Читать книгу College and Career - R.H. Boyd Publishing Corporation - Страница 11

King James Version

New Revised Standard Version

4 And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good:	4 Jonathan spoke well of David to his father Saul, saying to him, “The king should not sin against his servant David, because he has not sinned against you, and because his deeds have been of good service to you;
5 For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the LORD wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it, and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?	5 for he took his life in his hand when he attacked the Philistine, and the LORD brought about a great victory for all Israel. You saw it, and rejoiced; why then will you sin against an innocent person by killing David without cause?”
6 And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul sware, As the LORD liveth, he shall not be slain.	6 Saul heeded the voice of Jonathan; Saul swore, “As the LORD lives, he shall not be put to death.”
7 And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan shewed him all those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as in times past.	7 So Jonathan called David and related all these things to him. Jonathan then brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence as before.

After the Lord rejected Saul as king, an evil spirit tormented Saul. This torment explains Saul’s homicidal outbursts directed both at David and at anyone defending him. Saul’s attempts on David’s life over the years were both overt and covert. Jonathan intervened on behalf of David to his father King Saul. While David was hiding in the field as instructed, Jonathan attempted to reason with the king. He initially spoke truth to power: “Don’t harm him. He has not harmed you.” Jonathan then appealed to the king’s leadership: “His deeds have made you look good. Goliath was killed on your watch! Some of those cheers at the parade were for you as the leader whose army returned victoriously.”

Jonathan then used logic: “David wasn’t officially sworn in as a soldier yet risked his personal safety and killed the Philistine not with weaponry but with the skill of a shepherd.” Whereas David always would receive credit for killing the Philistine, Saul would get credit as the leader for “discovering” David. Leaders do not always have to perform the task at hand. Leadership’s value is in part determined by its ability to identify talent and employ that talent toward the stated goal. Saul easily could have made the argument he was due respect because he was the one who chose to use David. Good leaders realize they do not need to do everything, nor need the credit for all things. Leadership sometimes requires a backseat approach.

#TrueFriendship

Do you have any true friends? Brag on your friends and share a picture. Tag us @rhboydco and use #rhboydco.

Jonathan then spoke spiritually to the matter: “The Lord struck a blow for Israel, working a great salvation—from trash talk and cowering to the remaining Philistines running for their lives. You rejoiced as they fled and returned home defeated for all to see.” He closed the intervention again speaking truth to power: “Why would you entertain brutality against innocent blood?” Had Saul been successful in his campaign to kill David, he would’ve had the stain of bloodguilt on his hands. Saul was guilty of betrayal against one of his loyal soldiers, but it was not necessary for it to escalate to murder. Saul’s plan, if successful, would have reified Saul’s rejection before God. It also is possible that Saul would have been rejected by his soldiers and subjects. David was a popular figure and an untimely death at the hands of the king would have proved once and for all that Saul was incompetent as a leader. As Jonathan talked his father down from the proverbial edge, he saved whatever was left of Saul’s monarchial career. Jonathan had a thin line to walk, and he did so. He was able to simultaneously be loyal to David, his friend, and Saul, his father.

Jonathan refused to remain silent while injustice attempted to play out in brutality. He could have just stood by and said nothing as his father, the king of Israel, became aggressive toward his own countryman for no reason. But he didn’t. Jonathan’s efforts paid off. His father listened and made a promise not to harm David—at least not for the moment. Jonathan later had to continue to plead for and protect David, even to his tragic death on the battlefield along with his father, the king. David mourned for them both and then assumed the throne of Israel. Later King David advocated for Jonathan’s family by adopting one of them—Mephibosheth—to remain with him in the king’s palace.

A true friend advocates on behalf of his/her friends. True friendship is found in the words exchanged when the friend is not present. It is easy to speak well of another in his/her presence. However, it is difficult to speak well of those whose safety may put us in less than desirable positions. Jonathan was a friend beyond David’s earshot and eyesight. In this way, he demonstrated the kind of inclusive love that God desires of all His children. Jonathan’s intervention is reminiscent of Jesus’ sacrifice for all of God’s children. Even beyond Christ’s death on the cross, He serves as an advocate at the right hand of His Father, the King.

How should friends intervene when it is clear their friend is wrong?