When did King Saul meet David?

[Jonaitis]

I'm going through 1 Samuel again, and I noticed a discontinuity of chapter 16 with 17-18, specifically David's introduction to Saul.

1 Samuel 16:14-23:

Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and a harmful spirit from the Lord tormented him. And Saul's servants said to him, “Behold now, a harmful spirit from God is tormenting you. Let our lord now command your servants who are before you to seek out a man who is skillful in playing the lyre, and when the harmful spirit from God is upon you, he will play it, and you will be well.” So Saul said to his servants, “Provide for me a man who can play well and bring him to me.” One of the young men answered, “Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skillful in playing, a man of valor, a man of war, prudent in speech, and a man of good presence, and the Lord is with him.” Therefore Saul sent messengers to Jesse and said, “Send me David your son, who is with the sheep.” And Jesse took a donkey laden with bread and a skin of wine and a young goat and sent them by David his son to Saul. And David came to Saul and entered his service. And Saul loved him greatly, and he became his armor-bearer. And Saul sent to Jesse, saying, “Let David remain in my service, for he has found favor in my sight.” And whenever the harmful spirit from God was upon Saul, David took the lyre and played it with his hand. So Saul was refreshed and was well, and the harmful spirit departed from him.

However, in the following chapter, David was introduced to Saul through defeating Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:55-58:

As soon as Saul saw David go out against the Philistine, he said to Abner, the commander of the army, “Abner, whose son is this youth?” And Abner said, “As your soul lives, O king, I do not know.” And the king said, “Inquire whose son the boy is.” And as soon as David returned from the striking down of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand. And Saul said to him, “Whose son are you, young man?” And David answered, “I am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.”

Either, Saul quickly forgot who his armor-bearer was who frequently played music in his presence, or these are two different introduction stories. Is there another way that we can reconcile them?

 

[Andrewn]

Either, Saul quickly forgot who his armor-bearer was who frequently played music in his presence, or these are two different introduction stories. Is there another way that we can reconcile them?

To complicate things even further, 2 Samuel 21:19 seems to indicate that it was Elhanan, not David, who killed the giant.

But 1 Chronicles 20:5 says, “In another battle with the Philistines, Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite.

All these are different traditions.

 

[Jonaitis]

To complicate things even further, 2 Samuel 21:19 seems to indicate that it was Elhanan, not David, who killed the giant.

But 1 Chronicles 20:5 says, “In another battle with the Philistines, Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite.

All these are different traditions.

I've heard of a different tradition argument from a Jewish perspective. What do you make of the text I have in the OP, though? How do you actually reconcile it?

 

[Carl Emerson]

I'm going through 1 Samuel again, and I noticed a discontinuity of chapter 16 with 17-18, specifically David's introduction to Saul.

1 Samuel 16:14-23:

However, in the following chapter, David was introduced to Saul through defeating Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:55-58:

Either, Saul quickly forgot who his armor-bearer was who frequently played music in his presence, or these are two different introduction stories. Is there another way that we can reconcile them?

Does the text have to be in chronological order ?

 

[Jonaitis]

Does the text have to be in chronological order ?

I was thinking that too, but no matter which order you put them, David is made known to Saul on two separated accounts. Also, Chapter 16 flows with the story, because David played music to sooth Saul's tormented soul after being rejected by God (1 Samuel 15:1-16:12). Now, I also noticed that the harmful spirit that entered Saul happened in 1 Samuel 16:14 and 1 Samuel 18:10, the former, because he disobeyed God, and the latter, because David was successful. It seems that we unintentionally connect Saul's rage against David on account of being rejected by God, and that this was manifested in David's victories. It seems that further in the story, these two things are woven together, that Saul, being rejected by God and told that another would replace him, followed into suspicion of a young man who became greater than him. So they are somehow part of the same story, but there seems to be two Davids in that story. It would seem that that part in Chapter 16 is unnecessary.

It is also a bit strange, if I may be honest, that Saul had doubts about David defeating Goliath, being but a youth, but then later charged him to be commander of a thousand. A pretty hasty move, especially after being jealous of him. For some reason, the text doesn't flow smoothly in my head.

 

[disciple Clint]

I'm going through 1 Samuel again, and I noticed a discontinuity of chapter 16 with 17-18, specifically David's introduction to Saul.

1 Samuel 16:14-23:

However, in the following chapter, David was introduced to Saul through defeating Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:55-58:

Either, Saul quickly forgot who his armor-bearer was who frequently played music in his presence, or these are two different introduction stories. Is there another way that we can reconcile them?

Where does it say that they had not met before?

 

[Jonaitis]

Where does it say that they had not met before?

In the two quoted passages in the OP.

 

[Andrewn]

I've heard of a different tradition argument from a Jewish perspective. What do you make of the text I have in the OP, though? How do you actually reconcile it?

It is impossible to concise the different accounts. "Scholars believe that the original killer of Goliath was Elhanan and that the authors of the Deutoronomic history changed the text to credit the victory to the more famous character David."

Beside 2Sa 21:19 and 1Ch 20:5, Elhanan is also mentioned in 2 other verses. He is mentioned as one of David's bodyguard in 2Sa 23:24 and 1Ch 11:26.

"The armor described in 1 Samuel 17 appears typical of Greek armor of the sixth century BCE rather than of Philistine armor of the tenth century; narrative formulae such as the settlement of battle by single combat between champions has been thought characteristic of the Homeric epics (the Iliad) rather than of the ancient Near East. The designation of Goliath as a איש הביניים, "man of the in-between" (a longstanding difficulty in translating 1 Samuel 17) appears to be a borrowing from Greek "man of the metaikhmion (μεταίχμιον)", i.e., the space between two opposite army camps where champion combat would take place.[18]

"A story very similar to that of David and Goliath appears in the Iliad, written circa 760–710 BCE, where the young Nestor fights and conquers the giant Ereuthalion.[19]"

Goliath - Wikipedia

Perhaps David never killed Goliath and political propaganda is nothing new .

 

[Jonaitis]

It is impossible to concise the different accounts. "Scholars believe that the original killer of Goliath was Elhanan and that the authors of the Deutoronomic history changed the text to credit the victory to the more famous character David."

Beside 2Sa 21:19 and 1Ch 20:5, Elhanan is also mentioned in 2 other verses. He is mentioned as one of David's bodyguard in 2Sa 23:24 and 1Ch 11:26.

"The armor described in 1 Samuel 17 appears typical of Greek armor of the sixth century BCE rather than of Philistine armor of the tenth century; narrative formulae such as the settlement of battle by single combat between champions has been thought characteristic of the Homeric epics (the Iliad) rather than of the ancient Near East. The designation of Goliath as a איש הביניים, "man of the in-between" (a longstanding difficulty in translating 1 Samuel 17) appears to be a borrowing from Greek "man of the metaikhmion (μεταίχμιον)", i.e., the space between two opposite army camps where champion combat would take place.[18]

"A story very similar to that of David and Goliath appears in the Iliad, written circa 760–710 BCE, where the young Nestor fights and conquers the giant Ereuthalion.[19]"

Goliath - Wikipedia

Perhaps David never killed Goliath and political propaganda is nothing new .

Well, this was very useful information, thank you.

I did some other poking around, and have noticed, too, that the LXX omits the latter passages I quoted and referenced. This must have been intentionally edited by the Hellenistic translators, or that the additional verses were introduced in the Masoretic text. I know that the Septuagint corrects many of the inconsistent number of soldiers between Kings and Chronicles, that are apparently obvious in the Hebrew text, among other things. The more people do research into textual criticism, the more they will begin to see that the Scriptures are not as perfect as it is presented, but a stitch work of different traditions and perspectives. It is a beautiful work of literature on its own, though.

 

[BPPLEE]

It is impossible to concise the different accounts. "Scholars believe that the original killer of Goliath was Elhanan and that the authors of the Deutoronomic history changed the text to credit the victory to the more famous character David."

Beside 2Sa 21:19 and 1Ch 20:5, Elhanan is also mentioned in 2 other verses. He is mentioned as one of David's bodyguard in 2Sa 23:24 and 1Ch 11:26.

"The armor described in 1 Samuel 17 appears typical of Greek armor of the sixth century BCE rather than of Philistine armor of the tenth century; narrative formulae such as the settlement of battle by single combat between champions has been thought characteristic of the Homeric epics (the Iliad) rather than of the ancient Near East. The designation of Goliath as a איש הביניים, "man of the in-between" (a longstanding difficulty in translating 1 Samuel 17) appears to be a borrowing from Greek "man of the metaikhmion (μεταίχμιον)", i.e., the space between two opposite army camps where champion combat would take place.[18]

"A story very similar to that of David and Goliath appears in the Iliad, written circa 760–710 BCE, where the young Nestor fights and conquers the giant Ereuthalion.[19]"

Goliath - Wikipedia

Perhaps David never killed Goliath and political propaganda is nothing new .

And how would the Israelites who knew the truth react to their holy scriptures being filled with propaganda? I don't think that would work

 

[Andrewn]

I did some other poking around, and have noticed, too, that the LXX omits the latter passages I quoted and referenced.

This is an interesting observation. The last verse of 1Sa 17 in the Dead Sea Scrolls is v. 41. The rest of the chapter is missing.

I don't know if it is possible to assume that David in Ch. 16 was a child and in Ch. 17, he was a teenager. A time gap would explain why Saul did not recognize him. But in Ch. 16, David is described as a "man."

Perhaps the Hebrew word "ish" translated "man" can apply for a male of any age (boy)?

 

[BPPLEE]

I'm going through 1 Samuel again, and I noticed a discontinuity of chapter 16 with 17-18, specifically David's introduction to Saul.

1 Samuel 16:14-23:

However, in the following chapter, David was introduced to Saul through defeating Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:55-58:

Either, Saul quickly forgot who his armor-bearer was who frequently played music in his presence, or these are two different introduction stories. Is there another way that we can reconcile them?

If you'll notice in chapter 17, Saul was asking who David's father was. It doesn't say he didn't know David.

 

[Jonaitis]

If you'll notice in chapter 17, Saul was asking who David's father was. It doesn't say he didn't know David.

Well, that doesn't solve the issue. If you notice in chapter 16, Saul asks Jesse if David can enter into his service.

 

[Jonaitis]

This is an interesting observation. The last verse of 1Sa 17 in the Dead Sea Scrolls is v. 41. The rest of the chapter is missing.

I don't know if it is possible to assume that David in Ch. 16 was a child and in Ch. 17, he was a teenager. A time gap would explain why Saul did not recognize him. But in Ch. 16, David is described as a "man."

Perhaps the Hebrew word "ish" translated "man" can apply for a male of any age (boy)?

That's quite possible, but it doesn't quite make sense when you consider that Saul "loved him greatly" in Ch. 16 after David enters his service. Could a few years allow Saul to forget that much about him? The LXX is suggesting something, I think.

 

[BPPLEE]

Well, that doesn't solve the issue. If you notice in chapter 16, Saul asks Jesse if David can enter into his service.

A man who was having attacks that were so bad David had to soothe him with music couldn't forget something?

 

[Jonaitis]

A man who was having attacks that were so bad David had to soothe him with music couldn't forget something?

Well, don't forget that Saul also made him officially his armor-bearer. I mean, that's one of the biggest memory fogs of any king in the Scriptures. In Ch. 17, Abner, Saul's commander-in-chief, did not know anything about David, who regularly entered into the service of the king?