Tell me if you\u2019ve ever heard this story before:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nAn evil political authority wants to put an innocent king to death. This king knows that he will die, even though a close friend does not believe him. This king descends to a place marked by a stone, remains there, and on the morning of the third day he rises\u2014to the weeping of one of his friends. After engaging with a disciple, the king rises further and departs from those he loves.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
This may sound like something straight out of the Gospels, but in fact it comes from the left field of 1 Samuel 20, a chapter that recounts the historical events David\u2019s life, while also pointing past David to describe the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, David\u2019s greater son (Matt. 1:1). In this article, I\u2019ll seek to demonstrate how 1 Samuel 20 is full of character types that find their ultimate fulfillment in Jesus\u2019s life, death, and resurrection. But first a word about typology itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Typology<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Tapestries are remarkable works of art. Oftentimes they depict pictures sewn with hundreds of individual threads. A particular thread can prominently protrude into the forefront of the tapestry, dive under the surface into obscurity, and then weave back into the forefront where the same color, texture, or pattern is repeated elsewhere in the canvas. Individual threads can crisscross the entire tapestry, providing a unity and cohesion to the final picture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Typology is a lot like a tapestry. Typology weaves the Old and New Testaments together like so many colorful threads that connect the massive canvas of redemptive history. Properly defined, typology is \u201cThe study of analogical correspondences among revealed truths about persons, events, institutions, and other things within the historical framework of God\u2019s special revelation, which, from a retrospective view, are of a prophetic nature and are escalated in their meaning<\/em>.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. G. K. Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation<\/em> (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2012), 14.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
Thus, as we read our Old Testament, it\u2019s right for us to discern that a thread we find in one book re-appears to find its terminus in the cross. In the grand tapestry of cosmic history, God is the weaver. And what we find in 1 Samuel is the entwine of a master artisan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As others have shown,[2]<\/a><\/sup> so many experiences in David\u2019s life parallel Jesus\u2019s life. Why would God weave a web like this? He did this in part so that when Jesus came, we would recognize that this Messiah is the one to whom all the threads connect. But how does Jesus fit in 1 Samuel 20? We turn our attention to this question now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2. James M. Hamilton Jr., \u201cThe Typology of David\u2019s Rise to Power: Messianic Patterns in the Book of Samuel<\/a>,\u201d SBTJ<\/em>, no. 2 (2012): 4\u201325.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
1 Samuel 20<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
By this point in the book of Samuel, King Saul is on the decline, and David is on the rise. David has defeated Goliath (1 Samuel 17), he has been anointed the future king by the prophet Samuel (1 Sam. 16:13), and Saul has already made two attempts on David\u2019s life (1 Sam. 18:10\u201311; 19:9\u201310). It\u2019s with this backdrop that David meets with his friend Jonathan, the heir to Saul\u2019s throne. And it\u2019s with this background in mind that we see so many parallels with persons and events from this chapter and persons and events surrounding Jesus\u2019s ministry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jonathan and Peter<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
David knows that Saul wants to kill him, and so he communicates to Jonathan \u201cthere is but a step between me and death\u201d (1 Sam. 20:3). Jonathan does not believe David, and he proclaims to him, \u201cFar from it<\/em> [Hebrew: h\u0323a\u0304l\u0131\u0302l<\/em>]! You shall not die\u201d (1 Sam. 20:2, emphasis added). In the New Testament, immediately after Jesus announces his imminent death, we read, \u201cAnd Peter took [Jesus] aside and began to rebuke him, saying, \u2018Far be it from you<\/em>, Lord! This [=suffering and being killed] shall never happen to you\u2019\u201d (Matt. 16:22, emphasis added). The phrase \u201cfar be it from you\u201d is one word in Greek (hileo\u0304s<\/em>), it\u2019s rare in the New Testament (only here and Heb. 8:12), and it\u2019s used in this setting because it sounds similar to the Hebrew word h\u0323a\u0304l\u0131\u0302l<\/em>\u2014the very word that Jonathan used.[3]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> Matthew\u2019s record of Peter\u2019s rare use of this word recalls 1 Samuel 20:3, and we see in both instances that friends of the Davidic king disbelieve his impending death.[4]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n3. \u201chileos<\/em> is merely a homonymic rendering of the Hebrew . . . halilah<\/em>, \u201cfar be it from\u201d. This is a common Septuagintalism.\u201d <\/em>D. A. Carson, Expositor\u2019s Bible Commentary Notes on Matthew<\/em>, 1st<\/sup> Edition, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), note on Matthew 16:22.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4. Jonathan functions in the book of 1 Samuel as a model for God\u2019s people to follow. He has bold faith in God (1 Sam. 14:6), he loves the Davidic king (1 Sam. 18:1), and he ultimately chooses the kingdom of David over and against his own kingdom (1 Sam. 20:30\u201331, 40, 42). And in this chapter, Jonathan reiterates a covenant that he had established with David previously (1 Sam. 18:3). Throughout this narrative of 1 Samuel 20, Jonathan prefigures actions and words later made by Jesus\u2019s disciples.<\/h6>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
Saul and the Pharisees<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
David concocts a plan: David will skip the new moon festival he is expected to attend, and he will instead hide beside \u201ca stone heap\u201d (1 Sam. 20:19). David instructs Jonathan to tell Saul, \u201cDavid earnestly asked leave of me to run to Bethlehem his city, for there is a yearly sacrifice there for all the clan\u2019\u201d (1 Sam. 20:6). Jonathan would discern from Saul\u2019s reaction whether or not his father intended to kill David, and then Jonathan would bring word to David.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So David hides himself, and three times the text lingers on how David\u2019s place\/seat at the festival is \u201cempty\u201d (1 Sam. 20:18, 25, 27). But Saul \u201csat on his seat\u201d (1 Sam. 20:25)\u2014an unusual phrase that draws attention because of how unnecessary it is.[5]<\/a><\/sup> Amazingly, the Greek words that the Septuagint translator used to describe Saul sitting (kathizo\u0304<\/em>) on his seat (kathedra<\/em>) are only found together in one verse in the entire New Testament: Matthew 23:2. In this passage, Jesus describes how the scribes and Pharisees\u2014who are planning to kill Jesus (Matt. 21:38, 42, 45)\u2014sit in Moses\u2019 seat. Like the Israelite king Saul who does not obey God (1 Sam. 15:22), these Jewish leaders sit in a place of authority even though they do not practice the obedience to God that they preach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
5. In Hebrew, the words for \u201csat\u201d (ya\u0304s\u030ca\u0304b\u0331<\/em>) and \u201cseat\u201d (mo\u0302s\u030cob\u0331<\/em>) only occurs in seven verses together (Exod. 12:40; Lev. 13:46; 1 Sam. 20:25; Psa. 1:1; 107:36; Ezek. 28:2), and in only three of those verses does it describe someone sitting down (1 Sam. 20:25; Ps. 1:1; Ezek. 28:2). In every case, the person who takes a seat is evil (Saul in 1 Sam. 20:25; scoffers in Ps. 1:1; and the king of Tyre in Ezek. 28:2).<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
As Nicholas Piotrowski has ably demonstrated, 1 Samuel presents Saul as a seed of the serpent\u2014a character thread that begins in Genesis 3 and reappears with the murderous Cain and Esau and then Saul.[6]<\/a><\/sup> Like Cain, Saul disobeys God\u2019s word and has murderous intentions towards those who obey God, and he is likewise described doing actions that are only elsewhere used of Esau (cf. 1 Sam. 28:25 and Gen. 25:34). The Pharisees are also part of this family tree; Jesus exclaims to them in the same chapter in Matthew 23:33, \u201cYou snakes, you offspring of vipers<\/em>! How will you escape being condemned to hell?\u201d (NET, emphasis added). Clearly, there is a typological connection between the murderous and serpentine Saul and the murderous and serpentine Pharisees; both are looking to kill the Davidic king.[7]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n6. Nicholas G. Piotrowski, \u201cSaul Is Esau: Themes From Genesis 3 And Deuteronomy 18 In 1 Samuel<\/a>,\u201d Westminster Theological Journal<\/em> 81, no. 2 (Fall 2019): 205\u201329. The language of \u201cseed of the serpent\u201d builds on the idea from Genesis 3\u20135 that humanity can be separated into two family trees or two lines of offspring: the seed of the serpent who are opposed to God and the seed of the woman who believe God by faith.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
7. It is beyond the scope of this article to highlight the interplay between David and Jonathan in this chapter. Suffice it to say, and building on Piotrowski\u2019s article cited previously, their meetings take place \u201cin the field\u201d\u2014and the last time two men met in this setting was when Cain, killed Abel. Later in this passage, Jonathan hears his father call for David\u2019s death for the sake of Jonathan\u2019s future kingdom<\/em>. Jonathan goes out into the field (1 Sam. 20:35) armed with a bow and arrows<\/em>, and the narrative tension is high: will Jonathan choose his own kingdom and kill David like Cain killed Abel, or will Jonathan show loyalty to David at the expense of his own kingdom? The oft overlooked verse in 1 Samuel 20:40 answers the question: Jonathan gives his weapons to his servant to go back to the city, and he greets David with empty hands and a heart full of covenant love. Jonathan is a model to imitate.<\/h6>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
Jonathan\u2019s Defense of David\u2019s Innocence and Nicodemus\u2019s Defense of Jesus\u2019s Innocence<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
At the new moon feast, David is missed by Saul on the first day, and the reader hears the strange thoughts of Saul in 1 Samuel 20:26, \u201cSomething has happened to him. He is not clean; surely he is not clean.\u201d What\u2019s notable is that uncleanliness is associated with bones, dead bodies, and graves (e. g. Num. 19:18), which suggests that David\u2019s literary condition is associated with death. On the second day, Saul asks Jonathan about David, and Jonathan tells his father what David instructed him to say, but he adds an additional phrase in David\u2019s imaginary speech to him, \u201cSo now, if I have found favor in your eyes<\/em>, let me get away and see my brothers\u201d (1 Sam. 20:29). David had not told Jonathan to say this, but Jonathan added this clause likely to signal his affection for David. Upon hearing Jonathan\u2019s answer, Saul flies into a rage and curses his son for choosing David over and against his own kingdom (1 Sam. 20:31). To this, Jonathan responds in 1 Samuel 20:32, \u201cWhy should he be put to death? What has he done?\u201d Jim Hamilton rightly draws the connection to the New Testament:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nJust as Saul\u2019s son Jonathan, an establishment insider, had interceded on David\u2019s behalf\u2014asking what David had done that he should be put to death (1 Sam 20:32), so also Nicodemus, an establishment insider \u201cwho was one of them\u201d (John 7:50), asked, \u201cDoes our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?\u201d (John 7:51). Just as Jonathan\u2019s intercession had drawn Saul\u2019s wrath, so Nicodemus met with the curt reply, \u201cAre you from Galilee too?\u201d (John 7:52).[8]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
8. Hamilton, \u201cThe Typology of David\u2019s Rise to Power<\/a>\u201d: 12n66.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
In both instances, the innocence of the Davidic king is maintained by one of his followers, and this is met with persecution. In Nicodemus\u2019s case this was derision, and in Jonathan\u2019s case it was a hurled spear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
David\u2019s Third Day \u2018Resurrection\u2019 and Jesus\u2019s Third Day Resurrection<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
At this point the temporal references become highly significant, because the previous activity took place on the second day (1 Sam. 20:34). On the morning of the third day, David \u201crose from beside the stone heap\u201d (1 Sam. 20:41) for his rendezvous with Jonathan. In the Old Testament, the third day is often a day of resolution or deliverance (Gen. 22:4; 42:18; Exod. 19:11; Hos. 6:2; Jon. 1:17), which is why Paul could write in 1 Corinthians 15:4 that Jesus rose on the third day \u201cin accordance with the scriptures.\u201d[9]<\/a><\/sup> Resolution is found for both kings on the third day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
9. Stephen G. Dempster, \u201cFrom Slight Peg to Cornerstone to Capstone: The Resurrection of Christ on \u2018The Third Day\u2019 According to the Scriptures<\/a>,\u201d Westminster Theological Journal <\/em>76 (2014): 371\u2013409.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
Here is where it\u2019s worth remembering that Jonathan instructed David to \u201cgo down\u201d (yarad<\/em>) and remain beside the stone heap (1 Samuel 20:19), and then on the third day David \u201crose\u201d (qwm<\/em>) from the same.[10]<\/a><\/sup> By itself, this would be unremarkable. But when one considers the tapestry of redemptive history, we see that going down<\/em> is associated with death (Gen 37:25, 35; 44:29; Exod. 15:5) and coming up<\/em> with deliverance (Gen. 19:14\u201315; 21:18; 27:43; 31:21; Exod. 2:17; 12:31; Num. 24:17).[11]<\/a><\/sup> This going down and up of David prefigures the descent to Hades and resurrection that Jesus experiences between Good Friday and Easter Sunday.[12]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n10. Although Jonathan instructed David to go down to the stone heap on the third day (1 Sam. 20:19), David goes to the field where the stone heap is located on the first day and remains there until the third day (1 Sam. 20:24, 35, 41).<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
11. Michael Morales has demonstrated in the Pentateuch that going down (yarad<\/em>) is a picture of death (cf. Gen. 37:25, 35), whereas coming up (\u2018alah<\/em>) is a picture of emerging from a grave (cf. Gen. 46:4; Ps. 18:15\u201316; Jonah 2:2, 6); see L. Michael Morales, Exodus Old and New: A Biblical Theology of Redemption<\/em>, Essential Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2020), 50\u201354. While the Hebrew word used for coming up is different in 1 Samuel 20:41 (qwm <\/em>instead of \u2018alah<\/em>), qwm<\/em> is still used in theologically significant texts to describe deliverance.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
12. See Matthew Y. Emerson, He Descended to the Dead: An Evangelical Theology of Holy Saturday<\/em> (Downer\u2019s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2019).<\/h6>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n