Changes

In v. 4, the notable divestiture by Jonathan of his garments, “even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle” to place them on David, is first evidenced as being a partial disrobing (especially in the Hebrew), limiting it to his robe and outer garments, his sword, bow and “girdle," the latter denoting part of a soldiers armor<ref>Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown, 1Sam. 18:4</ref>  in such places as 2Samuel 20:8 and 2Kings 3:21. Besides such acts being a soldierly token of respect and friendship, as is seen in stories by Homer and other ancient writers<ref>Clarke</ref>, and an unselfish providence to the lowly shepherd of clothing fit for the royal household, this ceremony is shown to have a clear ceremonial significance and precedent in Numbers 20:26, (cf. Esther 3:60) in which God commanded Moses, "And strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son", in transference of the office of the former upon the latter.  Likewise, Jonathan, who most likely knew of Samuel's discharge of Saul as king, would be symbolically and prophetically transferring the kingship of himself (as the normal heir) to David, and which would come to pass.<ref>Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 146-54</ref><ref>Markus Zehnder, “Observations on the Relationship between David and Jonathan and the Debate on Homosexuality,” Westminster Theological Journal 69.1 [2007]: 127-74)</ref><ref>Thomas E Schmidt, “Straight or Narrow?”</ref>  Jonathan later evidences he know David was to be king. (1Sam. 20:15)

In v. 4, the notable divestiture by Jonathan of his garments, “even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle” to place them on David, is first evidenced as being a partial disrobing (especially in the Hebrew), limiting it to his robe and outer garments, his sword, bow and “girdle," the latter denoting part of a soldiers armor<ref>Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown, 1Sam. 18:4</ref>  in such places as 2Samuel 20:8 and 2Kings 3:21. Besides such acts being a soldierly token of respect and friendship, as is seen in stories by Homer and other ancient writers<ref>Clarke</ref>, and an unselfish providence to the lowly shepherd of clothing fit for the royal household, this ceremony is shown to have a clear ceremonial significance and precedent in Numbers 20:26, (cf. Esther 3:60) in which God commanded Moses, "And strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son", in transference of the office of the former upon the latter.  Likewise, Jonathan, who most likely knew of Samuel's discharge of Saul as king, would be symbolically and prophetically transferring the kingship of himself (as the normal heir) to David, and which would come to pass.<ref>Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 146-54</ref><ref>Markus Zehnder, “Observations on the Relationship between David and Jonathan and the Debate on Homosexuality,” Westminster Theological Journal 69.1 [2007]: 127-74)</ref><ref>Thomas E Schmidt, “Straight or Narrow?”</ref>  Jonathan later evidences he know David was to be king. (1Sam. 20:15)

In 1Sa 18:21, an attempt is made by some to render “thou shalt this day [yôm] be my son in law [châthân] in ''the one of'' the twain [shenayim / shettayimto]” (KJV: words in italics are not in original) to mean David was married to Jonathan and would become Saul's son in law again by his marriage to Michal. However, besides the unwarranted and absurd idea that Saul would recognize a homosexual marriage, or would not use such to get rid of David once for all, (Lv. 18:22; 20:13) and the ambiguity of the passage due to the sparsity of words (which Young renders `By the second--thou dost become my son-in-law to-day'),<ref>Young's literal translation</ref>  the context here is not that of Saul's son   but his daughters Merab and Michal. (1Sa 18:17-20)  As Saul had promised a daughter to the slayer of Goliath (1Sam. 17:25), so he promised Merab to David, but consistent with his guile and changeable spirit he gave her to Adriel (Michal would end up raising her children. (2Sam. 21:8)  It is thus understood that by a second offer (cf. Job. 33:14) David may become the king's son in law by marriage with Michal.

In 1Sa 18:21, an attempt is made by some to render “thou shalt this day [yôm] be my son in law [châthân] in ''the one of'' the twain [shenayim / shettayimto]” (KJV: words in italics are not in original) to mean David was married to Jonathan and would become Saul's son in law again by his marriage to Michal. However, besides the unwarranted and absurd idea that Saul would recognize a homosexual marriage, or would not use such a time to get rid of David once for all, (Lv. 18:22; 20:13) and the ambiguity of the passage due to the sparsity of words, the context here is not that of Saul's son but his daughters Merab and Michal. (1Sa 18:17-20)  As Saul had promised a daughter to the slayer of Goliath (1Sam. 17:25), so he promised Merab to David, but consistent with his guile and changeable spirit he gave her to Adriel (Michal would end up raising her children: 2Sam. 21:8)  It is thus understood that by a second offer (cf. Job. 33:14) David may become the king's son in law by marriage with Michal, or as David had become the king's son in law by when he was betrothed to Merab, which was basically considered marriage, so once again he would be son in law to Saul by his marriage to his youngest daughter.<ref>[http://www.layhands.com/IsHomosexualityASin.htm Were Jonathan and David "Married"?, layhands.com]</ref><ref>Albert Barnes, Dr. John Gill, 1Sa 18:21</ref>

===1 Samuel 19 and 20: brotherly love===

===1 Samuel 19 and 20: brotherly love===