Companionate Love in Times of Crisis

PDF Version

In times of crisis, companionate love—rooted in friendship and shared struggles—reveals its power. The story of David and Jonathan told in book of 1 Samuel 18:1–4, 19:1–7, and 20:1–42 in the Old Testament (King James Bible, 2024) is an exemplary case of this type of love. Their relationship, shaped by political dangers and personal challenges, transcends familial ties, showcasing loyalty, trust, and emotional support. Olyan (2009) explores this love as surpassing even that between a man and a woman, emphasizing its unique depth in biblical narratives.

The Biblical Example: David and Jonathan

The relationship between David and Jonathan stands out for its emotional intensity and mutual commitment. Book of 1 Samuel 18:1-4 recounts their immediate bond, symbolized by Jonathan giving David his robe and weapons. This act goes beyond mere friendship; it solidifies a covenant of solidarity. Olyan (2009) observes that Jonathan’s willingness to risk his own life for David reflects the surpassing nature of their bond, while Harold (2024) links this connection to both politics and romance.

Stylistic Insights into Biblical Text

Stylistically, the language in 1 Samuel is simple yet filled with emotional weight. Words like “love” and “soul” are used to describe David and Jonathan’s close relationship. Peleg (2005) highlights how biblical politics of gender shapes their interaction, with short declarative sentences like “Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself” (1 Samuel 18:3) emphasizing genuine, unembellished affection. The narrative presents love that needs no grand language, reflecting companionate love’s endurance.

Love as a Response to Crisis

Crisis often tests relationships, and for David and Jonathan, it solidified a love rooted in mutual support. In book of 1 Samuel 19, Jonathan intervenes with his father, Saul, to protect David, even at great personal risk. Harold (2024) argues that this love blends political allegiance with emotional loyalty, while Fisher (2004) emphasizes that love’s role during times of crisis offers both evolutionary and emotional refuge.

Religious and Contemporary Parallels

The story of David and Jonathan resonates beyond the ancient context. Companionate love continues to be a source of strength during modern crises—whether in war, natural disasters, or personal tragedy. Fisher (2004) suggests that the bonds forged in such times often provide emotional stability, much like Jonathan’s unwavering support of David. This narrative, as Tiemeyer (2023) discusses, challenges traditional masculinity and highlights the enduring value of friendship.

Conclusion

David and Jonathan’s relationship illustrates how companionate love, marked by loyalty and resilience, becomes most visible during hardship. From a stylistic perspective, the sparseness of language underscores the strength of their relationship. Companionate love, steady and unwavering, remains a powerful model of how humans can support one another in times of crisis (Harold, 2024; Tiemeyer, 2023).

References

Fisher, H. E. (2004). Why we love: The nature and chemistry of romantic love. H. Holt.

Harold, P. (2024). Unveiling the meaning of love אהב: Between politics and romance in the story of David and Jonathan. Journal Didaskalia, 7(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.33856/didaskalia.v7i1.331

King James Bible. (2024). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/  (Original work published 1611)

Olyan, S. M. (2009). “Surpassing The Love of Women” another look at 2 Samuel 1:26 and the relationship of David and Jonathan. Authorizing Marriage?, 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400827138.7

Peleg, Y. (2005). Love at first sight? David, Jonathan, and the biblical politics of gender. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 30(2), 171-189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089205060606

Tiemeyer, L. (2023). Jonathan, homoeroticism, and masculinity. In L. Tiemeyer (Ed.), In search of Jonathan: Jonathan between the Bible and modern fiction (pp. 36-63). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197637777.003.0003