1 Samuel 29 4

1 Samuel 29:4 kjv

And the princes of the Philistines were wroth with him; and the princes of the Philistines said unto him, Make this fellow return, that he may go again to his place which thou hast appointed him, and let him not go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he be an adversary to us: for wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master? should it not be with the heads of these men?

1 Samuel 29:4 nkjv

But the princes of the Philistines were angry with him; so the princes of the Philistines said to him, "Make this fellow return, that he may go back to the place which you have appointed for him, and do not let him go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he become our adversary. For with what could he reconcile himself to his master, if not with the heads of these men?

1 Samuel 29:4 niv

But the Philistine commanders were angry with Achish and said, "Send the man back, that he may return to the place you assigned him. He must not go with us into battle, or he will turn against us during the fighting. How better could he regain his master's favor than by taking the heads of our own men?

1 Samuel 29:4 esv

But the commanders of the Philistines were angry with him. And the commanders of the Philistines said to him, "Send the man back, that he may return to the place to which you have assigned him. He shall not go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he become an adversary to us. For how could this fellow reconcile himself to his lord? Would it not be with the heads of the men here?

1 Samuel 29:4 nlt

But the Philistine commanders were angry. "Send him back to the town you've given him!" they demanded. "He can't go into the battle with us. What if he turns against us in battle and becomes our adversary? Is there any better way for him to reconcile himself with his master than by handing our heads over to him?

1 Samuel 29 verses

1 Samuel 29 4 Meaning

First Samuel 29:4 describes the Philistine princes' vehement rejection of David accompanying their army into battle against Israel. They, in contrast to their king Achish, deeply distrusted David, fearing that he would betray them in the midst of the fight to reconcile with his former master, King Saul. Their reasoning was cynical and pragmatic: they believed David's path to reconciliation with Saul would involve sacrificing Philistine lives. This pivotal moment removed David from an ethically compromising situation, preventing him from fighting against his own people.

1 Samuel 29 4 Context

First Samuel chapter 29 finds David in a precarious position. After feigning madness to escape Gath (1 Sam 21) and leading a band of 600 men as an outlaw from King Saul, David had allied himself with Achish, king of Gath, for sixteen months (1 Sam 27:7). Achish, trusting David, had given him the Philistine town of Ziklag. This alliance protected David from Saul but created a profound moral dilemma. Chapter 28 depicts Saul's desperate state and his forbidden consultation of the medium of Endor, foreshadowing his defeat. Chapter 29 immediately shifts to the Philistine military mobilization against Israel, with David and his men accompanying Achish. This verse captures the moment when other Philistine commanders intervene, their distrust of David overriding Achish’s confidence, inadvertently saving David from a direct conflict with his own nation, Israel.

1 Samuel 29 4 Word analysis

• But the princes of the Philistines: לַסְּרָנִים פְּלִשְׁתִּים (las-sᵉrānîm pəlištîm).
  • לַסְּרָנִים (las-sᵉrānîm): From saranim (סְרָנִים), a unique title for Philistine lords/rulers, likely meaning "axle-lords" or "tyrants." This term differentiates them from typical kings and emphasizes their distinct political structure and collective authority. Their unity here highlights a powerful opposition to Achish.
• were wroth with him: וַיִּקְצְפוּ עָלָיו (wayyiqṣᵉfū 'ālāyw).
  • וַיִּקְצְפוּ (wayyiqṣᵉfū): From qaṣaf (קָצַף), meaning to rage, to be indignant, to be angry. It signifies an intense and overt display of anger, not just mild disapproval.
• and the princes of the Philistines said to him: וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו שָׂרֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים (wayyō'mᵉrū 'ēlāyw śārê pəlištîm).
  • שָׂרֵי (śārê): From sar (שַׂר), a general Hebrew term for prince, chief, or official. The use of sarim here alongside saranim might simply be a stylistic variation or indicate a broader council of officials including the 'saranim'. It reinforces the collective and authoritative nature of their command to Achish.
• Make this fellow return: הָשֵׁב אֶת־הָאִישׁ (hâšêḇ 'eṯ-hā'îš).
  • הָשֵׁב (hâšêḇ): From shuv (שׁוּב), to turn back, return, cause to return. It's a causative command, an imperative demand to Achish.
  • הָאִישׁ (hā'îš): "the man," possibly used with a slight tone of dismissal or disdain, rather than recognizing him as a chief or a specific personality.
• that he may go again to his place: וְיֵלֶךְ אֶל־מְקוֹמוֹ (wᵉyêlĕḵ 'el-mᵉqômōw).
  • מְקוֹמוֹ (mᵉqômōw): "his place," referring to Ziklag, the Philistine town Achish had granted David. This highlights that David's integration into Philistia was not complete, and he had an assigned, temporary domicile.
• where thou hast appointed him: אֲשֶׁר הִפְקַדְתָּו (ʾašer hip̄qaḏtāv).
  • הִפְקַדְתָּו (hip̄qaḏtāv): From paqad (פָּקַד), to appoint, entrust, commit. It underscores Achish's prior act of authority and trust in settling David.
• and let him not go down with us to battle: וְלֹא יֵרֵד עִמָּנוּ בַּמִּלְחָמָה (wᵉlō' yêrēḏ ‘immānû bam-milḥāmāh).
  • יֵרֵד (yêrēḏ): From yarad (יָרַד), to descend, go down. Common verb for moving from higher ground to lower ground, often used for going into battle in the plains. This is their main objective and fear.
• lest in the battle he be an adversary to us: וְלֹא יִהְיֶה לָּנוּ לְשָׂטָן בַּמִּלְחָמָה (wᵉlō' yihyeh lānu lᵉśāṭān bam-milḥāmāh).
  • לְשָׂטָן (lᵉśāṭān): From satan (שָׂטָן), meaning adversary, opponent, or accuser. While sometimes referring to the personal spiritual entity, here it simply denotes an antagonist or traitor. The Philistines' core fear is that David would switch allegiance during battle.
• for wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master?: כִּי בַּמֶּה יִתְרַצֶּה זֶה אֶל־אֲדֹנָיו (kî bammeh yitraṣṣeh zeh ’el-ʾăḏōnâw).
  • יִתְרַצֶּה (yitraṣṣeh): From raṣah (רָצָה), to be pleased with, accept, make amends. Here, "reconcile himself" implies an act of regaining favor or pacifying. The Philistine princes view David's loyalty as conditional and opportunistic.
  • אֲדֹנָיו (ʾăḏōnâw): "his master," referring to Saul, emphasizing the continued allegiance David was presumed to have.
• should it not be with the heads of these men?: הֲלוֹא בְּרָאשֵׁי הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵמָּה (hălō' bᵉrāšê hāʾănāšîm hāhēmmāh).
  • This is a rhetorical question that functions as an emphatic declaration. They explicitly state their belief that David would offer the Philistine soldiers' heads as proof of his renewed loyalty to Saul. It illustrates their complete distrust and a deep understanding of the ruthless political realities of their time.

Words-group by words-group analysis:

• "But the princes of the Philistines were wroth with him": This establishes immediate and intense opposition from the collective Philistine leadership, a sharp contrast to Achish's acceptance of David. Their wrath underscores the gravity of the situation and the threat David was perceived to be.
• "and the princes of the Philistines said to him, 'Make this fellow return that he may go again to his place where thou hast appointed him'": The repetition of "princes of the Philistines" emphasizes their unanimous, forceful decision over Achish. The demand for David's return to Ziklag highlights their belief that he should be confined to a neutral, appointed territory, not the battlefront.
• "and let him not go down with us to battle lest in the battle he be an adversary to us": This clearly states their core military concern. The word "adversary" (śāṭān) is highly significant; it articulates their deep fear of David becoming an internal saboteur, indicating suspicion that bordered on paranoia about his allegiance, an insightful and pragmatic assessment given David's true Israelite identity.
• "for wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master? should it not be with the heads of these men?": This reveals the cynical and strategic thinking of the Philistine princes. They deduce that the most convincing way for David to mend fences with Saul would be through a massive act of treachery—massacring Philistine soldiers. This justification demonstrates their suspicion of his motivations and reveals their ruthless worldview where loyalty is earned through demonstration, often violent.

1 Samuel 29 4 Bonus section

The narrative carefully portrays Achish's trust in David, highlighting it several times in this chapter (1 Sam 29:3, 6, 9-10). This consistent portrayal serves to amplify the unanimous and forceful opposition of the other saranim. The word saranim is only used for Philistine lords in the Old Testament, suggesting a distinct cultural or governmental structure among them that contrasts with Israelite monarchy. The use of "satan" (adversary) for a human opponent demonstrates the word's primary meaning as simply an "opponent" before its later association with the evil spiritual entity in Job and Zechariah. The divine timing here is also notable; David's presence at the battlefield put him on the brink of profound sin, but God intervened just as he was about to step over the line, preventing the future king of Israel from participating in the battle against Saul, thus maintaining his innocence in the eyes of Israel (at least concerning this conflict).

1 Samuel 29 4 Commentary

This verse is pivotal not only for David's immediate future but also for theological understanding. It highlights God's subtle providence, preventing David from having to engage in civil war against his own nation. David, though aligned with Achish due to his circumstances, would have faced an impossible ethical dilemma had he marched to battle alongside the Philistines against Israel. The intense suspicion and wrath of the Philistine princes, contrasting sharply with Achish's trust, served as God's instrument to deliver David from this impossible position. Their pragmatic fear that David would "reconcile" with Saul by betraying them (literally, "with the heads of these men") was a reasonable assessment from their perspective, rooted in the political realities of the ancient world where alliances could shift dramatically. Unbeknownst to them, their distrust indirectly saved David's integrity and future kingship. It's a striking example of how even the strategic self-interest of enemies can be used by God to fulfill His sovereign plans, keeping His chosen servant pure from a dire compromise.