And Kish was the father of Saul; and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel.
Jump to: Barnes • Benson • BI • Cambridge • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • JFB • KD • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Parker • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)The son of Abiel.—For “son” the commentators mostly agree we must read sons. Kish and Ner, we know, were both sons of Abiel. (See 1Chronicles 9:35-36, where, however, the father’s name is given as Jehiel.)1 Samuel 9:1.
and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel; this Abiel was the father both of Kish and Ner, and the grandfather of Saul, see 1 Samuel 9:1.And Kish was the father of Saul; and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)51. Abiel] It has been conjectured that Abiel is the same as Jehiel “the father” or founder of Gibeon, 1 Chronicles 9:35, and that Gibeon is identical with Gibeah; but this is doubtful.Verse 51. - The son of Abiel. There can be little doubt that the right reading is sons, and not son. We thus get an intelligible statement - "And Kish the father of Saul and Ner the father of Abner, were sons of Abiel."
What Jonathan had done was not wrong in itself, but became so simply on account of the oath with which Saul had forbidden it. But Jonathan did not hear the oath, and therefore had not even consciously transgressed. Nevertheless a curse lay upon Israel, which was to be brought to light as a warning for the culprit. Therefore Jehovah had given no reply to Saul. But when the lot, which had the force of a divine verdict, fell upon Jonathan, sentence of death was not thereby pronounced upon him by God; but is was simply made manifest, that through his transgression of his father's oath, with which he was not acquainted, guilt had been brought upon Israel. The breach of a command issued with a solemn oath, even when it took place unconsciously, excited the wrath of God, as being a profanation of the divine name. But such a sin could only rest as guilt upon the man who had committed, or the man who occasioned it. Now where the command in question was one of God himself, there could be no question, that even in the case of unconscious transgression the sin fell upon the transgressor, and it was necessary that it should either be expiated by him or forgiven him. But where the command of a man had been unconsciously transgressed, the guilt might also fall upon the man who issued the command, that is to say, if he did it without being authorized or empowered by God. In the present instance, Saul had issued the prohibition without divine authority, and had made it obligatory upon the people by a solemn oath. The people had conscientiously obeyed the command, but Jonathan had transgressed it without being aware of it. For this Saul was about to punish him with death, in order to keep his oath. But the people opposed it. They not only pronounced Jonathan innocent, because he had broken the king's command unconsciously, but they also exclaimed that he had gained the victory for Israel "with God." In this fact (Jonathan's victory) there was a divine verdict. And Saul could not fail to recognise now, that it was not Jonathan, but he himself, who had sinned, and through his arbitrary and despotic command had brought guilt upon Israel, on account of which God had given him no reply.
Links1 Samuel 14:51 Interlinear
1 Samuel 14:51 Parallel Texts
1 Samuel 14:51 NIV
1 Samuel 14:51 NLT
1 Samuel 14:51 ESV
1 Samuel 14:51 NASB
1 Samuel 14:51 KJV
1 Samuel 14:51 Bible Apps
1 Samuel 14:51 Parallel
1 Samuel 14:51 Biblia Paralela
1 Samuel 14:51 Chinese Bible
1 Samuel 14:51 French Bible
1 Samuel 14:51 German Bible