You may subscribe yourself at the Ascension site here and receive notifications in your email, or just follow along on my blog. Bible in One Year Readings Index
Chapter 20: Jonathan Helps David Escape
1 Samuel 20:1-4 ~ David Consults Jonathan
Don't miss the emotional intensity of the exchange between David and Jonathan as David asks three rhetorical questions in verse 1:
- "What have I done?"
- "What is my guilt?"
- "How have I wronged your father ...?"
Look for the equally emotional echo of these questions repeated by Jonathan to Saul in 20:32.
In verse 2 Jonathan expresses the belief that the matter of his father's hostility toward David has been settled.
Question: What argument does Jonathan offer to David to support his belief that David is no longer in danger? What is David's counter argument?
Answer: Jonathan says that he is his father's closest confidant and he would know if Saul still planned to kill David. David replies that Saul is now hiding his plans from Jonathan because he knows Jonathan favors David.
David and Jonathan (Rembrandt)
1 Samuel 20:5-17 ~ The Plan Part I
According to the Law of the Sinai Covenant, there was a twice daily liturgical sacrifice at the Sanctuary, and also weekly (Sabbath), monthly, yearly and periodic communal holy days with prescribed sacrifices. The Israelites were to keep to a lunar calendar with the feast of the New Moon marking the first day of the new month and with prescribed sacrifices to be offered at the Sanctuary during the morning liturgy of the Tamid sacrifice (Num 10:10; 28:11-15; Amos 8:5).
The feast of the New Moon was a joyous occasion celebrated in villages across Israel with the blowing of horns and communal feasts. As the king's son-in-law, David is expected to celebrate with the royal family, but attending the feast would only provide an opportunity for Saul to kill David. Jonathan says it will be the New Moon feast "tomorrow" because the next day began at sunset of what we would consider to be the same day.
Question: What is the plan David suggests?
Answer: Jonathan will tell his father that David has his permission to attend a clan feast in Bethlehem. If Saul flies into a rage they will know that he intended to kill David.
When David asks how Jonathan will warn him if his life is in danger, Jonathan suggests they leave his home and go into the countryside where they will have privacy. Jonathan is probably worried that a servant may hear their conversation. When they are alone in the field, Jonathan then swears by God's divine name (similar to the first part of the formula oath in 20:3b) to David that he will test his father's intentions concerning David.
Question: By what self-curse does Jonathan bind himself in Yahweh's name?
Answer: Jonathan will be under divine judgment if he fails to tell David if he is safe or if he is in danger and must escape.
1 Samuel 20:18-23 ~ The Plan Part II
The "day of the deed" (verse 19) probably refers to the day of the feast when Jonathan will put his plan into motion and it is hoped that Saul will reveal his true intentions. David's hiding place was probably and prominent memorial stone set up to remember some historical event (see Josh 4:20-21). The Hebrew word ezel means "departure" and is therefore a fitting place for David to await his fate.
Question: What is Jonathan's plan to inform David of what he has discovered about his father's intentions?
Answer: If it is safe for David to reveal himself, Jonathan will shoot the arrows close in. If however David is in danger and should leave, Jonathan will shoot the arrows farther down the field and will send this servant out into the field to find them.
The number three (three arrows and three days) may be significant; perhaps symbolizing that David's change in status from honored hero and son-in-law in the royal family to outcast is part of God's Divine Plan.
1 Samuel 20:24-31 ~ Jonathan discovers Saul's Intentions
The royal family gathers to celebrate the New Moon feast. Abner is included because he is not only Saul's general but Saul's nephew and therefore a member of the royal family. At first Saul is not disturbed by David's absence. He assumes that David has become ritually unclean and therefore cannot attend the meal on the first night. Notice that Saul takes the strategic position at the table with his back against the wall where he cannot be ambushed from behind. Does he fear that David will attempt to assassinate him? Notice that Saul does not use David's name but only calls him "son of Jesse" three times.
Those who participated in the feast of the New Moon had to be ritually clean, as in all the sacred feasts of the liturgical calendar, including the Passover meal. Ritual uncleanliness could arise from a number of activities in daily life that are listed in the Holiness Code in Leviticus chapters 11-15. Such uncleanness (with the exception of contamination by a corpse) was lifted by sundown after ritually bathing. This is why Saul will be greatly disturbed that David is not present on the next day for the meal. Most feast day meals occurred at noon. The Passover meal which took place at sundown was the exception. We know that the New Moon feast took place during the day because if it had occurred after sundown Saul would have expected David to have become ritually cleansed and fit to attend the meal.
As was the plan, when Saul inquires about David's absence, Jonathan gives the excuse that he gave David permission to attend an annual clan feast in Bethlehem because his presence was demanded by his elder brothers. As the youngest brother, David's elder brothers had authority over him.
Question: What is Saul's reaction and what proof is offered of Saul's attitude toward David that Jonathan found hard to accept earlier?
Answer: Saul flew into a rage and clearly reveals his intentions to kill David.
Jonathan's behavior is incomprehensible to Saul. David stands in the way of Jonathan's kingship and yet Jonathan in siding with "the son of Jesse." Saul's insults in verse 30 are not directed at Jonathan's mother but at Jonathan who Saul accuses of not being a "true son" because of his friendship with David. Saul swears an oath to kill "the son of Jesse," saying Now have him fetched and brought to me; for he is a son of death (literal translation). Personifying "Death," Saul is saying that he has sworn a covenant with death for David's life. It is "Death" who is Saul's witness to his oath.
Question: With what can Saul's covenant oath with death be compared and contrasted? See 18:3; 20:14-17, 42.
Answer: His oath can be seen in contrast to the oath David and Jonathan swore in which they pledged their covenant love and loyalty to each other and David's covenant promise to protect Jonathan's descendants. Their oaths, however, were sworn in Yahweh's Divine Name and with Yahweh as their witness.
It appears that Saul fully believes that David is the man Samuel spoke of who is chosen by God to be the next king (15:28).
Question: What point does Saul make about David concerning Jonathan and his heirs succeeding Saul as king of Israel?
Answer: He tries to appeal to Jonathan's self-interest in telling him as long as David lives Jonathan's succession rights are not secure.
1 Samuel 20:35-21:1 ~ Jonathan warns David
Acting in accord with the plan Jonathan and David made (20:11-13), Jonathan takes a servant into the field and pretends to be engaged in archery practice. David is hiding behind the memorial stone waiting for the signal that it is either safe for him to show himself and return home or that he must leave to escape from Saul's wrath by going into exile.
Question: What signal does Jonathan give?
Answer: He gives the signal that David must go into exile.
Question: Why is it significant that David prostrates himself before Jonathan three times?
Answer: David is demonstrating his faithful allegiance to Jonathan as his lord who is still the crown prince of Israel.
The two young men part as friends with Jonathan reminding David of the oath of loyalty they swore to one another that includes David's promise to show the same covenant love to Jonathan's descendants. It is an oath that David will dutifully keep.
CHALLENGE: “The Catholic Church is wrong to teach that its Magisterium is superior to the word of God.”
DEFENSE: The Church teaches that the Magisterium serves the word of God.
During his earthly ministry, Jesus commissioned his apostles and others to teach in his name, telling them: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16).
He further commissioned this teaching authority to continue to the end of the world, saying: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Matt. 28:19–20).
Today this teaching authority, known as the Magisterium (from the Latin, magister, “teacher”), is exercised by the bishops, the successors of the apostles. Although it was established by Christ, the Church does not regard the Magisterium as superior to the word of God but as its servant.
Vatican II taught: “This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed” (Dei Verbum 10). The idea that the Magisterium is superior to the word of God is false. It plays a subordinate role in helping the faithful identify and understand the word of God. Thus the Magisterium helped the Church discern the canon of Scripture—which books were divinely inspired and which were not. It similarly helps the Church discern which Traditions are of apostolic origin and which are not.
And it helps the Church understand the contents of both Scripture and Tradition. However, in all these things, the Magisterium is a guide and not a source. The source is the word of God, as expressed in Scripture and Tradition. The Magisterium is subordinate to these, as illustrated by the fact that it is the word of God that gives the Magisterium its authority (see the verses above), not the other way around.
Jimmy Akin, A Daily Defense: 365 Days (Plus One) to Becoming a Better Apologist
No comments:
Post a Comment