T h e
K i n g ’ s
B u s i n e s s
July 1930
357
pursuit (19:19-24), and David’s appeal to Jonathan to once more approach Saul in his behalf (20:1-8). 20:14. Show me the lovingkindness of Jehovah. In the measure that God had been kind to Israel, let David, who was the recipient of great mercy, also be kind to Jonathan and to his seed. That I die not. Jonathan knew the danger to himself and his house if the dynasty passed to another household. All too frequently in changes o f dynasty descendants of former kings were ruthlessly slain. V. 15. Not cut off thy kindness. Jona than pleads not only for his own life but for his posterity forever. When Jehovah hath cut off . . . enemies of David. This was a tacit admission that David was God’s appointed ruler whose foes would be overcome. Jonathan fails to mention Saul as one of these foes. Did he still hope that his father would change his at titude toward David? V. 16. Jonathan made a covenant. Da vid remembered this promise after his ac cession to the throne and showed kind ness to Mephibosheth, the only surviving son of Saul (2 Sam. 9:1-13; 21:7). Je hovah will require it. The thought may be that if David should prove untrue to his pledge God would raise up enemies against him to avenge his treachery. V. 17. Swear again. The repetition o f the oath made it doubly sure. II. Saul Seeking to Slay J o n a t h a n (1 Sam. 20:32-34). David’s absence from a feast in the pal ace was noted by Saul, who demanded of Jonathan that David be brought, the king purposing to slay him treacherously (20: 25 :31). V. 32. Wherefore . . . put to death. Jonathan understood his father’s rage but sought to reason with him. V. 33. Saul cast his spear. His mani acal rage did not stop short of an attempt to kill his son and heir who, as a good son, had been loyal to a fault toward his bad father. Saul’s jealously was blind as well as cruel. Jonathan knew. All hope that the king would change his attitude was gone. V. 34. Arose . . . in fierce anger. This was not the anger o f jealousy but the anger that is born of a sense of truth and justice. Did eat no food. He left the table and the house and dared not go back to face his father’s fury. Saul re mained at the feast. Did he try to bury his troubles in the wine cup? Grieved for David. Jonathan forgot his own shame, suffered at the hands of his father, in his concern for his friend. III. Farewell Words (1 Sam. 20:41, 42).' A prearranged signal told David that Jonathan’s efforts in his behalf had failed (20:35-40). V. 41. Fell on his face. This was an expression both o f humility and submis sion. It assured Jonathan of David’s un failing loyalty. Wept one with another. Orientals are very demonstrative. This grief at parting was genuine. ■' V. 42. Go in peace. Another transla t i o n is possible: “ Go away safe.” For asmuch as we have sworn. Jonathan promised to be the defender o f David, come what would. The Lord would be the Judge between the households o f Jona than and David, assuring that there would never be any rupture between them. Jona than went into the city. The city of
to Saul? Did he know that he endangered his life in so doing? V. 33. What did Saul attempt to do? What conclusion did Jonathan reach? V. 34. Was Jonathan’s “fierce -anger” malicious or was it based upon a sense of justice? Did Jonathan seem to grieve more for David than for himself? 20:41. What signal had been arranged between David and Jonathan? What was David’s attitude when they met? Was their grief genuine? V. 42. What was Jonathan’s final word? Was the covenant between them again renewed? To what place did Jona than go? 2 Sam. 1 :25-27. Did David rise above all selfishness in honoring Saul after his death? In what language did he show his tender love for and deep appreciation o f his friend, Jonathan? * * * P ractical P oints 1. Jonathan, because he loved David, risked his life for his friend. A greater than either Jonathan or David gave His life for us while we were yet sinners (Rom. 5:8). 2. David leaned heavily upon his friend. Jonathan was true to him and sought to be helpful, but he was limited in power. Would it have been better if David had leaned more upon the arm of God and less upon Jonathan? 3. What a tragic awakening Jonathan had when he came to recognize his fa ther’s true character! How sad it was that so trustful and dutiful a son should be compelled to lose confidence in his parent. Long continued resistance to God hardens the heart and beclouds the mind. 4. Jonathan must have had many temp tations to forget his covenant and steel his heart against David. No doubt his friends at court would be ready to ad vise him to do so. His faithfulness un der such circumstances is the more re markable. 5. Did Jonathan show weakness in re maining in the household o f Saul? He must have had a very good motive, whether the thought of filial duty or the hope that he might be helpful to David. He had sacrificed much for his friend. Should he have gone still farther, leav ing the palace and identifying himself Wholly with David ? David was cast out side the camp. Should Jonathan have gone forth with him? Might he thereby have escaped death in one o f Saul’s battles? 6. We are called not merely to serve Christ but to yield all to Him and go out side the camp with Him, bearing His re proach (Heb. 13:13). 7. David did not forget his covenant. Our Lord also has made a covenant with us which He will not forget (Acts 2:39; 16:31). 8. David shows his strength of charac ter when he sings the praises of the fallen king who had been his inveterate foe. He had not allowed bitterness or malice to enter his heart. * * * G olden T ext I llustration Several years ago, a prize was offered for the best definition o f a friend. The description that won the prize was this: “A friend is the person who comes in when every other person has gone out.” Christ is that kind of Friend.
BLACKBOARD LESSON
rç F ai Lein" JONATHAN. SERVER / ó r WID i n - .
W B R i 'Love- Neve ¡S p o p p a 1 OVE OF L ife pre
1 \
D/
n
1 wmDt. ----- H I 'SAULS HATRED
W aters 0 /
AG.H. A WG. Z4.
Gibeah, which was Saul’s capital. This was an evidence o f his filial loyalty to his father, and Jonathan is to be admired for it. Viewed in the light of future dis aster to Jonathan, some have questioned whether this dutiful son did not go too far in patriotism and loyalty. At any rate, he was involved in the ruin of Saul’s house. 2 Sam. 1 :25. How are the mighty fallen. Both Saul and Jonathan are in cluded among “the mighty.” With true chivalry, David forgets all the evil Saul had done or attempted to do, and gives him in this dirge more honor than one would think was his due. V. 26. I am distressed for thee. His love for . Jonathan predominated. His words concerning his beloved friend would be marred by attempts at expla nation. They still ring out with won drous charm. Hear them again : “Very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.” - ♦ * * L esson Q uestions 1 Sam. 18:1. On what occasion did Da vid and Jonathan meet? What questions had Saul asked o f David? What expres sions describe the intensity of Jonathan’s love? V- 2. To what place did David go? Why was he not permitted to go home ? Vs., 3, 4. What is a covenant? When Jonathan stripped himself o f his apparel, what did this action signify? 20:14. How was the covenant between the two enlarged? Did Jonathan fear that he might be slain if there was a change o f dynasty? V. 15. Why did Jonathan fear for his descendants? Did he show that he ex pected the enemies of David to be de stroyed? Do you think he had Saul in mind as one o f the enemies? Vs. 16, 17. Did Jonathan suggest that if David were untrue to his covenant God would raise up enemies to punish him? Did Jonathan require a new oath? Did he mistrust David? Had it cost him much to love David? 20:32. What plea did Jonathan make
Unanimous Want to say, that this magazine is the best o f its kind I have ever seen or read, and all of our teachers in the S. S. and Pastor o f our church also seem to be o f the same opinion. —From Elyria, Ohio.
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs