Commentary - 1 Samuel 14:24-46

Bird's-eye view

What we have in this passage is a master class in the difference between true and false religion. It is a story of contrasts. We see the contrast between Jonathan, who walks in simple faith and wisdom, and his father Saul, who is a whirlwind of insecure, performative piety. We see the contrast between God's gracious provision, honey on the ground in the middle of a forest, and man's foolish prohibition, a rash vow that brings weariness and sin. Saul, in a fit of what he imagines is spiritual zeal, lays a heavy burden on his men, and in so doing, he actually hinders the victory God was giving them. His leadership is all about appearances, about grand gestures and solemn oaths, but it is hollow at the core. This entire episode demonstrates the principle that legalism, which is man's attempt to manage his relationship with God through external rules, always ends in one of two places: pride or despair, and often a bit of both. It also leads, as we see here, to sin. Saul's foolish law causes the people to break God's good law.

The central conflict revolves around Saul's attempt to secure victory through fleshly means, and God's refusal to bless it. When God goes silent, Saul doubles down, hunting for a scapegoat instead of looking in the mirror. His pride and his rash words nearly lead him to murder his own son, the very hero of the day. It is only the common sense of the common soldier that averts the final tragedy. This is a story about the failure of man-centered leadership and a powerful illustration of how the wisdom of God often looks like foolishness to men, and the "wisdom" of men is always foolishness before God.

Outline

Commentary on the Text

v. 24 Now the men of Israel were hard-pressed on that day. And 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.

The battle is raging, and God has given Israel a great opportunity. But Saul, the leader, is not thinking clearly. He is thinking religiously. Instead of providing his men with rations, he provides them with a curse. Notice the possessive pronouns: "until I have avenged myself on my enemies." This is not about God's glory; it is about Saul's resume. This is a classic example of a man-made rule that sounds pious but is actually profoundly foolish and self-serving. It is a burden, not a blessing, and it will have disastrous consequences.

vv. 25-26 Now all the people of the land entered the forest, and there was honey on the ground. So the people entered the forest, and behold, there was a flow of honey; but no man put his hand to his mouth, for the people feared the sworn oath.

Here is a beautiful picture of God's common grace. In the midst of a hard-fought battle, in a forest, God has provided a high-energy food source. Honey, dripping and flowing. This is provision. This is a gift. But Saul's curse has put a fence around God's gift. The people see the blessing, but they cannot touch it because they fear the king's arbitrary law more than they trust God's provision. This is what legalism does. It makes men afraid of the good things God provides.

v. 27 But Jonathan had not heard when his father put the people under a sworn 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.

Jonathan is operating outside the bubble of his father's foolish piety. He is a soldier in a battle, he is weary, he sees food, and he eats. This is not rebellion; it is simple, created-order common sense. And the result is immediate and potent: "his eyes brightened." He was refreshed, strengthened, and made more effective for the fight. This is a small picture of the life that comes from receiving God's grace, as opposed to the weariness that comes from man-made religion.

vv. 28-30 Then one of the people answered and said, "Your father strictly put the people under a sworn oath, saying, 'Cursed be the man who eats food today.' " And the people were weary. Then Jonathan said, "My father has troubled the land. See now, how my eyes have brightened because I tasted a little of this honey. 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 people are weary, and Jonathan now understands why. He does not mince words. "My father has troubled the land." This is a strong indictment. Saul's leadership has brought trouble, not blessing. Jonathan uses his own experience as the proof. A little taste of honey, God's provision, brought life. He then extrapolates: imagine if the whole army had been refreshed. The victory would have been decisive. Saul's vow was not only foolish, it was strategically disastrous. It hindered the very thing it was supposed to promote.

vv. 31-32 Then they struck among the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon. And the people were very weary. So the people rushed greedily upon the spoil, and they took sheep and oxen and calves and slaughtered them on the ground; and the people ate them with the blood.

Here is the inevitable result of Saul's legalism. You impose an unnatural and ungodly restriction on people, and when the dam finally breaks, they will swing to the other extreme into license and sin. The men were "very weary." Their hunger, artificially induced by Saul's vow, became ravenous. In their desperation, they disregarded one of God's explicit commands: they ate meat with the blood still in it, a prohibition rooted in the sanctity of life (Gen 9:4, Lev 17:11). Saul's foolish human law led directly to the breaking of God's divine law.

vv. 33-35 Then they told Saul, saying, "Behold, the people are sinning against Yahweh by eating with the blood." And he said, "You have acted treacherously; roll a great stone to me today." And Saul said, "Scatter 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 Yahweh by eating with the blood.' " So all the people that night brought each one his ox with him and slaughtered it there. And Saul built an altar to Yahweh; it was the first altar that he built to Yahweh.

Saul's response is telling. He springs into action, not with repentance for his own folly, but with a display of religious administration. He rebukes the people for a sin he himself provoked. He sets up a stone as a makeshift altar for proper slaughter. He is managing the crisis, playing the part of the spiritual leader. And then the text gives us this devastating detail: "it was the first altar that he built to Yahweh." All this time as king, and his first recorded act of building an altar is not in response to God's grace, but as a damage-control measure for his own failure. This is reactive piety, not proactive worship.

vv. 36-37 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 in your eyes." So the priest said, "Let us draw near to God here." And Saul asked 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.

With the blood issue sorted out, Saul is ready to get back to the fighting. His zeal is still there, but it is a fleshly zeal. The people are compliant, but it is the priest who injects a note of spiritual caution: "Let us draw near to God here." So Saul goes through the motions of inquiring of the Lord. And the result is a deafening silence. God is not participating in Saul's program. When a leader is operating this far out of bounds, heaven shuts up. God will not be manipulated or used as a rubber stamp for the proud agendas of men.

vv. 38-39 And Saul said, "Draw near here, all you chiefs of the people, and know and see how this sin has happened today. For as Yahweh lives, who saves Israel, though it is in Jonathan my son, he shall surely die." But not one of all the people answered him.

How does Saul interpret God's silence? He doesn't look inward. He doesn't consider that his own foolish vow might be the problem. Instead, he assumes there is a secret sin in the camp, and he launches a witch hunt. And in his zeal to find the culprit, he makes another rash vow, this time a death sentence. He wraps it in pious language, "As Yahweh lives," but he is using God's name to sanctify his own investigation. He is so confident in his own righteousness that he is willing to kill his own son to prove his point. The people's silence is telling; they know this is a fool's errand.

vv. 40-42 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 in your eyes." Therefore, Saul said to Yahweh, the God of Israel, "Give a perfect lot." And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped. And Saul said, "Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son." And Jonathan was taken.

Saul uses the sacred lots to pursue his foolish course. God, in His sovereignty, answers the process. The lot reveals that the "problem" is in the royal house, with Saul and Jonathan. A wise man would have stopped right there and fallen on his face. But Saul presses on, narrowing it down until Jonathan is identified. God is answering Saul according to his folly, allowing his pride to lead him right to the brink of disaster.

vv. 43-44 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!" And Saul said, "May God do this to me and more also, for you shall surely die, Jonathan."

Jonathan's confession is straightforward and honorable. He states the fact and accepts the consequence of his father's vow. "Here I am; I must die." He is a man of integrity. Saul, on the other hand, is a man trapped by his own words. To save face, to maintain the authority he has established on a foundation of foolish oaths, he must now kill the son who won the victory for him. He doubles down on his curse. This is the dead end of pride. It will sacrifice anything, even its own children, to protect itself.

v. 45 But the people said to Saul, "Must Jonathan die, who has brought about this great salvation in Israel? Far from it! As Yahweh lives, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground, for he has worked with God this day." So the people redeemed Jonathan, and he did not die.

Here, the common sense of the people becomes the instrument of God's deliverance. They see the situation with perfect clarity. Jonathan is not a sinner to be executed; he is the hero who "has worked with God this day." They counter Saul's foolish oath with a righteous one of their own: "As Yahweh lives..." They recognize that Jonathan's actions were aligned with God, while Saul's were not. They "redeemed" Jonathan, literally ransoming him from his father's insane vow. This is a righteous mutiny against ungodly authority.

v. 46 Then Saul went up from pursuing the Philistines, and the Philistines went to their own place.

And so the great victory fizzles out. The momentum is lost. The army is demoralized. The king is humiliated. The enemy gets away. All because of one man's insecure, performative, man-centered religion. Saul's folly cut the work of God short.

Application

This chapter is a stark warning for the church in any age. The temptation to supplement the simple gospel with man-made rules and regulations is a perennial one. We think that by adding our own strictures, our own vows, our own disciplines, we are being more spiritual. But as Saul demonstrates, this is the path to folly. Such rules do not produce holiness; they produce weariness, sin, and hypocrisy.

God's provision for us in the battle is grace, symbolized by the honey on the ground. It is there for our refreshment and strength. Legalism tells us not to touch it. But faith receives the gift and is strengthened for the fight. Jonathan acted in faith, and his eyes were brightened. The people acted in fear of man, and they grew weary and fell into sin.

We must also beware of the kind of prideful leadership that, when confronted with failure, looks for a scapegoat instead of looking in the mirror. When God is silent, when our plans are not working, the first place to look is at our own assumptions, our own vows, our own wisdom. Saul was willing to kill his son to protect his pride. We must be willing to kill our pride to protect our people. The gospel frees us from this kind of face-saving religion. In Christ, our failures are covered. We are free to admit when we are wrong, to repent of our foolish vows, and to walk in the simple wisdom that receives God's grace and gives all the glory to Him.