David and Jonathan: Not Just About Friendship
In 1895, while standing trial for homosexual acts, Oscar Wilde appealed to the Biblical account of David and Jonathan as an example of “the love that dare not speak its name”.
Many today would likewise point to them as an example of two men who “expressed their love physically” (to quote the former Bishop of Liverpool, James Jones).
Pastor and author Kevin M. Young recently posted the following tweet that has gained almost a million views:
Evangelicals rightly reject the insinuation of homosexuality. In the words of Tim Chester, such a claim “says more about our own culture’s sexualisation of relationships”.[1]
But are we also guilty of missing the point by seeing this relationship as merely one of friendship?
To answer that question, we need to consider the particular roles David and Jonathan played.
David: A Clear Type of the Prince of Princes
In 1658, the Puritan John Owen received the manuscript of a book in the mail. It had been sent to him by the widow of a Scottish pastor named William Guild. The book, which Owen published the next year, was a commentary on 2 Samuel entitled The Throne of David. For Guild, David was “a clear type of the Prince of Princes, Christ Jesus, the son of David” (to quote the book’s subtitle). David’s kingdom, likewise, formed a pattern of Christ’s spiritual kingdom.
David is God’s “anointed” – which is where we get the titles “Messiah” (Hebrew) and “Christ” (Greek). As people respond to David, they are responding to the Lord’s anointed. Significantly Scripture emphasises not David and Jonathan’s mutual love, but Jonathan’s love for David.
Jonathan: Heir or Spare?
In 2023, Prince Harry, fifth in line to the British throne, published a memoir entitled Spare. The book’s title is a reference to the idea that “an heir and spare” is needed to preserve the line of succession. The first-born is the heir apparent, the second-born is the backup. Harry’s older brother William is the heir – leaving him as the spare (and falling further down the line of succession with each child born to William).
In 1 Samuel, Jonathan is the heir-apparent to his father Saul. And yet in 1 Samuel 15:28, Saul is rejected as king in favour of David.
The question for Jonathan soon becomes which dynasty he will swear allegiance to.
“I have come to set a man against his father”
After the LORD’s rejection of Saul, and with David secretly anointed king, it becomes clear that “neither can live while the other survives” (if we can borrow the language of Harry Potter). From here until the end of 1 Samuel, Saul’s attempts to kill David – and David’s opportunities to do the same – are what grab the headlines.
What we can easily miss, however, is that David’s survival is equally a threat to Jonathan – if the heir wants to inherit the throne. Saul saw this clearly, telling his son: “as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established” (1 Sam. 20:31).
Yet rather than stubbornly maintaining his allegiance to a doomed dynasty, Jonathan makes a covenant with David (1 Sam. 18:3). In this context, Jonathan stripping himself of his robe is seen in a very different light from mere friendship or anything else. It is nothing less than an abdication of the throne. As Andrew Steinmann has pointed out:
“Throughout the book of Samuel the noun “robe” (מְעִיל) is always associated with prophets or royalty…Here Jonathan is acknowledging David’s right to the kingdom”.[2]
Simon De Graaf connects the dots to the New Testament:
“Jonathan, for David's sake, surrenders everything—even his future claim to the throne. Jonathan could do so only in faith, a faith in David as the one chosen by God to be Israel's deliverer. Here, in Jonathan's life, we see a choice for the Redeemer”.[3]
Love Lacking
What are we to make of Jonathan’s love for David? We’re told that it equalled Jonathan’s love for his own soul (1. Sam. 18:1, 3) and “surpassed the love of women” (2 Sam. 1:26). A close reading of 1 Samuel 18, however, suggests that Jonathan’s love for David is not primarily what the writer is trying to draw our attention to. Loving David in that chapter is the norm: all Israel and Judah loved David (v. 16), Saul’s daughter loved him (vv 20, 28), all Saul’s servants love him (v. 22). What our attention is being drawn to is that Saul does not love David. Instead, he twice tries to pin him to the wall with his spear (v. 11). Everyone loves David – but Saul is afraid of him (vv 12, 15, 29) and was continually his enemy.
How could anyone not love this Messianic figure, this man after the LORD’s own heart? The shocking thing is that Saul doesn’t! Unlike his son, Saul is not willing to strip himself of his ambitions and submit to God’s chosen king. Unlike Jonathan, Saul was not willing to say: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30).
Surpassing the love of women
In this context, David’s declaration that Jonathan’s love for him surpassed the love of women is a fitting description of a love which was prepared to “surrender a claim to the throne for the one recognized as more fitted to the role”.[4] As Jonathan grew up, he would have been picturing the day when he sat on the throne and had the crown put on his head. But for David’s sake, he will joyfully give up those aspirations. As Matthew Henry put it long ago:
“for a man to love one who he knew was to take the crown over his head, and to be so faithful to his rival: this far surpassed the highest degree of conjugal affection and constancy.”
Is David and Jonathan’s relationship a great example of friendship? Sure. But it also points to something greater.
[1] Tim Chester, 2 Samuel For You, p. 16
[2] Andrew Steinmann, 1 Samuel, p. 346.
[3] S. G. De Graaf, Promise and Deliverance, ii, 113.
[4] David Firth, 1 & 2 Samuel, p. 326.