NEGOTIATION
A close look at the words Jonathan used in his appeal to his father shows that he was a very clever negotiator. With just one sentence, Jonathan pointed to injustice, ‘he has not wronged you’. Remember that, on his saner days, Saul was quite concerned to do what was right before God (although sadly he was inconsistent). But Jonathan also points out the political benefits of leaving David be - ‘what he has done has benefited you greatly’. And he was right: David’s successes were good for Israel, and what was good for Israel was good for Saul. As we’ve seen, even the galling ‘pop’ song, ‘Saul has slain his thousands, David his tens of thousands’, were not intended as a slight to Saul, but celebrated the two men as heroes together. Jonathan cleverly pointed to what was not only moral, but personally beneficial to Saul.
The careful construction of the case means that Jonathan prepared himself carefully for the meeting with his father, a meeting that had potential for being very volatile. Not only could this conversation have angered Saul and made David’s situation even worse, but Jonathan himself might not have been spared if Saul had launched into one of his angry reactions.
We should tiptoe prayerfully into sensitive conversations, and plan and think. And only then should we open our mouths.
And then, look closely at how Jonathan continued his appeal. He points out a potential outrage - the killing of a man who had risked his life for Saul, only to lose his life at the hands of the man that he served. Then Jonathan affirms that God is with David - a very effective argument indeed, because fighting against someone that God is anointing and blessing would be very foolish indeed, although Saul would end up doing exactly that. Then Jonathan reminds Saul of better days in the past when he was glad about David’s successes. He had been an eye witness to David’s exploits. And the argument for David’s defence was wrapped up by a final appeal to what was right and just: Saul should not do wrong, David was innocent, to kill him would be committing murder for absolutely no reason. Convincing stuff: Jonathan would have made an excellent defence lawyer.
But Jonathan’s approach showed that he was not only clever and thoughtful with words, but that he had also learned this vital lesson of life: sin is madness, and leads to chaos. When we’re tempted, how quickly we forget that truth, and even try to fool ourselves that what we crave is good for us. Basic logic dies in the heat of the moment.
Saul could be in no doubt that threatening David was a very bad idea: and yet, despite the stunning clarity of his son’s warning, he went ahead with his murderous plans anyway. May we be clear headed about sin like Jonathan - and not hot-headed like Saul.
Jonathan very carefully negotiated a peace between Saul and David - but it was a peace that obviously didn’t last long, because soon he would be back to murderous square one. But that doesn’t make Jonathan’s efforts a failure. He did what he could, and continued to try to help. Saul was responsible for his own actions.