Jump to content
The World News Media

"Jonathan began to love [David] as his own soul." ???


Bible Speaks

Recommended Posts

  • Member

"Jonathan began to love [David] as his own soul."—1 Sam. 18:1. 

?????

Jonathan and David

Some 20 years later, the Philistine champion Goliath taunted the Israelite army, but David slew him. Although Jonathan was likely 30 years David’s senior, the two had much in common.* The courage that Jonathan displayed at Michmash was evident also in David. More than all else, David had the same faith in Jehovah’s saving power, enabling him to face Goliath fearlessly when all other Israelites shrank from the challenge. So it was that “Jonathan’s very soul became bound up with the soul of David, and Jonathan began to love him as his own soul.”—1 Samuel 17:1–18:4.

?????

Although David’s prowess made King Saul see him as a rival, no trace of jealousy darkened Jonathan’s countenance. He and Davidbecame very close friends, and it is likely that in their confidential talk, Jonathan learned about David’s anointing to be Israel’s next king. Jonathan respected God’s decision.

?????

When King Saul spoke to his son and servants about killing David, Jonathan warned David. Jonathan convinced Saul that he had nothing to fear from David. Why, David had not sinned against the king at all! Had David not risked his life in facing Goliath? Jonathan’s impassioned plea for his wronged friend placated Saul. However, the king soon reverted to murderous scheming and made further attempts on David’s life, forcing him to flee.—1 Samuel 19:1-18.

?????

Jonathan stood by David. The two friends met to plan what was to be done. Loyal to his friend and still striving to be loyal to his father, Jonathan said to David: “It is unthinkable! You will not die.” However, David told Jonathan: “There is just about a step between me and death!”—1 Samuel 20:1-3.

?????

Jonathan and David worked out a plan to test Saul’s intentions. If David’s absence from the king’s table was noticed, Jonathan was to tell his father that David had asked to be excused to take part in a family sacrifice. If Saul reacted angrily, that was a sign of ill will toward David. Jonathan blessed him and implicitly acknowledged his future kingship, saying: “May Jehovah prove to be with you, just as he proved to be with my father.” The two swore loyalty to each other and decided how Jonathan would let David know about the outcome of the test.—1 Samuel 20:5-24.

?????

When Saul saw that David was absent, Jonathan explained that David had begged him: “If I have found favor in your eyes, let me slip away, please, that I may see my brothers.” Jonathan was not afraid to admit that David had his favor. The king was furious! He insulted Jonathan and ranted that David was a threat to his son’s succession as king. Saul demanded that Jonathan bring David to him as one destined to die. Jonathan retorted: “Why should he be put to death? What has he done?” In a fit of rage, Saul hurled his spear at his son. Jonathan escaped unharmed but was deeply hurt at heart respecting David.—1 Samuel 20:25-34.

?????

What loyalty Jonathan displayed! In purely human terms, he had little to gain and much to lose from his friendship with David. Yet, Jehovah had ordained that David would succeed Saul as king, andwhat God had purposed was for Jonathan’s own good and that of others.

A Tearful Parting ?

Jonathan met David secretly to give him the news. It was clear that David could never again set foot in Saul’s court. The two men wept and embraced. Then David went into hiding.—1 Samuel 20:35-42.

?????

Jonathan saw the fugitive just once more, when David was hiding from Saul “in the wilderness of Ziph at Horesh.” It was then that Jonathan encouraged David with the words: “Do not be afraid; for the hand of Saul my father will not find you, and you yourself will be king over Israel, and I myself shall become second to you; and Saul my father also has knowledge to that effect.” (1 Samuel 23:15-18) Soon thereafter, Jonathan and Saul died in a battle against the Philistines.—1 Samuel 31:1-4.

?????

All who love God would do well to contemplate the course pursued by Jonathan. Do you face a conflict of loyalties? Then remember that Saul urged Jonathan to seek his own interests. Jonathan, however, honored Jehovah with heartfelt submission and reverence and rejoiced that the one whom God chose would be Israel’s next king. Yes, Jonathan supported David and was loyal to Jehovah.

?????

Jonathan had admirable qualities. Imitate them! Then people will be able to say of you as they did of Jonathan: “It was with God that he worked.”—1 Samuel 14:45.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2007685?q=david+and+jonathan&p=par

 

IMG_1049.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 600
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

"Jonathan began to love [David] as his own soul."—1 Sam. 18:1.  ????? Jonathan and David Some 20 years later, the Philistine champion Goliath taunted the Israelite army, but David slew

Posted Images





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,411

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,680
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.