I Samuel
Lesson 30 - Chapter 17 and 18
I said last week that the 2 books of Samuel, and especially where we are now, simply explode
with God-principles (that we learned about in the Torah) applied to the situations at hand.
We’re going to bump into and examine several of those principles today.
As we continue in 1
st
Samuel chapter 17, David has just slain the giant Philistine warrior
Goliath but as we discovered last week, Goliath doesn’t represent David’s only battle. Saul,
the illegitimate current king of Israel, has no intentions of giving up his throne just because God
says the Kingdom is no longer his. Because the Lord has anointed David as the new king
(nagid, actually, king-in-waiting) conflict between the rightful king and the pretender is
inevitable.
Saul, as the Anti-King, displays for us the general characteristics (or type) of the Anti-Christ. I
don’t want to take this parallel too far: Saul was probably not an ancient appearance of the
Anti-Christ per se. Yet as the Apostle John tells us, the essence of the Anti-King/Anti-Christ is
first and foremost as a spirit of evil and there is no doubt in my mind that this spirit can be
visualized as present in Saul. And that spirit that was so dominant in Sha’ul’s life is also
present and active today, just as it was in the Apostle John’s time, even though the human
being who will become the ultimate tool and fleshly container of that spirit is yet to come.
CJB
1 John 2:18 Children, this is the Last Hour. You have heard that an Anti-Messiah is
coming; and in fact, many anti-Messiahs have arisen now- which is how we know that
this is the Last Hour.
19
They went out from us, but they weren't part of us; for had they
been part of us, they would have remained with us.
CJB
1 John 4:1 Dear friends, don't trust every spirit. On the contrary, test the spirits to
see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the
world.
2
Here is how you recognize the Spirit of God: every spirit which acknowledges
that Yeshua the Messiah came as a human being is from God,
3
and every spirit which
does not acknowledge Yeshua is not from God- in fact, this is the spirit of the Anti-
Messiah. You have heard that he is coming. Well, he's here now, in the world already!
John is speaking of the same pattern that we view here in 1
st
Samuel 17. John is saying that
those who manifest the spirit of the Anti-Messiah (the Anti-Christ) were mingled in among the
Believers and appeared to be part of them (meaning part of the Body of Believers, primarily
Hebrews). There were several, perhaps many of them, but it turns out that while they looked
and talked the part of being a Believer in reality they weren’t actually part of the Body (or at
least they weren’t any longer as they gave up the Holy Spirit for another kind). They very likely
deceived their own minds into believing that they were indeed part of the Body; they didn’t at
all see themselves as vessels of the spirit of the Anti-Christ.
1 / 8

Note how King Saul by all outward appearances was part of Israel and even their anointed and
legitimate leader. Saul always talked about how he was leading God’s Kingdom, and that the
wars he fought were God’s wars. He was present at sacrifices to make fine speeches, he
surrounded himself with priests, he used religious sounding words and tried to create and
maintain an aura of personal piety and loyalty to God. I have no doubt that King Saul
continued to see himself as a legitimate part of God’s Kingdom (despite what Samuel told him)
but in reality he was far from God. In spiritual reality God had completely removed Himself from
Saul, never to return. Let me be very clear here: from a spiritual point of view Saul was no
longer part of Israel. He came from Israel, but he wasn’t part of Israel (at least he isn’t any
more) because by definition being part of Israel wasn’t only a matter of physical genealogy or
race, it was spiritual. How could a person (such as King Saul) call him or herself an Israelite (a
member of God’s Kingdom, Israel), and yet be completely devoid of God’s presence?
Answer: from a spiritual standpoint he couldn’t. And as always, the spiritual standpoint
overrides the physical.
This perverted pattern of Saul is expounded upon by St. Paul over a thousand years later in
Romans chapter 2 (a passage we’ve all heard many times but perhaps thought that it was a
brand new thing only for Paul’s day and henceforth). I want to quote it again because of its
critical importance; take note that Paul is talking to ethnic Jews here. He is talking to Jews
about principles that affect all men (Jews and gentiles), and thus Jews can’t merely hold up
their ethnicity as the sole proof of their membership in the Kingdom of God.
CJB
Romans 2:24 as it says in the Tanakh, "For it is because of you that God's name is
blasphemed by the Goyim."
25
For circumcision is indeed of value if you do what Torah
says. But if you are a transgressor of Torah, your circumcision has become
uncircumcision!
26
Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous
requirements of the Torah, won't his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?
27
Indeed, the man who is physically uncircumcised but obeys the Torah will stand as a
judgment on you who have had a b'rit-milah and have Torah written out but violate it!
28
For the real Jew is not merely Jewish outwardly: true circumcision is not only external
and physical.
29
On the contrary, the real Jew is one inwardly; and true circumcision is
of the heart, spiritual not literal; so that his praise comes not from other people but from
God.
In Paul’s eyes (and I think fairly to say in God’s eyes as well), the ancient King Saul would not
have been a real (a true) Israelite from the divine perspective because his circumcision (his
sign of Kingdom membership) was strictly present in the flesh, and it contained none of the (far
more important) spiritual element.
With this in mind, towards the end of last week I presented you with some food for thought. We
are in the habit of thinking of the coming Anti-Christ (Anti-King) as a typical gentile; likely a
white-skinned European-type who is either very secular or so religiously tolerant as to adhere
to no discernable faith whatsoever. But why would any modern Jew who is still waiting for their
Jewish Messiah to come, even remotely be enticed into looking to a gentile as that Messiah?
Conversely, why would a major portion of Judeo-Christian society accept an avowed atheist or
agnostic as the possible Savior of the world or even as God Himself? Neither of those cases
2 / 8

seems at all likely.
On a physical level King Saul had Hebrew blood, and held himself up as a member of God’s
Kingdom people, even though from a spiritual level God had abandoned him. The Israelites
were generally none the wiser (except perhaps for a handful of Saul’s closest advisors). In
fact, as of this point in 1
st
Samuel, David was in the dark as to Saul’s spiritual position before
God as well. As far as he knew Saul was still the legitimate king. There is no indication that
David had any clue that he had already been consecrated as Israel’s next king (David didn’t
know what the anointing by Samuel was really all about).
Therefore, using this as a pattern for the present and future, it is my speculation that the
coming Anti-Christ must somehow appear to be sufficiently both Hebrew and Christian in order
for him to fool the world, and to set off the series of prophesied events. He will be very much
like King Saul was; what you see is NOT what you’re getting. So it’s all the more important
that we carefully pay attention to the various evolving aspects of Saul’s and David’s
relationship, as in many respects they will be repeated and possibly be an early indicator of
who this coming Anti-Christ is. We (as readers looking back upon these ancient historical
events in the book of Samuel) are given insights by the narrator that no one but Samuel had
knowledge of at this point. Most of the Hebrew people didn’t know that God had abandoned
Saul, chosen David, used Goliath as an ultimately doomed symbol of paganism and
indomitability, and was going to elevate David and frustrate Saul in the process. They didn’t
know that this was all about deliverance and redemption. The chief characteristic of God’s
providential involvement in human history is that it goes undetectable as events occur. Saul
and David are participants in events far bigger than themselves; and like Job they have no
inkling of the pivotal roles they are playing in an invisible cosmic spiritual confrontation. They
are merely living their lives day-by-day and attending to matters at hand in ways that seem
practical and pragmatic to their minds.
Let’s read and discuss that last few verses of 1
st
Samuel chapter 17.
RE-READ 1
ST
SAMUEL 17: 54 – end
Verse 54 speaks of David taking Goliath’s severed head to Jerusalem. There are a few things
to understand here. First is that while the stone that flew at lightening speed from David’s sling
struck a fatal blow to Goliath, it did not immediately kill him. Goliath was indeed mortally
wounded as he lay there on the ground, face down before David but he wasn’t yet dead.
Verse 51 explains that because David didn’t carry a sword, he picked up Goliath’s and
beheaded him with his own sword; it was only then that Goliath was finally killed.
Second, why would David take Goliath’s head to Jerusalem? There is much debate on this.
Some scholars say that this is immediately a problem in that Jerusalem was not in existence in
this time and so it can only be that some extraneous verses were added at a much later date;
and that although there was a walled city there occupied by the Jebusites, that it certainly was
not called Jerusalem but rather Jebus (thus the name of the inhabitants, the Jebus-ites). And
what would possibly be the purpose, no matter who ruled that city or what name it went by, in
taking Goliath’s head there?
3 / 8

I can’t give you a definitive answer to these questions but I will give you some opinions held by
respected scholars. First, there is more and more evidence that while Jebus was indeed a
walled city inhabited by some Canaanites who were referred to as Jebusites, that immediately
outside the walls (as a kind of suburb) was also a place called Jerusalem. And that David went
there (to that Hebrew suburb) with the head to show the residents that Goliath had been
defeated (why that was important we don’t know). Further that the name of the suburb called
Jerusalem eventually got transferred to walled city of Jebus after David captured it for his
capital.
A second view is that Jebus was at that time a city of mixed nationalities: some Israelites and
some Canaanites living side-by-side. And that the Canaanites tended to refer to the city by its
older Canaanite name, Jebus, while the Israelites tended to refer to it with a newer Hebrew
name Yerushalayim.
Third is that the use of the name Jerusalem is an anachronism. In other words, as is rather
common in the Bible and in most any history book, the most modern name is used to describe
an ancient place that originally went by another name. The old name had become so out of
use and forgotten, that to use it meant that the listeners (or readers) would have no idea what
place was being referred to. It was also common that over the centuries languages would
change, or that a city occupied by one people would be taken over by another people who
used a different language. So either the place name would be roughly phoneticized in the new
language to sound like the old, or an entire new name was assigned by the new residents in
their new language. So the new name was used even if when the story took place it went by an
entirely different name.
While the issue of David bringing Goliath’s head to Jerusalem is interesting (but hardly earth
shattering), now comes the confusing matter of the conversation between Saul, Abner, and
David. The conversation takes place immediately following David’s slaying of Goliath. And the
confusing issue is that (at least at first glance) Saul doesn’t seem to recognize David. Since
David was given the honored title of armor-bearer who has been acting as Saul’s official court
musician, how can it be that Saul is oblivious to David’s identity? Since the King apparently
doesn’t recognize the victorious shepherd boy, Saul asks his top general about him (and
Abner says he knows exactly zero about this lad). So finally the King summons David and
asks, “Whose son are you?”
The usual take on this is that we have at least two different (and somewhat conflicting) stories
combined here and we wind up with a corrupted and illogical narrative. Or that someone added
this conversation at a much later date and they weren’t cleaver enough to notice that what
they added contradicted what was said earlier. Another rather standard opinion is that King
Saul was becoming more and more mentally disabled, and so he couldn’t remember who
David was even though he had him in the palace playing the lyre on a regular basis.
To me, this is a tempest in a teapot. It’s a case of not seeing the forest because of the trees.
Here’s the key: Saul doesn’t ask David who HE is. Rather he asks who David’s FATHER is
(whose SON are you?) This matter of who David’s father is connects perfectly to this story
when we look back to verse 25 where it says this:
4 / 8

CJB
1 Samuel 17:25 The soldiers from Isra'el said [to each other], "You saw that man who
just came up? He has come to challenge Isra'el. To whoever kills him, the king will give
a rich reward; he'll also give him his daughter and exempt his father's family from all
service and taxes in Isra'el."
The promised prize to the Champion of Israel who confronted and killed Goliath was: 1) a rich
reward (money), 2) one of the King’s daughters in marriage (thereby officially making the
Champion part of the ruling family), and 3) that the Champion’s FATHER’s family would be
exempt from taxes and service to Israel.
The confusing conversation was about Saul addressing the 3
rd
part of the offer. In order to
reward David’s family he obviously had to know who David’s father was. Recall that it was not
Saul who found David to be his court musician; it was one of his court advisors. They merely
brought David’s name to the King; the King agreed and summoned him. Indeed in chapter
16:19 we have Saul sending to Jesse for his shepherd son. But that in no way means that Saul
personally knew of Jesse or even personally sent for him. Saul would have had one of his royal
cabinet handle such a message, merely putting his stamp of authority upon the messenger.
It’s not unlike someone saying that they got an invitation from our President to attend a state
function. It is a figure of speech. There is no way that our President personally did anymore
than to delegate the task of compiling a list and then contacting the invitees; the office person
would attend to the entire function, in the name and authority of the President.
As his military general, Abner dealt with soldiers, not musicians. He was not part of the group
who handled the issue of summoning David to come and play music for the King; so Abner
spoke truthfully that he had no knowledge about the family of this giant killer. Nowhere in these
passages is David asked his name; but three times the question is asked: “whose son are
you?” And indeed David doesn’t answer with his own name, but rather with his father’s name,
because that is the proper response to Saul’s question.
Further in the next chapter we’re going to see Saul deal with the 2
nd
part of the promised prize
for the killer of Goliath: one of the King’s daughters is to be given as the victor’s wife. So this
really isn’t so challenging after all is it?
Let’s move on to chapter 18.
READ 1
ST
SAMUEL CHAPTER 18 all
Please notice that the chapter markers are poorly chosen and thus give the timing of these
events a wrong sense to them (that is, it’s as though some time passed since the end of
chapter 17 and beginning of chapter 18). It would have been more accurate and appropriate to
have chapter 18 begin at what is currently chapter 17 verse 55, because the first words of the
current chapter 18 refer directly to the conversation with David, Saul and Abner about the
identity of David’s father. So chapter 18 (as currently constituted) begins by saying, “By the
time David had finished speaking to Sha’ul (about who his father is)”; this was merely the
ending of the aforementioned conversation. So no time has passed and the meeting
immediately following Goliath’s defeat is ongoing.
5 / 8

Y’honatan (Saul’s eldest son) found himself awestruck by David’s character and abilities and
therefore greatly desired to be his closest friend. In verse 1 it says that Jonathan “loved” David
as he loved himself. In fact we’ll find a number of occasions whereby we’re informed that
Jonathan “loved David as he loved himself”. I said this last week but it bears repeating; some
modern liberal scholars and pastors have regularly taken this to indicate a homosexual love
affair between David and Jonathan. This is ridiculous on its face and political correctness at its
worst. First of all homosexuality is dealt with over and over in both the Old and New
Testaments and it is condemned on the highest level by the Father. Second, the use of the
term “love” (ahab) here carries a sort of political or even mystical context to it; or even better it
denotes a sense of partisanship or dedication or loyalty. It has nothing to do with erotic
affections. Notice that the verse even explains that the KIND of love that Jonathan had for
David was the same kind that Jonathan had for himself (the proper healthy kind that we’re all
supposed to exhibit). Not even in the twisted sexual perversions of today do we think in terms
of a person having an erotic sexual affection for one’s own self!
Rather this is a fundamental reference to a God principle that we’re all familiar with: love your
neighbor as yourself. And the meaning of this core Biblical principle is certainly NOT that the
Lord instructs His people to go have sexually intimate relations with our neighbors. Rather this
is a love of acceptance and devotion and doing. The first place we see this commandment
concerning love is in the Torah in the book of Leviticus (and then it is repeated 7 more times in
the Bible).
CJB
Leviticus 19:18 Don't take vengeance on or bear a grudge against any of your
people; rather, love your neighbor as yourself; I am ADONAI.
Notice something key: the context of this verse in Leviticus is about actions that we take. It
says that rather than take the action of vengeance against people (because of grudge), take
actions of goodness for those you know just as you automatically take actions of goodness on
your own behalf. This isn’t about emotions or how one feels about people (although the two
are obviously connected).
The CJB (which employs what is called a dynamic translation) doesn’t handle this first verse
very well and so the impact of it is muffled. What it says in the Hebrew is that
Jonathan’s nephesh became knitted together with David’s nephesh so that Jonathan loved
David as his own nephesh. Or, Jonathan’s soul became so knitted and united with David’s
soul that Jonathan loved David as he loved his own soul.
This is speaking of a mysterious connection and unity on a spiritual level. It is a meeting of the
mind and heart based on a commonly held set of holy principles and beliefs and it all rests on
trusting God. It has NOTHING to do with a mere meeting or connection of the flesh. It is an
early example of exactly the type of spiritual (soul-ish) unification the members of God’s
Church are to have in concert with Christ. It is a similar kind of inexplicable unity that the
Church Doctrine of the Trinity of God demonstrates; it is called echad (one-ness) in the Torah
and Tanach. The Body of Messiah is commanded to emulate the unity and one-ness that is the
Godhead. Thus even as God manifests His unity in at least 3 entities so the Church is also one
unity but manifests itself in many entities (the millions of Believers).
6 / 8

CJB
Ephesians 4:1 Therefore I, the prisoner united with the Lord, beg you to lead a life
worthy of the calling to which you have been called.
2
Always be humble, gentle and
patient, bearing with one another in love,
3
and making every effort to preserve the unity
the Spirit gives through the binding power of shalom.
4
There is one body and one Spirit,
just as when you were called you were called to one hope.
5
And there is one Lord, one
trust, one immersion,
6
and one God, the Father of all, who rules over all, works through
all and is in all.
This is the nature of the love that Believers are to have for one another. It is the kind of bond of
love that David and Jonathan formed. It is a kind that is not possible without God as the glue
that both initially binds it together and keeps it together (Yes, all this in but the first verse of this
chapter).
In verse 2 a comparison and contrast is established in the way that Jonathan behaves toward
David versus the way Saul behaves toward David. And of course this behavior is a reflection of
the condition of the souls of each party. We’re told that King Saul on that day (the same day
that David killed Goliath), TOOK David into his service and wouldn’t let him return home to his
family. On the other hand, Jonathan made a covenant (of friendship) with David and sealed it
by giving to David his cloak, armor, and weapons. Saul took, Jonathan gave. And in the next
several verses were going to see a list of things that Saul “took”.
As much as has taken place here in the spiritual sphere, what is happening simultaneously in
the earthly sphere is but what Samuel told Israel would happen once the administration of
Judges was prematurely replaced with an administration of Kings.
Turn your bibles back a few pages to 1
st
Samuel chapter 8.
READ 1
ST
SAMUEL 8:10 – 18
The Lord warned the leaders of Israel through Samuel that this king that THEY chose would be
a taker. God’s Judges weren’t takers; they were deliverers. So what was predicted is now
happening, and it is happening to David who is practically legally kidnapped from his family to
serve King Saul. There was no ruckus over it, because all understood that in the world this is
the way of kings and kingdoms and one has no choice in the matter.
Let me point out something else. In verse 3 it is said that the REASON that Y’honatan made
this covenant with David is because he loved him. This was not a contract for services
rendered. No self-serving political alliance was formed and maintained. There was no financial
gain or business venture contemplated. It was not a mutual protection treaty. All of these were
indeed the typical reasons for forming a covenant in that era. But this one was strictly out of
love.
Jonathan was of the royal family and so he was the one that had to offer it. Lowly David, a
commoner, could NOT offer a covenant to the King’s family. This is yet another demonstration
of the nature of the several covenants that God made with men. The Created could not come
to the Creator with an offer of a covenant. Man could not come to God with the offer of a
7 / 8

covenant; God had to come to man. Whether it was the Covenant with Noah not to destroy the
world by flood again, or the Covenant with Abraham to establish a set-apart people and give
them an inheritance of divine blessing, land and kingdom that would someday benefit the
whole world, or the Covenant with Moses to give the redeemed people of Israel a manual for
living and a means to maintain harmony with God, the reason for the covenant was always
God’s love for lesser beings. God gained nothing, and often gave something up…..like His Son.
Jonathan gained nothing by making this covenant with David. It was for the sake of a spiritual
kind of love that he sought the bond. Jonathan would eventually even give up his right to
succeed Saul.
It is said that the New Covenant in Christ’s blood is a covenant of love; true enough. But the
reality is that ALL of the ancient covenants between God and mankind, between God and
Israel, were covenants of love. And here we have Jonathan covenanting with David in exactly
that same mold. And we have the royalty giving his covering and his protection to the lesser
mortal as a free gift, rather than when in earthly terms one would expect the lesser being to
give a gift to the higher being for offering such a covenant.
We’ll resume this study when next we meet.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
8 / 8