Week 5
7/6/2025
Summer 2025
-
Central Passage: 1 Samuel 17, David and Goliath
-
Check out the Middle School Sunday School Resources page for other books of the Bible resources. Note: the 1 Samuel-2 Kings handout will be available eventually.
Contents
David’s decisive killing of the mighty Philistine warrior, Goliath, is one of the most well-known stories in the Bible. But there are some textual difficulties in the Hebrew text (known as the Masoretic Text or MT) that should be addressed. [1] For instance, the MT contains 58 verses, but the older Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) omits 1 Samuel 17:12-31, 55-58.[2] However, the story’s meaning and purpose remain unchanged.
One textual difficulty comes from 2 Samuel 21:19. The ESV indicates that Elhanan struck down Goliath, which may lead one to believe that David did not decisively kill Goliath. However, most ESV translations also contain a footnote comparing 2 Samuel 21:19 with the parallel account in 1 Chronicles 20:5. The latter retains the original reading, while 2 Samuel 21:19 in the MT contains a scribal error. The error could very likely be due to the visual similarity between the Hebrew definite direct object marker and the Hebrew word for brother. The definite direct object marker indicates upon whom the subject of a sentence is acting, in addition to marking this direct object as definite, meaning it can be preceded by either a “the” or it can refer to a proper noun. An example in English would be “Elhanan [subject] killed Goliath [definite direct object]. However, the definite direct object marker could be confused with the Hebrew word for “brother” to a scribe with tired eyes. The definite direct object marker (את) was likely accidentally substituted for the word brother (אח). Thus, as 1 Chronicles 20:5 reports, Elhanan actually killed the brother of Goliath, not Goliath. But who was Goliath?
Who Was Goliath? Was He a Giant?
When reading this story as a kid, I pictured Goliath as a giant of mythical proportions, larger than a man could ever be. The Hebrew text (and many English translations) seems to indicate that he was between nine and eleven feet tall. So, who was this mighty champion of the Philistines, and was he actually as large as my child mind pictured?
First, Goliath was from Gath, one of the five royal Philistine cities. Gath is the same city where the Ark of the Covenant arrived in 1 Samuel 5:8 after causing turmoil in the house of Dagon. The people of Gath, both young and old, were then afflicted with tumors until they sent the Ark to Ekron. In 1 Samuel 7:14, under Samuel’s leadership, the Israelites recovered cities that the Philistines had taken from Ekron to Gath. However, this does not necessarily mean that they took Gath; rather, they took all the cities in between Ekron and Gath that belonged to Judah. Thus, Goliath of Gath represents a mighty remnant of Philistine antagonism that had been pushed to the east. David would later sojourn in Gath while fleeing from Saul (1 Sam 21; 27), and as king, defeat the Philistines and take Gath from them (1 Chron 18:1).
Second, Goliath was a champion of the Philistines. The Hebrew phrase here translates to “a man between armies.” It was often customary to have a battle of champions before engaging in a battle of armies. The king often would send out his own champion to battle the enemy champion, testing the enemy’s prowess. If the king’s champion won, the king might reward him with a marriage to one of his daughters, creating a close political connection between families. If the enemy champion won, the king may battle him next. However, 1 Samuel 17 does not depict Saul acting like a normal king; Saul is a cowardly king. He is notably terrified of Goliath (1 Sam 17:11). Furthermore, the duration that Saul and the armies of Israel endured Goliath’s taunting without responding also indicates an abnormally fearful response. The king likely would have battled the champion long before forty days of taunting were completed (1 Sam 17:16). All the details of the story depict Saul as a faithless coward in response to danger.
Third, Goliath was gigantic but not necessarily a giant of mythical proportions. The MT (Hebrew text) and the ESV claim that he was six cubits and a span, which would put him around nine feet and nine inches at a minimum (or eleven feet and five inches at most).[3] However, the older LXX (Greek Septuagint) says that he was four cubits and a span, around six feet and nine inches tall. The LXX is likely the more reliable text, and the size of his weapons and armor may correspond to a very large (but not mythically giant) warrior.[4]
The Bible is not the only ancient resource that reports of these large, mighty warriors in the land of Canaan. An Egyptian letter dating back to the 1200s BC spoke of the fierce Canaanite warriors who stood between seven and nine feet tall. The rumors and reports of such warriors have already been established in the Bible so far. The twelve spies reported back to Moses and Israel that there were giants (Nephilim) in the land (Num 13:33). Later, in 2 Samuel 21:20-22, another man of Gath was descended from the giants (Rephaim). Regardless of whether Goliath can be connected with these mighty men of old who were descended from fallen angels and human women in Genesis 6, this story takes the same posture toward mighty men: they are irrelevant to God’s story of salvation. For Genesis 6, mighty men of old may refer to epic characters like Gilgamesh, but Moses claims that these men were on the earth both before and after the flood, yet they had nothing to do with the Bible’s flood account. Similarly, in 1 Samuel 17, this mighty Goliath has no might before God or part to play in His redemptive story. Instead, he is like the kings of the earth who stand against the LORD and His anointed one (Psalm 2:2). Thus, David reframes the narrative of fear to a narrative of faith. Though Goliath was a large, mighty warrior, David calls him an uncircumcised Philistine, one who is outside the covenantal blessing of the God of creation and promise/Exodus. Though the soldiers have great fearful resignation for Goliath (1 Sam 17:25), David has words of indignation for the one who would dare stand against Yahweh (1 Sam 17:26, 36). God topples the strong through the weak in order to glorify Himself.
Martin Luther distinguished between what he called a Theology of Glory and a Theology of the Cross. A theology of glory aims for self-improvement, working toward merit, earning what we are due. This theology shows itself in the prosperity gospel of many American false churches today, claiming that enough faith and obedience will result in God’s blessing. This system depends on the glory that we can bring to the equation. A theology of the cross claims the opposite. When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die (Bonhoeffer). We will suffer for the gospel, but God’s power is made perfect in weakness (2 Cor 12:9; cf. John 9:1-2; 11:4). He glorifies Himself through our weakness.
Some have taken this story and framed it as a story of courage in which we are all called to conquer our own Goliaths and hardships. Though it may be partially true if the message is to have bold faith in God, there is a danger in moralizing the message, missing the bigger picture of the story, and reframing it as an exhortation to a theology of glory in which David’s bravery takes center stage. Instead, Saul was the cowardly king whom the people foolishly chose to go before them in battle. Yet in this story, he refuses to go before them in battle, even symbolically placing his kingly duties on David when he gives David his armor to wear. Though Saul was a Benjamite who would have been proficient with a sling, a young, seemingly weak shepherd from Judah uses a sling to defeat Goliath. This is a story in which we can and should identify with the weakness and cowardice of Saul. We also can and should identify with a David who could only depend on God to deliver Him. We need God to raise up a champion for us. This is a story about God, who laughs at those who stand against Him (Psalm 2:4), raising up a champion who appears weak and ill-equipped. But God delivers David out of the hand of the Philistines and further establishes David as His king, establishing the family line that would bring us Jesus, our king of all creation.
Gill, John. Gill's Commentary. Volume II: Judges to Psalm 22. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.
Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A Grisanti. The Word and the World: An Introduction to the Old Testament.
Theocast. “What is the Theology of Glory vs the Theology of the Cross?” https://theocast.org/blogs/asktheocast/what-is-the-theology-of-glory-vs-the-theology-of-the-cross
Walton, John H., Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2000.
Youngblood, Ronald F. and Richard D. Patterson. 1 Samuel ~ 2 Kings. The Expositor's Bible Commentary. General Editors: Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.
[1] You might assume that the Hebrew MT would be older than the Greek Septuagint (LXX) since the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew. However, the Masoretes were a sect of Jewish scribes who were active several centuries after the writing of the LXX. Writing sometime between 500-1000 AD, the oldest complete MT manuscript dates to 1009 AD. The Masoretes were brilliant scribes and linguists, adding chapter and verse distinctions in addition to accent marks and sentence structure markings to assist in reading and vocalizing the text. But in 1947, archaeologists discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, pushing the date for our earliest manuscripts back even further by at least 1000 years. The oldest fragments of manuscripts at Qumran have been dated from 250 BC to 135 AD. At their discovery, textual scholars discovered that ninety percent of the MT is consistent with the much older Dead Sea Scrolls.
On the other hand, the Septuagint was translated, beginning with the Pentateuch (Genesis through Deuteronomy) in the 200s BC. Thus, the LXX contains an older version of the text when compared to the MT. It is a valuable resource to compare to the MT to uncover the original text. The original writings (autographs) are the inspired texts, and the various manuscripts help textual scholars uncover the original rendering.
[2] There are other textual difficulties with the MT in 1 Samuel as well. For instance, 1 Samuel 14:41 is noticeably shorter in the Hebrew, simply reading, “And Saul said to Yahweh, the God of Israel, ‘give Thummim.’ And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped.” The LXX contains a fuller reading. Some have proposed that the Masoretic scribe who was copying the Hebrew could have made a mistake and skipped a line due to the frequency that the phrase “O LORD God of Israel” occurs in this verse.
[3] A cubit was not a precise measurement. It was typically measured by the distance from one’s elbow to the tip of the middle finger. That means that the measurement may vary from person to person. However, most assume this would be around eighteen inches, with others claiming it could be up to twenty-one inches.
[4] His armor likely weighed around 125 pounds. And his sword may have been large, but David was still able to wield it.
