1 Samuel 31:1

THE DEATH OF SAUL AND HIS SONS ON MOUNT GILBOA

"Now the Philistines fought against Israel; and the men of Israel fled before the Philistines, and fell slain on Mount Gilboa. And the Philistines overtook Saul and his sons; and the Philistines slew Jonathan and Abinadab and Malchishua, the sons of Saul. The battle pressed hard upon Saul, and the archers found him; and he was badly wounded by the archers. Then Saul said to his armor-bearer. "Draw your sword and thrust me through with it, lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through, and make sport of me." But his armor-bearer would not, for he feared greatly. Therefore Saul took his own sword, and fell upon it. And when his armor-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he also fell upon his sword, and died with him. Thus Saul died, and his three sons, and his armor-bearer, and all his men, on the same day together. And when the men of Israel who were on the other side of the valley and those beyond the Jordan saw that the men of Israel had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they forsook their cities and fled; and the Philistines came and dwelt in them."

This paragraph records the near destruction of Israel. The reign of Saul was here terminated in bloody disaster; and many of the Israelites fled for the dens and caves of the Judean hills, leaving their cities to the tender mercies of the Philistines.

"All the men of Israel" (1 Samuel 31:1). Significantly, not `all the men of Israel' were slain. These words refer to the particular detachment of Abner's army which, along with Saul and his sons, was surrounded on Mount Gilboa and annihilated. A thing like this could have happened only because Saul's day of grace had expired, and God fulfilled what he had said through his prophet Samuel, that the Lord had rejected him from being king over Israel.

"Now the Philistines fought against Israel" (1 Samuel 31:1). Payne, like most modern scholars saw this battle as coming immediately after 1 Samuel 29:11,[1] following, as so many do, the alleged "prophecy of Samuel" (1 Samuel 28:19) to the effect that Saul and his sons would die the next day. (See our comment on this in 1 Samuel 28.) There is a very real possibility that the opinion of Methodius is correct, that the prophecy was a fraudulent imposition upon Saul by the witch, and that the `prophecy itself' was not fulfilled.

H. P. Smith's claim that there are two contradictory Biblical accounts of Saul's death, the one here, and the one in 2 Samuel 1:6-10,[2] is incorrect, being only an example of another radical scholar's willingness to believe an Amalekite rather than the inspired record. One must be naive indeed to accept the word of that self-seeking Amalekite who came to David with his tale regarding Saul's death, as anything but a lie. David himself considered it a lie and put the prevaricator to death.

"The armor-bearer would not; for he feared greatly" (1 Samuel 31:4). The fear of the armor-bearer to thrust Saul through with his sword was most likely due to the great respect and awe in which all Israelites viewed "The Lord's Anointed." That was the reason that David himself refused to kill Saul on two different occasions.

"Saul took his own sword, and fell upon it ... his armor-bearer ... also fell upon his sword, and died with him" (1 Samuel 31:4-5). Here we have two of the total of only five suicides recorded in the entire Bible. The other three are those of Ahithophel (2 Samuel 17:23), Zimri (1 Kings 16:18), and Judas Iscariot (Matthew 27:5).

"Thus Saul died, and his three sons" (1 Samuel 31:6). Jonathan exhibited a true loyalty to his father, despite the fact of Saul's condemning him to death on one occasion (1 Samuel 14:36-43), casting his spear at him on another (1 Samuel 20:33), and his refusing utterly to listen to Jonathan with regard to the innocence of David. Willis referred to this as, "a moving example of loyalty."[3] Jonathan died fighting by his father's side, perhaps even trying to save his life as the enemy closed in upon them.

"And those beyond the Jordan" (1 Samuel 31:7). Cook pointed out that these words usually mean "east of the Jordan," but not in this particular passage,[4] at the same time questioning the integrity of the text. Willis also questioned the accuracy of the rendition here, even though it is followed by the KJV, ASV, RSV, NIV and GNB. The NEB renders the passage, "in the district of the Jordan," which Willis cited as preferable, because, "Clearly the Philistines did not cross the Jordan to the east and occupy territory there,"[5] since (as the text indicates) Jabesh-gilead, on the east of Jordan, some ten miles east of Bethshan (on the west side and which was occupied by the Philistines), remained under Israelite control as proved by the citizens of that place rescuing the bodies of Saul and his sons from the Philistines at Bethshan.