Nathan the prophet: this is the first mention of the prophet Nathan. The presence of the definite article indicates that he was well known during the time of David and probably also well known to the first readers of this book. But there is no indication where he came from or how he became a part of David’s court. It should be clear that this is not the same Nathan mentioned in 5.14, who was one of David’s sons. In some languages it will be better to say here “a certain prophet, whose name was Nathan.” See also comments on “the prophet Gad” in 1 Sam 22.5.

See now: the word translated See is not the emphatic particle usually rendered “behold” or “lo” in Revised Standard Version. Rather it is actually a verb meaning “to see.” However, it is used in a way similar to the emphatic particle, and, together with the word translated now, it draws attention to and emphasizes what follows. The idea is almost like the English idiom “Look at me….” This is why several versions including Good News Translation translate it as “Here I am….”

Dwell … dwells: the same word is used of David and the Covenant Box, but in some languages it will not be possible to retain the same verb for a person living in a house and an object, such as the ark, being in a certain place. In the second use of this verb, it may be necessary to say “but we are keeping the Covenant Box in a tent” or “the Covenant Box is sitting in a tent.”

The contrast between a house of cedar and a tent is significant and should be reflected in the receptor language. David was concerned that, while he was living in luxury in his palace, the Covenant Box was left in a mere tent. The word cedar will be difficult to translate in languages where such a tree is unknown. Cedar trees were well known for their size and strength and had been sent to David by Hiram, the king of Tyre (see 5.11). The emphasis here is on the fact that David lived in a very strong, permanent building, while the Covenant Box remained in a weak and temporary structure. It should also be noted that the word translated tent here is not the one that is usually so translated, as in 6.17. The meaning of this word is more like “curtains” (Anchor Bible) or “awnings” (New Jerusalem Bible). This word and the more common one for tent are used together in Song 1.5; Jer 4.20; and Hab 3.7. An American Translation combines the meanings with “tent curtains.” Similarly Moffatt has “the curtains of a tent,” and Fox says “a curtained shrine.”

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 .

Said: in view of the context, in some languages the verb may be more naturally translated “answered” (Good News Translation and Revised English Bible) or “replied” (New International Version).

Go: the parallel passage in 1 Chr 17.1 and the Syriac version lack this word. This imperative form of the verb “go” is often used as a kind of interjection, and in this setting it is almost certainly not a command for David to proceed to another place. A literal rendering of the word would therefore be misleading in most languages. Perhaps the closest idea is that of the English idiom “Go ahead!” (Anderson), which is a kind of authorization to put a plan into action.

All that is in your heart: the word heart is often used figuratively in the Bible for the inner personality functions of thought, will, or emotion. The context hints that David had a plan forming in his mind, and here Nathan seems to concur with that idea. On the use of the term heart, compare 1 Sam 1.8; 2.35. One African language translates “I know you don’t lack ideas in this matter. Do whatever you are thinking….”

For: it is because of the LORD’s presence that Nathan initially agrees that David should do what he wanted to do. So the transition word used in translation should convey this kind of relationship between the two clauses. In some languages it will be more natural to change the order of the elements in this verse and state that the LORD will be with David before telling him to do whatever he had in mind. Contemporary English Version provides a possible model for this type of structure: “The LORD is with you, so do what you want!”

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 .

But: this marks a turning point in the story, so the transition word is extremely important. In the previous verse Nathan agrees with David’s plan. However, the revelation that follows indicates that David is not the person to do this task.

The word of the LORD came: this expression occurs more than a hundred times in the Old Testament, including the revelation to Abram in Gen 15 and to Samuel in 1 Sam 15.10. But it is found most often in the prophets (Jonah 1.1; 3.1, for example). In some languages a literal rendering of the expression will be unnatural, and it will be better to say more directly “the LORD spoke to Nathan….”

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 .

Go: in contrast with the use of this same verb in verse 3, here Nathan is actually told to go to David in order to pass a message on to him.

The formula Thus says the LORD is used hundreds of times in the Old Testament to introduce a solemn message directly from God—especially in the prophets. It is more than a mere introduction to an ordinary quotation. The Hebrew verb form here is the perfect, which is often translated by the English past tense, and in some languages it will be more natural to retain this form. Some other possible models are “These are the words of the LORD” (New English Bible) or “Listen to what the LORD has said.” While this is the first occurrence of the formula in 2 Samuel, it is found in 1 Sam 2.27; 10.18; 15.2.

The force of the question Would you build me a house to dwell in? is not often communicated by a question in other languages. The sentence contains two emphatic pronouns that are important to the meaning. The first, you, focuses attention on David and indicates that, although the plan to build a temple may be acceptable, he should not be the person to do it. Following English writing style, Fox places the pronoun “you” in italic font in order to show the emphatic use of the Hebrew pronoun. But the use of italics is not recommended as a way of conveying meaning in translation, since they are meaningful only to the reader and not to the hearer of Scripture.

There is a play on words in this passage. The word house is used here of the temple that David had envisioned. But in verse 11 the same word refers to the dynasty that God will establish for David’s family. So the idea of the whole passage is something like this: “YOU are not going to build a house [temple] for ME. I am going to build a house [dynasty] for YOU.” So in this verse it will probably be preferable to avoid the question format and to say something like “You are not the person to build a house for me to live in” (New Century Version). Or, if the question can be naturally retained, translators may say “Are you the right person to build a house for me?” And in some languages, when such a question is used, it is appropriate to give the implied answer immediately. In a few cases translators may prefer to change the Yes/No question to a rhetorical one beginning with “Why,” as in Contemporary English Version, “Why should you build a temple for me?”

Since this verse contains a quotation within another quotation, it will be better in some languages to change one of the two to indirect speech. One way of doing this is to follow the previous verse by saying:

• … and told him to go and tell God’s servant David this message from the LORD: “Do you think you are the one to build a temple for me to live in? No….”

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 .

The word for house is again contrasted with the idea of a tent, but some languages use the same word for the two and simply qualify them in different ways. A house may be something like “a dwelling made of wood,” or “a dwelling made of stone,” or “a permanent dwelling.” A tent, however, is “a dwelling made of animal skin,” “a dwelling made of cloth,” or “a temporary dwelling.” In the context of this passage it may be better to translate “a house made of wood” and “a house made of cloth [or, skin].”

Brought up: literally this is the causative form of the verb “ascend,” so that the overall meaning is “cause to go up.” But in many languages a verb like “save,” “deliver,” or “liberate” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente) will be more natural in this context. The reference is to the time of the exodus from Egypt, when Moses led the Israelites out of slavery.

To this day: that is, up to the time that the LORD was talking with David in this story. Note that Good News Translation translates “until now.” Note also that Revised English Bible restructures the verse so that this part comes first: “Down to this day I have never dwelt in a house….” This order may be a better model for some languages.

Moving about in a tent: translators should ensure that this is not rendered in such a way as to imply movement within a tent. The idea is rather one of movement from place to place while using a temporary dwelling for lodging.

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 .

In all places where I have moved with all the people of Israel: this may be better rendered in some languages as in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, “As I moved about wherever the Israelites went…” or “When I was migrating with the people of Israel….” Knox renders it more poetically as “This way and that, the whole race of Israel journeyed, and I with them….”

Speak a word: this expression may carry the idea of “reproach” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Bible en français courant, Knox) and should be so translated in some languages. Others may prefer to use the verb “ask” (Revised English Bible, Moffatt), if this fits the overall structure adopted for the verse.

The judges of Israel: the Hebrew text as well as the ancient Greek version of this verse have “the tribes of Israel.” This is followed by King James Version, New American Standard Bible, and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, but nowhere else does the Old Testament say that the LORD appointed “the tribes of Israel” to govern his people. However, by changing a single consonant in the Hebrew noun “tribes,” Revised Standard Version renders it judges, which agrees with the parallel passage in 1 Chr 17.6. But some experts maintain that a meaning like “those who hold the scepter,” “staff bearers” (Anchor Bible), or “tribal leaders” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and New Revised Standard Version) can be found in the Hebrew word that is normally translated “tribe.” This, in fact, is recommended by Hebrew Old Testament Text Project/Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, which gives an {A} rating to the Hebrew text. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament claims that the word “tribes” here is a metonym, that is, a word used in place of a related word, and refers to a “leader” or a “chief.” According to this interpretation of the Hebrew term, the meaning is basically the same as that in the Septuagint and in the parallel passage in 1 Chronicles.

To shepherd my people: the use of the image of the shepherd to refer to a person who rules over others is common in the Old Testament (compare 5.2 as well as Num 27.17). In some languages it will be more natural to drop the figure of speech altogether and use a verb like “rule” (Moffatt), “govern” (Bible en français courant), or “care for” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). But in others the image may be retained while at the same time its meaning is translated clearly: “oversee like shepherds” or “watch over like those who look after sheep.”

The question within the direct quotation may be rendered in a very different form in some languages. In some cases the direct quotation should become indirect because it is found within another quotation. Also, the question may become a simple statement of fact: “I never asked them to build me a house made of cedar.”

On the translation of cedar see the comments on verse 2.

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 .

Some languages may prefer to follow the model of Contemporary English Version, which makes the whole section from the middle of verse 5 through verse 16 a direct quotation of what God told Nathan to say to David. This is done without interruption by including as a part of the word of the LORD the words that are outside the quotation marks in most versions. If these words are taken as editorial comment, the first part of this verse is in effect a sort of interruption of that discourse, repeating the admonition of verse 5, that this is what the prophet is to say, and reminding him to whom he is to say it.

Many languages, however, will find it natural to interrupt the quotation and supply this explicit reminder outside the quotation. Some English versions (New American Bible, for example) actually place a section heading at this point, but this is not recommended to translators.

Now therefore: literally “And now….” These words are a sort of transitional signal showing the logical connection between what has already been said and what follows. As a result of the fact that Yahweh did not live in a temple in the past and had never asked the leaders of Israel to build such a place for him, the prophet Nathan is to say to David the words that follow.

Thus you shall say: since the meaning here is clearly imperative, this will be more naturally rendered by an imperative verb form in many languages. This is followed by the prophetic formula Thus says the LORD already discussed in verse 5. Unless it is unnatural to do so, this formula should be repeated here for emphasis.

The LORD of hosts: see 6.2 as well as 1 Sam 1.3.

I took you from the pasture …: this is a reference to the call of David as recorded in 1 Sam 16.1-13. The pronoun I is emphatic, underlining the fact that Yahweh alone was responsible for David’s rise to power. New American Bible and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible render it “It was I who took you….” Other languages may begin by saying something like “I am the one who….”

This verse contains a quotation within a larger quotation, and this may present special problems in some languages. In some cases what Nathan was to say to David will be more naturally rendered indirectly by changing the pronouns as follows: “and tell him that I am the one who took him from the fields where he was looking after sheep and made him a ruler over my people Israel.”

The Hebrew word for prince should not be taken in the English sense as the son of a king but rather more generally as “ruler” (New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “commander” (New American Bible), “leader” (New Jerusalem Bible), or “chief” (Bible en français courant). See the comments on 1 Sam 9.16.

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 .

In some languages it may be more natural to reverse the order of the first two elements in this verse and say “Everywhere you went, I remained with you.”

Cut off all your enemies: the verb translated cut off will be more naturally rendered in most languages as “destroyed” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible), “exterminating” (Knox), or “got rid of” (New Jerusalem Bible). Compare 1 Sam 20.15-16 and Psa 143.12.

I will make for you a great name: the idea of making a great name will be rendered as “famous” or “well-known” in many languages. The verb form here and those in the following verse have long troubled scholars. While some interpreters think that the context seems to require a past tense interpretation, the grammar favors the future. The past tense, however, is possible, and Contemporary English Version has rendered the verb here as past: “I have made you one of the most famous people in the world.” Other versions adopting this solution are Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Anderson, and Knox. The final decision about which verb tense to use here is tied to the discussion about the following verse, and so this should be decided in conjunction with the verbs that follow.

The great ones of the earth: the word used for great ones is the same as translated “a great man” in 3.38 but is plural here. Anchor Bible translates “a nobleman” in that case and “the nobility in the land” in this verse. Some other renderings of the phrase used here are “the greatest men on earth” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) and “the most famous people in the world” (Contemporary English Version).

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 .