ark was brought there. But it was not necessary to inquire of the Lord. Only the ephod was required. Regardless, Yahweh was silent. This was a certain indication that Yahweh was displeased, but not why. One wonders what Saul would have done if Yahweh had just said "no" here.
38 Saul said, "Draw near here, all you chiefs of the people, and investigate and see how this sin has happened today. Saul's response is to inquire to Yahweh through the priest Ahijah. It is possible that the Ark was brought there. But it was not necessary to inquire of the Lord. Only the ephod was required. Regardless, Yahweh was silent. This was a certain indication that Yahweh was displeased, but not why. One wonders what Saul would have done if Yahweh had just said "no" here.
39 "For as the Lord lives, who delivers Israel, though it is in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die." But not one of all the people answered him. Saul makes another foolish oath here. In English this is a little confusing. Saul is saying that Israel will be delivered by the death of whoever is found to have caused offense, even if it is Jonathan. A possible reason the people are silent is that the news that Jonathan had unknowingly broken the previous oath had spread among them.
Some commentators speculate that Saul was trying to get rid of Jonathan at this point. However, that is not supported by the text. If anything, Saul knew his reputation was enhanced by the victories of his son. There is no hint of jealousy here. If anything, Saul declared this thinking it couldn't be Jonathan in order to give credibility to his oath and death sentence. It also could be so there would be no argument when the lots showed who was the problem, even if it was one of the chiefs.
40 Then he said to all Israel, "You shall be on one side and I and Jonathan my son will be on the other side." And the people said to Saul, "Do what seems good to you." Saul set things up himself, and it was not the usual method of drawing lots. Normally the representatives would pass by and the lots were drawn for each as he came by. Thus, there would be many repeated no answers before the one yes would be drawn. The odds of that occurring naturally were astronomically high. Thus, it would be demonstrated that Yahweh was directing the casting of lots for all to see. Instead, Saul set it up so there would always be an answer, one side or the other. Scripture doesn't say why Saul did this. A lack of faith, or a fear that Yahweh would continue to be silent and wouldn't direct it are possible. But we don't know.
41 Therefore, Saul said to the Lord, the God of Israel, "Give a perfect lot." And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped. 42 Saul said, "Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son." And Jonathan was taken. Saul may have been directly addressing Ahijah the priest who was Yahweh's representative present. It would be like a person addressing the king's representative as the king himself. Ahijah would use the urim and tummim, the two stones from his ephod, to cast the lots. Casting of lots is not documented to be done this way after David.
Elsewhere, the name order is Saul and Jonathan. That Jonathan's name is first may be to emphasize that this narrative is focused on him.
Again, it doesn't seem that Saul considered that Jonathan could have been the problem. But after his oath he had painted himself into a corner.
43 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!" Both of Saul's foolish oaths have put his heir, Jonathan, at risk. The consequence of the first was to put a curse on him, even though he didn't know about it. The second put him under a death sentence.
On its own it is not known whether Jonathan's statement "I must die", amut in Hebrew, is meant as a statement or a question. However, the next verse seems to indicate that Jonathan said it in protest of an unfair oath.
44 Saul said, "May God do this to me and more also, for you shall surely die, Jonathan." The "may God do this to me" phrasing is usually in response to a challenge, such as questioning or evading. This indicates Saul is contradicting Jonathan, meaning Saul thought Jonathan was challenging his oaths.
45 But the people said to Saul, "Must Jonathan die, who has brought about this great deliverance in Israel? Far from it! As the Lord lives, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground, for he has worked with God this day." So the people rescued Jonathan and he did not die. Either the people saw for themselves the injustice, or Jonathan's protest in verse 43 brought them to it. Plain reading of the text shows their argument was based on it not being right to condemn the hero who was behind the rout that made the victory possible, not to mention he clearly was working hand in glove with Yahweh to do so. It may be that they saw the injustice of Saul's foolish oaths resulting in the execution of an innocent man, regardless of his hero status. In that case, the hero status is an argument to change Saul's mind rather than their base motivation. But that is speculation. Regardless of their thought process, the people were unwilling to allow this injustice to occur.
Rescued could be translated as ransomed, but rescued better fits the context.
46 Then Saul went up from pursuing the Philistines, and the Philistines went to their own place. So Saul ceases to pursue the Philistines and returns to his home of Gibeah in the hill country. This allowed many more Philistines to survive and escape than otherwise would have.
47 Now when Saul had taken the kingdom over Israel, he fought against all his enemies on every side, against Moab, the sons of Ammon, Edom, the kings of Zobah, and the Philistines; and wherever he turned, he inflicted punishment. Despite his problems and sin, God continued to use Saul to protect Israel. That he "inflicted punishment" indicates that Saul was successful in battling the enemies of Israel. However, it also infers a general lack of decisive victories over them. This is supported by the historical record both in and outside the Bible.
48 He acted valiantly and defeated the Amalekites, and delivered Israel from the hands of those who plundered them. Amalek was a tribe of desert dwelling raiders from south of Judah that would harass and steal from Israel. They opposed Israel as far back as the Exodus. While Saul is credited with a valiant victory over them here, they remained a problem. It is the Amalekites who attack David's home city of Ziklag in chapter 29.
49 Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan and Ishvi and Malchi-shua; and the names of his two daughters were these: the name of the firstborn Merab and the name of the younger Michal. This is not an all-inclusive list of Saul's sons. Thus the writer does not number them here. Writers often will only list those that are relevant to a particular narrative. At different places in scripture a different list will appear. However, Jonathan, Ish-bosheth, and Abinadab are the only ones that are significant in the story of Israel. Ishvi is most likely a version of the name Ish-bosheth.
Saul is stated as having only two daughters.
50 The name of Saul's wife was Ahinoam the daughter of Ahimaaz. And the name of the captain of his army was Abner the son of Ner, Saul's uncle. One of David's wives has the same name as Saul's wife. However, they are clearly identified as being different women. Saul's wife was the daughter of Ahimaaz. Whereas David's wife Ahinoam is of Jezreel. Not mentioned in verses 49-50 is that Saul also had a concubine who bore him two sons.
Whether Abner, the captain of Saul's army, or his father Ner was Saul's uncle is not clear here. However, this is cleared up in the next verse.
51 Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel. Kish was Saul's father. In 9:1, Kish's father is Abiel. Here, Ner is the son of Abiel, making Ner the uncle of Saul and brother to Saul's father. Thus, the captain of Saul's army was his cousin.
52 Now the war against the Philistines was severe all the days of Saul; and when Saul saw any mighty man or any valiant man, he attached him to his staff. Because of Saul's foolish oaths, the pursuit of the Philistines stopped short of destroying their ability to fight against Israel in verse 46. If Saul had not acted foolishly, there is good reason to believe that the Philistine military would have been nearly destroyed and not been a threat for decades as happened in 1 Samuel 7:13. There would still be other enemies and threats to deal with. But they would not have to deal with this constant and severe state of war with the Philistines. Because he was faced with constant military threat, Saul would conscript anyone who had great fighting ability just as Samuel warned would happen in 1 Samuel 8:11.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB © The Lockman Foundation.

If you have a question, you can find the email address to write to on the FAQ Page under the Questions FAQ.

1 Sam. 13   -   1 Samuel   -   1 Sam. 15

Bible Study Page   -   Michael's Abbey