Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:21

Turn aside to your right hand or to your left: see the comments on verse 19. Translators should remember that the context is a breathless chase in the heat of battle. In addition to the model of Good News Translation, translators may consider “Leave me alone!” Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente states “Change direction.”

One of the young men: that is, one of the other soldiers. See 1.15 and verse 14 in this chapter.

Take his spoil: the word translated spoil is not the usual word for booty taken in war (as in 1 Sam 14.30). The noun is based on a root that means “to draw [or, strip] off.” But it is used in Judges 14.19 and refers to what is taken from a person in war—that is, what could be taken off a dead body, whether weapons, garments, or other belongings. The New International Version rendering is perhaps too restricted, “strip him of his weapons.” There may have been other items of value that could have been recovered from an enemy in battle. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “strip off his tunic,” but this also seems too limited. La Bible du Semeur has “his equipment.”

Would not turn aside: this is stated positively in Good News Translation. In other languages it may be more natural to say something like “refused to stop chasing him.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:22

While Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation have questions within a direct quotation, it may be more natural in some languages to avoid both the direct speech and the rhetorical questions.

Why should I smite you to the ground? The idea is that Abner did not want to have to kill his pursuer, but that he would have to do so if Asahel did not stop chasing him. While this is in the form of a question, it may be better expressed as a statement in some languages. One possibility is to say “I don’t want to have to kill you.”

How then could I…? If Abner had to kill Asahel, he knew he would not be able to face Joab, the brother of the person he had killed. Instead of the question, some languages may prefer a direct negative statement like “I could not possibly….” In fact Joab will later kill Abner in revenge (see 3.27).

Lift up my face: that is, look him straight in the eye without feeling guilty. Some languages may have idioms that are quite different in form but carry the same meaning. Some may say “How could I sit with your brother?” or, using the more direct statement, “I could not bear to look at your brother.” Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente says “Then I will have to break my relationship with your brother Joab,” and La Biblia Latinoamerica states “How could I then be reconciled with your brother Joab?”

Here is a possible model that does away with both of the questions in the text but maintains the basic meaning:

• “Stop chasing me, or I will have to kill you! Then I will never be able to look at the face of your brother, Joab, again.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:23

But: the conjunction here introduces a contrast between Abner’s request in the previous verse and Asahel’s response which follows. While many versions use the conjunction But, as in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, others insert the word “still” into the sentence (Revised English Bible, New American Bible). Since verse 24 also begins with “But,” this may be the preferred solution here.

Smote him in the belly with the butt of his spear: as shown by the notes in several English versions, the Hebrew at this point is unclear. Both Good News Translation and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh speak of a “backward thrust,” but it is uncertain just what this means. Perhaps Abner was trying to cripple Asahel (without actually killing him) by using the blunt end of his spear. But the text indicates that the spear went completely through his stomach and killed him immediately. The butt of a spear was often pointed for sticking it into the ground.

The word translated belly occurs only here and in 3.27; 4.6; 20.10. It is nearly always translated as “stomach” (New Revised Standard Version), “abdomen” (New American Bible), or belly. The Hebrew word is exactly the same as the word for “fifth.” Fox therefore translates this as “in the fifth (rib),” meaning that the spear went through Asahel’s body where the fifth rib is located. On the left side of the body, this is where the heart is located.

Stood still: in some languages it may be advisable to state clearly the reason that everyone came to a halt on seeing the body of Asahel. Was it because of the manner in which he died? Or was it simply the fact that Joab’s brother had been killed? Probably the other soldiers were stunned by what had happened. Compare 20.12.

It is possible, though not likely, that the last sentence in this verse refers not to events on the day of battle but rather to a custom that was observed by Israelites in later generations (so Hertzberg). If, however, one accepts this interpretation, then it will be incorrect to say, as Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente does, that “all the other soldiers stopped.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:24

But: this conjunction is apparently intended to show the contrast between the action of all the other people (who stood still before the body of Asahel) and that of the two brothers of the slain man, who immediately began to chase the killer. The following verses, however, suggest that Joab’s troops continued the chase with Joab and Abishai.

The hill of Ammah … before Giah: the names Ammah and Giah do not appear elsewhere in the Bible. The exact geographic location referred to here is therefore rather difficult to determine with any precision. Ammah was apparently a hill in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin where the land begins to slope toward the wilderness of the Jordan valley. Before Giah is literally “opposite Giah” (Revised English Bible). This is taken to mean “to the east of Giah” by several versions (New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible as well as Good News Translation). The word usually rendered Giah may mean “valley,” as in New American Bible, or “water channel.” But this is not certain, so it is better to translate it as a name as most versions do.

Wilderness: the word so translated in Revised Standard Version is usually rendered “desert” in Good News Translation and New International Version, but here Good News Translation has “wilderness,” while New International Version has “wasteland.” Some other renderings are “pastures” (Revised English Bible) and “empty land” (New Century Version). But if “desert” (as in New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible) is a permissible translation in other contexts, it is difficult to see why it is not acceptable here.

Gibeon: some commentators find it strange that the fighters would still be near Gibeon (see verse 13) after an apparently long chase. They have suggested that the original text probably said “Geba,” as in New American Bible. The strength of this suggestion is that Gibeon is not in or near a desert region, but that Geba is. Geba is located eight kilometers (five miles) to the east of Gibeon. Most versions, however, retain “Gibeon,” and there is little significant textual evidence to the contrary.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:25

Benjaminites: literally “children of Benjamin” (Fox). This word seems to imply that it was primarily the men of the tribe of Benjamin who remained with Abner at this point (see verse 15), although other groups are mentioned in 2.9. See also the references to “Benjaminites” in 1 Sam 9.1, 21; 22.7.

Became one band: the basic meaning of the word translated band is “bundle” or “knot.” The Benjaminite soldiers formed a close-knit group around their leader and prepared to defend themselves. Revised English Bible has “forming themselves into a single group,” while Knox has “stood gathered in one mass.”

A hill: presumably the hill on which Abner and his forces gathered was not the same as the one on which Joab, Abishai, and their soldiers had arrived (the hill of Ammah in the previous verse). The picture therefore is of two groups of soldiers on different but nearby hills shouting at each other. This image will determine the kinds of verbs that are used in the following verses as these men shout to each other.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:26

Called to Joab: literally “called to Joab and said.” In view of the image of two opposing armies some distance from each other on different hills, it will probably be advisable to translate called to, using a verb like “yelled” or “shouted” (New Century Version).

Shall the sword devour for ever? This rhetorical question was intended to make Joab think about the consequences of continuing in battle. A literal translation will probably be unwise in most languages. The sword stands for warfare in general, and the verb devour indicates that continued fighting would take away more and more of the population of the two groups. Revised English Bible has “Must the slaughter go on for ever?” Another way of saying this is “Shall we go on killing each other forever?” Or, changing the rhetorical question into a statement, “To continue fighting [forever] is not wise.”

Do you not know that the end will be bitter? Another rhetorical question implying that Joab knows very well that the only way continued fighting can end is in bitterness. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh transforms the question into an exclamation, “You know how bitterly it’s going to end!” Rather than use the word “bitter” as most English translations do, Contemporary English Version says “Don’t you know that the longer we keep on doing this, the worse it’s going to be when it’s all over?” Other languages may find it more natural to translate the last part of the sentence by saying simply “it will end badly.”

How long…? Or “When will you stop…?”

Your people: literally “the people” as in New American Bible (see also verses 27-28, 30). Revised English Bible translates “the troops.” But it is probably best to translate “your troops” as in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh.

Their brethren: this is an indirect way used by Abner to refer to himself and his soldiers. They were related to David’s men as descendants of Jacob, although they were not in the literal sense “brothers” but more distant relatives. Moffatt has “fellow-countrymen.” In some languages it will be more natural to use the first person plural object pronoun, “us,” as in Good News Translation. But in order to convey the idea contained in the word brethren, it may be wise to add “We are your relatives” or something similar.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:27

Said: or perhaps “shouted back,” in view of the context.

As God lives: this expression, also found in Job 27.2, is a way of swearing in the strongest possible terms. A similar expression using the name of YHWH, “as the LORD lives,” is much more frequent, occurring thirty-five times in the Old Testament (including Judges 8.19; Ruth 3.13; 1 Sam 14.39 and 2 Sam 4.9). This may be stated in a variety of ways in different languages. For example, “I promise, with God as my witness,” or “In the presence of God, I affirm,” or “I make a vow in the name of God.”

If you had not spoken: some languages will require that the content of what was spoken be made clear. This almost certainly refers to what Abner had just said about the risk of continuing the battle. Bible en français courant clarifies the meaning by saying “if you had not asked for this break….” In other cases one may say simply “if you had not said that…” (referring to Abner’s words) or, more generally, “if you had not said something….”

A slight change in the spelling of the word not will change this Hebrew word to “only.” The meaning would then be “If you had only spoken [earlier during the battle], the men would have stopped fighting earlier that same morning.” Though this change has been noted by interpreters, it has not been accepted by translators.

The men: literally “the people” (as in verse 26).

Their brethren: in replying to Abner, Joab uses the same kind of indirect reference as Abner used in the previous verse. But here it is better translated by the plural pronoun “you,” since Joab is speaking to and about his opponents.

Would have given up … in the morning: there is a problem here in deciding which morning is referred to. Is it the previous morning or the following one (so Good News Translation)? Like Good News Translation, New International Version indicates that “in the morning” refers to the following morning: “If you had not spoken, the men would have continued the pursuit of their brothers until morning.” The Hebrew may also be understood to mean that Joab’s troops would definitely have continued to pursue Abner until the next morning if Abner had not spoken up. This interpretation gives nearly the same meaning as that in Good News Translation. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, for example, says “if you hadn’t spoken up, the troops would have given up the pursuit of their kinsmen only the next morning.” It is possible to understand the Hebrew to mean that, if Abner had not issued the challenge at the pool of Gibeon that morning, the soldiers would have gone home then without ever fighting. The alternate translation in New International Version follows this second interpretation: “If you had not spoken this morning, the men would not have taken up the pursuit of their brothers.” The meaning of the text is probably best conveyed by the interpretation which is the basis for the New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Good News Translation translations.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 2:28

So: while Revised Standard Version takes this as a logical transition marker, Good News Translation makes it more temporal. New Revised Standard Version omits it altogether, but a temporal transition seems appropriate in this context.

Blew the trumpet: most English versions translate as Revised Standard Version, but it is worth noting that the instrument used to signal the end of a battle was a common ram’s horn (see Josh 6.4, for example; also 2 Sam 18.16; 20.22). It is not normally used for making music. The same instrument was also used later in this book to assemble the people at the arrival of the Covenant Box in Jerusalem (6.15). In that case Revised Standard Version translates “horn.” In both cases Anchor Bible and Fox transliterate it shofar, but this is not recommended. Probably it is best to use the word for “horn.” See also comment on 1 Sam 13.3.

And all the men stopped: the conjunction and may be misleading. In many languages it will be necessary to show the relationship between the blowing of the trumpet and the fact that the soldiers (literally “the people”) stopped. Some may say “and therefore the troops halted” or “so that his soldiers stopped chasing their enemies.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .