I Samuel 17:38-40 · Bible study
1 Samuel 17:38-40 Commentary: Why David Refused Saul's Armor
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Discover why David removed Saul's armor and chose only a sling and stones, and what this reveals about faith, preparation, and God's deliverance.
Research Summary
- Meaning: David rejects Saul's armor as untested and relies on weapons proven through faith and experience.
- Key words: nissah (tested/proved), David had not tested the armor, but he had tested God's deliverance against lion and bear.
- Main debate: Do the five stones imply David prepared for multiple enemies (practical reserve) or carry symbolic meaning (e.g. grace, the five books of Torah)?
- Theological theme: God uses the humble and proven things over the world's impressive resources.
- Best use: A narrative example of faith-informed wisdom and trusting God's past faithfulness for present battles.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
38Then Saul clothed David in his own tunic, put a bronze helmet on his head, and dressed him in armor.
39David strapped his sword over the tunic and tried to walk, but he was not accustomed to them. “I cannot walk in these,” David said to Saul. “I am not accustomed to them.” So David took them off.
40And David took his staff in his hand, selected five smooth stones from the brook, and put them in the pouch of his shepherd’s bag. And with his sling in hand, he approached the Philistine.
WEB World English Bible 2000
38Saul dressed David with his clothing. He put a helmet of bronze on his head, and he clad him with a coat of mail.
39David strapped his sword on his clothing and he tried to move, for he had not tested it. David said to Saul, “I can’t go with these, for I have not tested them.” Then David took them off.
40He took his staff in his hand, and chose for himself five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in the pouch of his shepherd’s bag which he had. His sling was in his hand; and he came near to the Philistine.
KJV King James Version 1769
38And Saul armed David with his armour, and he put an helmet of brass upon his head; also he armed him with a coat of mail.
39And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
40And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in a shepherd’s bag which he had, even in a scrip; and his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
38And Saul clad David with his apparel, and he put a helmet of brass upon his head, and he clad him with a coat of mail.
39And David girded his sword upon his apparel, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
40And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in the shepherd’s bag which he had, even in his wallet; and his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
38And Saul clotheth David with his long robe, and hath put a helmet of brass on his head, and doth clothe him with a coat of mail.
39And David girded his sword above his long robe, and beginneth to go, for he hath not tried it ; and David saith unto Saul, `I am not able to go with these, for I had not tried;' and David turneth them aside from off him.
40And he taketh his staff in his hand, and chooseth for him five smooth stones from the brook, and putteth them in the shepherds' habiliments that he hath, even in the scrip, and his sling is in his hand, and he draweth nigh unto the Philistine.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
38And Saul clothed David with his dress, and put a helmet of bronze upon his head, and clothed him with a corselet.
39And David girded his sword upon his dress, and endeavoured to go; for he had not yet tried [it]. And David said to Saul, I cannot go in these; for I have never tried [them]. And David put them off him.
40And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in the shepherd's bag that he had, into the pocket; and his sling was in his hand. And he drew near to the Philistine.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
38And Saul clothed David with his garments, and put a helmet of brass upon his head, and armed him with a coat of mail.
39And David having girded his sword upon his armour, began to try if he could walk in armour: for he was not accustomed to it. And David said to Saul: I cannot go thus, for I am not used to it. And he laid them off,
40And he took his staff, which he had always in his hands: and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them into the shepherd's scrip, which he had with him, and he took a sling in his hand, and went forth against the Philistine.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · I Samuel 17:38
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that David's refusal of Saul's armor is not a rejection of help but a discerning choice grounded in self-knowledge and faith. Adam Clarke notes that in ancient times heavy armor required extensive training; David, being unaccustomed to it, would have been encumbered rather than helped. The Cambridge Bible adds that David "made the effort in ignorance, because he had never tried a suit of armor", the Hebrew verb nissah (tested/proved) appears twice, stressing that the armor was not part of his experience. Gill observes that David's own weapons, the staff, sling and stones, were the tools of his shepherd life, already proven against lion and bear (17:34, 36). As the Targum puts it, had he used Saul's armor, "there would have been no appearance of a miracle." Augustine (Sermon XXXII) summarizes: "He desired to go forth to the battle in the lightest possible armour: strong in the Lord not in himself: armed not with steel but with faith." David's action is a paradigm of choosing what is tested and trusting God's track record over human provision.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Practical self-assessment: David explicitly says he cannot use the armor because he has not tested it (v39); the narrative emphasizes his lack of experience with military gear.
- Symbolic rejection of Saul's way: The Targum (cited by Gill) says there would have been no miracle in armor; David wanted God alone to receive glory by using humble weapons.
- Pragmatic preparation with faith: David still chooses weapons — a sling and stones — and selects them carefully; he does not go unarmed, showing that faith and preparation coexist.
What is clear: David's trust in Yahweh as the source of victory, not in conventional tools of war, is central to the narrative.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| David's rejection of Saul's armor | All major commentators agree David was unaccustomed to heavy armor; his refusal was practical and wise. | Some see it as a rejection of human means entirely (spiritual warfare), others as a case of using what one is trained in (calling). |
| The five smooth stones | They were chosen from the wadi for being smooth and easy to sling; shepherds use slings regularly. | Literal: David took extra stones as reserve in case first missed or for other Philistines. Symbolic: some see a number meaning 'grace' or 'preparation for multiple battles.' |
| Saul's motivation for offering armor | Saul wanted to help David by providing protection, following military custom. | Some say Saul was being kind or prudent (Clarke). Others suggest he was attempting to make David fight in a conventional way (Gill's Targum: 'no miracle') or even testing David's submission. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The scene takes place in the Valley of Elah, a natural corridor between Philistine and Israelite territory. The wadi (brook) that ran through the valley would have water-worn, smooth pebbles, what the Cambridge Bible calls "rounded and water-worn pebbles" ideally suited for a sling. The sling was a common shepherd's weapon in ancient Syria; Benjaminite warriors were famed for using it, even left-handed slingers who could hit a hair and not miss (Judges 20:16).
Saul's armor, a bronze helmet and a scale corselet (coat of mail), was standard for an Israelite king or high-ranking officer. Gill suggests these were not Saul's personal armor (which would be too large for the young David) but pieces from the king's armory brought for emergencies. The fact that David could wear them at all, even briefly, indicates he was likely a full-grown youth of around twenty, as the Cambridge Bible notes.
When David straps Saul's sword over the tunic and tries to walk, the Hebrew va'yo'el ("he fell short" or "he undertook") conveys a tentative attempt. The result is immediate: he cannot function in gear he has never trained with. By contrast, his shepherd's bag and sling are worn from daily use. The five stones, smooth, selected carefully, show practical forethought. The bag itself, a leathern scrip, normally carried provisions for the flock. Everything David takes is familiar, tested, and linked to his identity as a shepherd whom God has already delivered from lion and bear.
Textual Notes
The consulted commentaries note no significant textual variants for these verses. The main differences across translations arise from interpreting the Hebrew maddāyw (his garments/armour), whether it refers to Saul's personal military dress or general armoury items, and the precise term for the coat of mail (shiryōn, a corselet of scales). All ancient manuscript witnesses agree on the core narrative and dialogue.
Reception History
Augustine (Sermon XXXII) read David's removal of the armor as an act of faith: "strong not in himself but in the Lord." During the Reformation, the passage became a classic illustration that salvation does not come through human effort or religious trappings but through trust in God alone. Luther and Calvin both pointed to David's sling as the pattern of faith using ordinary means. In modern evangelical teaching, it is frequently preached as a test of whether believers rely on God's resources or their own. The image of the shepherd boy with his sling and five stones remains one of the most recognized symbols of faith overcoming overwhelming odds. The passage has also been used in Christian spirituality to encourage authenticity, the refusal to wear a "religious armor" that does not fit one's own walk with God.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The armor that did not fit (vv38, 39a): Saul dresses David in royal military gear. The boy straps on the sword, attempts to move, and finds it all a hindrance. This is the place where human resources, however well meant, prove inadequate for a divine assignment.
- The honest assessment (v39b): "I can't go with these, for I have not tested them." David knows his limits. He refuses to pretend. He acknowledges what he can and cannot do, a humility that opens the door for God's power to work.
- The tested weapons of faith (v40): David reaches for his staff, his sling, and five smooth stones. These are tools he has proven in the fields against predators. He does not go unarmed; he goes armed with what God has already used to rescue him. The battle becomes an extension of the faithfulness he has already lived.
Five-point outline
- Saul's gift: a king offers a warrior the best of his arsenal, kind in intent, impressive in appearance.
- The trial: David straps on the unfamiliar gear and attempts to walk. He tries, honestly, to make it work.
- The moment of truth: He cannot function. The equipment meant to protect him only immobilizes him. This is not failure; it is discovery.
- The return: David removes the armor and goes back to his shepherd's bag, his sling, his staff, what he knows and has tested.
- The advance: Armed with the proven, he draws near to the Philistine. Faith does not mean standing still; it means moving forward with what God has already given.
Illustration hooks
- A student who once tried to study with a complex tablet loaded with apps but abandoned it for a simple notebook and pen, the tools that actually helped him learn.
- A carpenter who inherited a set of advanced power tools but kept returning to his grandfather's hand plane because he could feel the wood more accurately.
- A parent who stopped trying to follow every parenting guru's program and instead trusted the habits and prayers that had already shaped their older children well.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Did David disrespect Saul by rejecting his armor? And why did the king not insist?
- Why five stones, was he preparing to kill Goliath plus his brothers, or was there a symbolic meaning?
- Does this story teach that we should never use human methods in ministry, or is it about using the right ones?
Leading a Discussion
This passage shows David deciding not to use the king's armor and instead to fight with his shepherd's tools. His reason is simple: he has not tested the armor, but he has tested his sling and stones, and more importantly, he has tested God's faithfulness against lion and bear. This study will explore how David's practical wisdom and faith came together in that choice.
Discussion questions
- Read 1 Samuel 17:38, 40 carefully. What details stand out to you about the armor and about David's own equipment?
- Verse 39 says David tried to walk in the armor but could not. Why do you think he agreed to try it at first before rejecting it?
- David says, "I have not tested them." Look at verses 34, 37. What had David tested? How does that shape his confidence?
- Gill cites the Targum that David refused armor because "there would have been no miracle" in victory by conventional means. Is that a good reason to choose weaker methods? Why or why not?
- David still used tools, a staff, sling, stones. He did not go unarmed. What does this tell us about the relationship between faith and human preparation?
- Is there an area of your life where you are trying to wear someone else's "armor", a skill, a role, a solution that worked for another person but does not fit you? What would it mean to take it off?
- What "tested" resources, small, ordinary things God has already used in your life, might you be overlooking for a challenge ahead?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Hosea 1:7 | But I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and will save them by Yahweh their God, and will not save them by bow, sword, battle, horses, or horsemen.” |
| Zechariah 4:6 | Then he answered and spoke to me, saying, “This is Yahweh’s word to Zerubbabel, saying, ‘Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says Yahweh of Armies. |
| II Corinthians 10:4 | for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but mighty before God to the throwing down of strongholds, |
| II Corinthians 10:5 | throwing down imaginations and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, |
| Judges 3:31 | After him was Shamgar the son of Anath, who struck six hundred men of the Philistines with an ox goad. He also saved Israel. |
| Judges 7:16 | He divided the three hundred men into three companies, and he put into the hands of all of them trumpets and empty pitchers, with torches within the pitchers. |
| Judges 7:20 | The three companies blew the trumpets, broke the pitchers, and held the torches in their left hands and the trumpets in their right hands with which to blow; and they shouted, “The sword of Yahweh and of Gideon!” |
| Judges 15:15 | He found a fresh jawbone of a donkey, put out his hand, took it, and struck a thousand men with it. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke highlights David's practical wisdom: he refused Saul's armor not from faith alone but because he was untrained in heavy armor, which would have hindered him. The smooth stones and sling were not a naive choice but a calculated one, requiring practiced skill that made the sling as deadly as a bow or musket in experienced hands.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator notes that David was full grown and could wear Saul's armor, but he had never trained with it and found it an encumbrance. Augustine's insight is cited: David went forth strong in the Lord, not in himself, armed with faith rather than steel. God intended the victory to be plainly His own.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note highlights David's practical wisdom: he refused Saul's armor because he had never tested it, choosing instead the shepherd's staff, sling, and stones he was trained to use. David trusted God's provision in his ordinary calling rather than adopting unfamiliar weapons.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill highlights that David refused Saul's armor not only because he was unpracticed with it, but also because using it would have hidden the miracle. If David had fought like a soldier, the victory would have looked natural. He chose his shepherd's tools so God alone would get the glory.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB notes that Saul's coat of mail was probably a loose shirt to fit both a young man and a giant. David took five stones as a practical reserve, in case the first shot missed, a precaution still used by shepherds in the East.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry highlights David's tactful courage: rather than say "Let not your heart fail" to the king, David says "Let no man's heart fail," sparing Saul's honor while still encouraging everyone. A young shepherd, fresh from the fields, shows more boldness than all Israel's warriors combined.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley emphasizes that David rejected the king's armor not from rashness but because he had no experience with such weapons. His choice of the shepherd's staff was deliberate: it made the victory clearly God's, brought greater honor to God, and maximized the Philistines' shame.