1 Samuel 31:1–13

Original Meaning

The Deaths of Saul and Jonathan (31:1–6)

THE REFERENCE TO Mount Gilboa picks up the strand of 28:4. The conflict between Israel and the Philistines had been set aside temporarily to explain what was happening to David (chs. 29–30).2 Death was always preferable to being captured where the Philistines were concerned (cf. Judg. 16:21). Saul’s fears that the enemy would “abuse” him (or “sport with him mischievously,” cf. NRSV) were well founded.

The description of Saul’s death brings the contrast between David and Saul to a climax.3 Chapter 30 has just related David’s great success against the Amalekites; he rescued Ziklag and saved the lives of everyone associated with him. By contrast, Saul and everyone associated with him die in this losing battle with the Philistines. Saul had been commissioned as king specifically to provide victory against the Philistines (9:16), which makes his death at their hands especially ironic and provides “the measure of his failure.”4

The Philistines Desecrate Saul’s Body (31:7–10)

Bridging Contexts

OLD TESTAMENT HISTORICAL BOOKS do not attempt simple history. They never trace historical cause-and-effect connections simply for the sake of explaining the past and how it relates to the present. Rather, these are theological treatises, which use history to illustrate primarily cause-and-effect connections that concern God and Israel. These are vertical narratives rather than horizontal narratives. The cause-and-effect relationships in biblical history are those that demonstrate the benefits of relating rightly to God or to each other. Conversely, they also demonstrate the consequences of relating wrongly to God or to each other. It is in this sense that the story of Saul’s death contributes eternal truths that are applicable to today’s believers. This text illustrates tragically the consequences of relating wrongly to God and others.

The national level. It should be remembered that Old Testament historical narratives have different levels of interpretation: universal, national, and individual.11 Each individual narrative plays a role in the greater national narrative of Israel’s history and therefore also contributes to the ultimate narrative of God’s redemptive plan in history. This mournful episode contributes on the national level to the book’s answer to the question: Who can serve suitably in the new Israelite institution of monarchy?

In the earlier portion of the book, the prophet Samuel devoted a large portion of his ministry to defining the new institution of kingship (chs. 8–12). Though the monarchy will be constituted as a human institution, Yahweh remains the king of Israel, and he will rule through human anointed ones. These anointed ones will be his viceroys on earth. They will be anointed with oil by Yahweh’s prophets and be guided by Yahweh’s Spirit. But their success will depend entirely on their acceptance of Yahweh’s authority as true king and acceptance of their own role as mere viceroy. In this way, they will not be like other kings of the ancient Near East.

Saul then serves as the first anointed one. Unfortunately, he becomes an example of the kind of king who may not serve suitably as Yahweh’s viceroy. The contrast between him and David since 1 Samuel 16 has built to this point. Whereas David is trusting and depends on God, Saul is manipulative and vindictive. Saul fails to accept the authority of Yahweh as true king, whereas David recognizes the source of his royal authority and is quick to rely on Yahweh for guidance and deliverance.

In the previous unit, God’s guidance for David was both defensive and offensive. He intervened in David’s dealings with Achish and the Philistines to prevent him from fighting against Israel, but he also intervened against the Amalekites to provide a much-needed military victory. By contrast, Saul is quickly turned over to the Philistines and decapitated after his death, and his body is left exposed to the elements. Saul failed to accept Yahweh as king, so Yahweh rejected Saul as king.12 Future anointed ones should be like David, not like Saul.13

The individual level. The passage also contributes to biblical theology on an individual level. Ultimately this is a story of divine judgment. King Saul reaps in death what he sowed in life. His words and actions on Mount Gilboa only arouse pity in the reader, as it did for the good citizens of Jabesh Gilead. Saul is in these final moments free of his paranoia and paralyzing distrust. He is simply trying to do his best as the anointed of Yahweh.14 But Yahweh has departed, and the prophecy of Samuel through the medium at Endor is coming true. Saul is soon to die. In one fatal battle he loses his kingdom, his life, his sons, and—despite his suicide—his dignity. “In this ignominious fate of Saul there was manifested the righteous judgment of God in consequence of the hardening of his heart.”15

Divine judgment is a central concept in biblical thought. It appears early in the Old Testament story when Abraham asked (Gen. 18:25): “Will not the Judge of all the earth do right (mišpaṭ)?” In the last pages of the Bible, it is God’s penultimate act at the conclusion of human history (Rev. 20:11–15). Throughout both Testaments, God is the God of mišpaṭ (“justice/judgment”). Judgment is essential to his character (Deut. 32:4; Ps. 97:2; Isa. 40:14; Jer. 8:7). Sometimes modern believers think of judgment only as forward looking, some distant “day of judgment” in which God will make right all the wrongs of this world. And so it can be in both Testaments (Ps. 96:13; Rom. 3:5–6; Heb. 6:1–2; Rev. 20:11–15).

But often divine judgment becomes a reality in the present life. In Old Testament contexts, believers have no fully developed concept of eternal bliss or eternal punishment. As a result, one suffers the consequences of one’s sins in this life.16 Even in the New Testament, Paul’s description of God’s judgment on pagans of past generations is contained in the three occurrences of “God gave them over” (Rom. 1:24–32). Setting aside for the moment the nature of the final judgment in the end times, the present text reminds us that all of us suffer the consequences of our actions in this present life. Judgment is not an abstraction imposed on the sinner. Rather, it grows from within the created cosmos itself, governed by the universal principles of life established by God.

So the book of 1 Samuel ends in a cemetery near Jabesh, with a group of faithful and loyal subjects paying homage to the fallen king. But the book also ends in expectation. We are not left on this theme of judgment, having no hope. There is a quiet waiting, an anticipation, which finds fulfillment in 2 Samuel. The narrator has carefully prepared us for the second anointed one, who is ready to fulfill his role in history and in God’s plan. “The narrator would not have us believe that Saul’s death nullifies the hope of Hannah.”17

The expectation at the conclusion of 1 Samuel is met with the triumphant and joyful account of David in 2 Samuel 1–9. Likewise, present-day believers should read this account of the divine judgment of Saul with an eye to the New Testament. Just as this text anticipates the coming of the anointed one who is suitable to serve as king of Israel, so it also anticipates the coming of his greater Son. Just as the first readers of this text waited in expectation for the next chapters leading to the coronation of King David, so we today celebrate the coming of the Messiah, who comes to forgive and restore.

Contemporary Significance

APPLICATION OF THIS TEXT can draw on both the individual and national levels of interpretation. On the individual level, the death of Saul draws our attention to the experience of death itself and its relationship to the way we live our lives. On the national level, this text completes the contrast between David and Saul and contributes to our understanding of the nature and role of the Messiah.

The experience of death. Death unifies all humanity. It is the one experience we all share in common, regardless of our race, creed, heritage, or station in life. In this singular event “we leave behind everything we have and take with us everything we are.”18 In the Old Testament generally, an ignoble or untimely death implies the deceased was sinful or somehow deserving of death (Deut. 19:6; 21:22; Jer. 26:11, 16).

In the case of Saul’s death, the message is clear because of the line of reasoning followed by the narrator since 1 Samuel 9: Saul’s suicide is the result of the tragic choices he made in life.19 He had been anointed by Yahweh’s prophet, and the Spirit of Yahweh had come upon him powerfully to guide and direct him as the new king of Israel (10:1, 10). God had transformed him into a better man (10:9), and he initially had great military success in defeating the enemies of God’s people (ch. 11). But he slowly came to despise the very man who anointed him as king, making it impossible to follow God’s instructions for the nation. Ultimately he rejected God’s authority as king of Israel, and his life degenerated into pathetic bickering and jealousy. Rather than saving the people from the Philistines, Saul devoted himself to denying the kingdom to David. His charismatic gifts and divine blessings had deteriorated into madness.20 Saul’s ignoble death is due to his ignoble life.

Woody Allen said of death, “It’s not that I’m afraid to die, I just don’t want to be there when it happens.”21 It is one thing to have no fear of death, but quite another to want to escape the undeniable uncertainty of it all. As we saw in the Bridging Contexts section, this text is about the judgment of God. Christians often postpone justice until that final day in the end times. But Saul’s death brings us face to face with the realization that there is more to divine justice/judgment than “pie in the sky,” which makes the Christian gospel bigger than any simple “turn or burn” message. We all suffer in this life because of the sins we commit. Conversely, the Christian gospel offers more than reward in the hereafter. Correctly formulated and communicated, the gospel offers hope and peace in this life. By rightly relating to God in the here and now, we prepare for loving him eternally in the hereafter.

C. S. Lewis has reminded us that we are all in the same boat and that any of us could end like Saul:

When any man comes into the presence of God he will find, whether he wishes it or not, that all those things which seemed to make him so different from the men of other times, or even from his earlier self, have fallen off him. He is back where he always was, where every man always is. Eadem sunt omnia semper [“Everything is always the same”]. Do not let us deceive ourselves. No possible complexity which we can give to our picture of the universe can hide us from God: there is no copse, no forest, no jungle thick enough to provide cover…. It may happen to any of us at any moment. In the twinkling of an eye, in a time too small to be measured, and in any place, all that seems to divide us from God can flee away, vanish leaving us naked before Him, like the first man, like the only man, as if nothing but He and I existed. And since that contact cannot be avoided for long, and since it means either bliss or horror, the business of life is to learn to like it. That is the first and great commandment.22

The way we die is related to the way we live. As Lewis implies, we have no greater or more urgent task in this life than to learn how to die well.

The Messiah. Another lesson to be learned from Saul’s death grows out of the national level of interpretation, through which this text contributes to our understanding of the Messiah. The first anointed one’s death is described here in succinct and shocking tones. In a matter-of-fact way, the narrator relates Saul’s despair, as he sank lower into the shadows of loneliness, abandonment, and desperation. Perhaps the ultimate contrast between Saul and David is the fact that David “rested with his fathers,” meaning he was buried in the family tomb (1 Kings 2:10).23 His death came after a long and successful rule over Israel, and he died surrounded by his family, with his son Solomon on the throne (though not without great difficulty because of Adonijah, see 1 Kings 1). Saul’s sons died with him, his body was dismembered, and his bones were given a modest disposal by the people of Jabesh. Death overwhelms Saul as an unwanted but irresistible foe. David met death as the timely and natural outcome of life. Thus, David becomes the ancestor of the Messiah, who will be victorious over sin and death, confirmed by his resurrection.

Death is not the end of our story. Contemporary believers should read 1 Samuel 31 in a way that leads to hope for the future. Just as ancient Israelite readers would have read this text in anticipation of the coronation of David and the rule of the ideal anointed one, so we know there is more to the story. The coming of David’s greater Son has given us reason to hope that a new day will dawn in which death will no more claim its wretched price (1 Cor. 15:54–57).

Original Meaning

The Philistines Desecrate Saul’s Body (31:7–10)

THE RESULT OF THE DEBACLE at Mount Gilboa is devastating for Israel. The subsequent evacuation of the towns in the area leaves the Philistine military in control of Israelite territory. Saul’s decapitated body is fastened “to the wall of Beth Shan,” a city that stands impressively over the junction of the Jezreel and Jordan valleys, guarding access to both.5 It had never been conquered and held by the Israelites (Josh. 17:11, 16; Judg. 1:27) and therefore provided a natural stronghold for Philistine occupation. Saul’s armor is placed in “the temple of the Ashtoreths,” which may refer to the goddess Astarte worshiped principally at Sidon but is more likely a derogatory reference to the unnamed principal goddess of Beth Shan.6

Philistine occupation of territory so far north of Philistia and so central to Israel marks a nadir in Israel’s national history. Of course, the biblical historian is less concerned to narrate the details of the national tragedy. We might have expected more detail about the battle itself and the social and military repercussions. Instead, the narrator moves quickly over those details and emphasizes the personal and theological consequences of Saul’s disappointing rule.

Saul’s worst fears of bodily desecration at the hands of the Philistines become a reality. Moreover, his defeat and death become occasions for proclamation of glad tidings in the temples of foreign idol gods, implying the victory of those gods over Yahweh in the minds of the Philistines. The national tragedy, painful though it is, serves merely as the backdrop for Saul’s failure to vigorously defend and honor the name of Yahweh.

Citizens of Jabesh Gilead Bury Saul’s Remains (31:11–13)