Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 23:21

And: introducing yet another in the list of brave deeds performed by Benaiah. Translators should feel free to use whatever transition word naturally fits in this context.

He slew: in Hebrew the verb rendered slew here is different from the verb rendered slew at the end of this verse. The two verbs are synonyms and need not be translated by different words in the receptor language (see the comments on 12.9).

A handsome man: several versions indicate that the man was “of great stature” (New Jerusalem Bible). Other versions adopting this meaning are New American Bible, New International Version, New Century Version, Contemporary English Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Nueva Biblia Española, Anchor Bible, and Anderson as well as Good News Translation. This is in keeping with the parallel in 1 Chr 11.23. But the idea of “a man of appearance” (marʾeh, that is, a handsome man) is followed by New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, and Goldman, and is based on the traditional Hebrew text at this point, while the idea of a “large man” (mdh) assumes an error in the transmission of the text, which is possible because the letters d and r look similar in Hebrew. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text.

The Masoretic Text reads “an Egyptian who handsome.” The margin of the Masoretic Text corrects the word “who” to the noun “man,” in agreement with the parallel in 1 Chr 11.23, to read “an Egyptian, a handsome man.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text and recommends the translation “an Egyptian who was of good appearance.” For translation purposes, however, the difference between what is written in the text of the Hebrew and what is written in the margin is not significant.

Went down to him: the idea of downward movement conveyed by the Revised Standard Version rendering may be misleading. It will be more appropriate to say “went against” (New American Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version) or simply “attacked” as in Good News Translation.

The word for staff probably refers to nothing more than a heavy stick. In 7.14 the same word is translated “rod.” Both New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and New American Bible as well as Good News Translation have “club.”

It will be important in this verse to ensure that the pronoun references are clear to the ordinary reader. Translators will do well to test the understanding by asking questions of such readers after they become acquainted with the translation.

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 23:22

This verse and the one that follows constitute a kind of summary statement of what has been said about Benaiah. But the structure may be unnatural if followed literally in other languages. Some versions such as Contemporary English Version combine the two verses, since there is a reordering of elements. However, the final sentence of verse 23 is not really a part of the summary. It is rather the result of Benaiah’s proven bravery.

As indicated by the difference between Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, the confusion between three and “thirty” continues. The traditional Hebrew text has the number three (so, for example, New Revised Standard Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), but in addition to Good News Translation the following versions and commentators feel that the original reading was probably “thirty”: New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Revised English Bible, and Anderson. This is comparable to the same problem in verse 19. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, recommends “three,” giving the Masoretic Text a {B} rating.

Won a name beside the three …: this is taken by the same versions as in verse 18 to mean “just as famous as the Three.” But as in verse 18, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente translates this as “in the group of three Warriors,” and this seems to be the best translation of the Hebrew.

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 23:23

Instead of the thirty, some texts have “the heroes.” The same is true of the following verse. But “thirty” is recommended in both cases by Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. If translators read “thirty” in the previous verse, it is possible to use the pronoun “them” in this case.

Renowned: while this is similar in Hebrew to the statement in verse 19, Revised Standard Version does not use the superlative expression here.

But he did not attain to the three: see verse 19.

Set him over his bodyguard: in some languages it will be more natural to say “made him chief…” or “named him as leader….” On the word bodyguard see 1 Sam 28.2. It is not clear whether this refers to the Cherethites and Pelethites (8.18; 15.18; 20.7, 23; and compare also 1 Sam 30.14) or to a different group. But translators will be well advised to use a more general term or expression here. Some may say “the group of soldiers who guarded him [King David].”

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 23:24 - 23:39

While this group was called the thirty (verse 23), the list is said to include a total of thirty-seven (verse 39). But when the names are counted, there are only thirty-one or thirty-two, depending on how certain textual problems are resolved. The parallel in 1 Chr 11.41-47 gives sixteen additional names. Over a period of time some members of the group of Thirty would probably have died in battle and would have been replaced by others. This very likely accounts for the fact that more than thirty warriors are said to be members of the Thirty. There is, however, no explanation for the fact that the list of thirty-one is said to be thirty-seven in all. Even if the Three (Josheb-basshebeth, Eleazar, and Shammah) and Abishai and Benaiah are added, the total comes to only thirty-six.

The way of introducing the list in Revised Standard Version seems awkward, but it does reflect the form of the Hebrew. However, in many languages it will be wise to make the statement about the thirty apply to the roster as a whole rather than merely to the first name on the list. It may also be advisable to use a list format as in Good News Translation, rather than naming the heroes in paragraph form as Revised Standard Version does.

There are a number of textual problems in the list of names as well as problems that arise out of comparison with the parallel passage in 1 Chronicles. Textual problems include the following:

1. In verse 27 the traditional Hebrew text reads Mebunnai, while New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Nueva Biblia Española, Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel, and Anchor Bible have “Sibbecai,” making it the same as the parallel in 1 Chronicles. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends “Sabeni,” but absolutely no version consulted follows this. Very possibly scribes have confused the shape of the letter k (ך) for n (ן), and the shape of m (מ) for s (ס). If corrected on this basis, Mebunnai becomes “Sibbecai” as in 21.18. Translators should probably retain Mebunnai here.

2. In verse 32 the translation the sons of Jashen is based on the Masoretic Text. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, argues that the Hebrew word translated “the sons of” is not original but came into the text when a scribe accidentally repeated the final letters of the name Sha-albon. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament also follows part of the Septuagint tradition and corrects the Masoretic Text from Jashen to “Jashen the Gunite,” giving a {D} rating to the corrected text. This corrected text agrees with the translation “Jashen the Gunite” found in New American Bible, Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel, and Moffatt, and “Jashen from Gun” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Others have such diverse reading as “Jashen” (Nueva Biblia Española), “Hashem the Gizonite” (Revised English Bible), and “Jashen of Gimzo [or, the Gimzonite]” (New Jerusalem Bible and Anderson). The problem is very complex. The majority of versions seem to prefer “the sons of Jashen.” The {D} rating in Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament indicates how uncertain the experts are about what the correct reading is here. Translators simply must choose between the various options.

3. Also at the end of verse 32 and beginning of verse 33, what appears to be the names of two different persons, Jonathan, Shammah, may be rather “Jonathan, the son of Shammah” (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Nueva Biblia Española, Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel, Moffatt and Contemporary English Version). The addition of the word “son of” is preferred by Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, with a {D} rating, on the assumption that the word for “son of” that was in the original must have dropped out of the text.

Problems in this list that arise from comparison with the parallel list in 1 Chr 11 are as follows:

1. In verse 25 the name Shammah is very likely a variant spelling of “Shammoth” in 1 Chronicles. Since it is essentially the same name and refers to the same person, it is reasonable to use the same form in both cases in the receptor language.

2. Also in verse 25 there is mention of Elika of Harod, but this is omitted from the account in 1 Chronicles. It is quite possible that the copyist’s eye jumped from the first occurrence of Harod to the second and thus eliminated this reference in 1 Chronicles. But the name should be retained in 2 Samuel.

3. In verse 26 the name Paltite contrasts with “Pelonite” in 1 Chr 11.27. This is a relatively minor difference in Hebrew, but there is no reliable textual information that allows translators to harmonize the two accounts at this point. So Paltite should be retained here and should probably be understood as referring to the city of Beth-Pelet in the territory of Judah, mentioned in Josh 15.27. This may be translated as “Helez from Pelet” (Good News Translation, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), “Helez from Beth-Pelet” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), or “Helez from the town of Beth-Pelet.”

4. In verse 28 the name Zalmon is significantly different from “Ilai,” which is found in the same place in the parallel in 1 Chronicles. But there is no apparent reason to harmonize them.

5. In verse 29 the difference between the names Heleb and “Heled” is slight, and the two may be variant forms of the same name. A few Hebrew manuscripts as well as the Latin Vulgate have “Heled” in 2 Samuel. For this reason some versions such as New International Version have harmonized the two names here. There is likewise little difference between Ittai and “Ithai,” so these are also harmonized in New International Version.

6. In verse 30 the difference between the names Hiddai in 2 Samuel and “Hurai” in 1 Chr 11.32 is based on a pair of commonly confused consonants in Hebrew. And some manuscripts of the ancient Greek version have “Hurai” in 2 Samuel. But the textual evidence is insufficient to harmonize these names here.

7. In verse 31 the name Abi-albon should probably be kept distinct from “Abiel” (1 Chr 11.32) in the receptor language. The names Bahurim and “Baharum” differ only in the vowels and for this reason are sometimes harmonized.

8. With regard to verse 32, the account in 1 Chronicles qualifies Jonathan as “the son of Shagee the Hararite,” while 2 Samuel lists as a separate person Shammah the Hararite. A harmonization of the two passages on this matter cannot be justified.

9. In verse 33 there is a difference between the name of the father of Ahiam. He is called Sharar here but “Sachar” in 1 Chronicles. While some Septuagint manuscripts have “Sachar” in 2 Samuel, the evidence that this was the original reading is insufficient to alter the text here.

10. In verse 34, while the names are similar, Eliphelet the son of Ahasbai of Maacah is not the same as “Eliphal, son of Ur” in 1 Chr 11.35. The differences between the two accounts will have to be reflected in translation. Also, the Chronicler omits any reference to Eliam the son of Ahithophel of Gilo, while 2 Samuel lacks the words “Hepher the Mecherathite, Ahijah the Pelonite.” This distinction between the two lists will have to be maintained.

11. In verse 35 there is considerable difference between Paarai the Arbite in 2 Samuel and “Naarai the son of Ezbai” in the Chronicles account. And no reason can be found to attempt to reconcile the two accounts in this matter.

12. In verse 36 there is very little difference in Hebrew between Igal here and “Joel” in 1 Chronicles. In 2 Samuel Igal is said to be the son of Nathan, while Joel is described as “the brother of Nathan” in 1 Chronicles. Based on the available evidence, these differences cannot be reconciled and should therefore be translated as they exist in the currently available texts. The place name Zobah probably refers to the independent city-state or kingdom in southern Syria (see the comments on 8.3 and 1 Sam 14.47).

On Uriah the Hittite, the husband of Bathsheba, see chapters 11 and 12.

Thirty-seven in all: it may be better in many languages to make this summary statement into a separate sentence complete with a form of the verb “to be,” and have it serve as a reminder that the list involved warriors or soldiers. Depending on the way in which certain textual problems are decided, the list may in fact have only thirty-six names. But some have supposed that Joab was also counted as a part of the group although he is not named. As the overall commander of David’s forces, he was almost certainly considered over the Three and the Thirty.

The Chronicler provides considerably more information than 2 Samuel at the end of the passage but offers no end total to correspond to the other account. These differences will, of course, have to be reflected in the receptor language.

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 24:1

Again: the word so translated is actually a verb meaning “to add or repeat.” It apparently refers back to chapter 21, where the LORD’s anger with the people of Israel was the cause of the famine described there. Because of the two intervening chapters, which include material that is largely poetic in nature, translators may wish to follow the example of Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente and add a footnote explaining to the reader that this refers back to the events described in 21.1-14. This footnote states “at another time: allusion to the events told in 21.1-14.” Moffatt resolves the problem by transposing chapter 24 in its entirety to follow immediately after chapter 21. But this is not recommended to translators. The transition at the beginning of this chapter should, however, be worded in such a way as to show that there is a clear reference backward. One may say “At another time…” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente) or “later on….”

The passive expression anger of the LORD was kindled may be easily made active by saying “the LORD was annoyed…” or something similar. The Hebrew is more literally “the anger of the LORD burned hot.” Other uses of this kind of expression are found in 1 Sam 17.28, where Eliab is said to have been angry with David, and 1 Sam 20.30, where Saul was angry at his son Jonathan. In 2 Sam 6.7 this expression is used to portray the anger of the LORD because the ark was touched. In this case readers are not informed as to why the LORD was angry with the people of Israel.

He incited David against them: according to the account in this book, it was the LORD who caused David to bring trouble on the people of Israel. The theological difficulties of this passage are complicated by the fact that 1 Chr 21.1 places the blame on Satan rather than saying that God caused David to take the census. Some writers attempt to show that there is a sense in which both God and Satan were involved in provoking David to take this action, since the same Hebrew verb is used in each case. Translators cannot hope to solve the theological problems of the two texts, so they will do well to translate the text as it stands in each case and leave the details of the interpretation to preachers and theologians. In many languages a causative form of the verb will be the best way to translate the idea here: “he caused David to act against them” or “he caused David to turn against the Israelites” (New Century Version).

Number: the verb here means to count people or to take a census. It is uncertain why taking a census was considered wrong. Some have suggested that the real sin was the pride and ambition of David that was behind the counting of the people. Others, including Josephus, speculate that perhaps he failed to make the prescribed payment (see Exo 30.12). But all the translator has to do here is to communicate the idea of census taking, or counting the people, of the tribe of Judah and the northern tribes of Israel.

As noted in the introduction to this section, the census most likely included only males eligible to serve in the military. See Num 1.1-47, where only males old enough “to go forth to war” are included in the census. For this reason it may be wise here to say something like “count the number of people capable of fighting in all the tribes of Judah and Israel.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch says “the men of Israel and Judah” here and “the men fit for military service” in verse 2.

In some languages it will be more natural to change the direct quotation at the end of this verse into an indirect statement by saying something like “the LORD told him to order his men to count the people of Israel and Judah” or “the LORD instructed David to find out the number of all the people in Israel and Judah.” Bible en français courant reads “He caused David to act against their interests by suggesting to him to count the Israelites and Judeans.” Contemporary English Version says “and he made David think it would be a good idea to count the people in Israel and Judah,” but this translation unfortunately omits the idea that what David did was somehow against the best interests of his people. Compare New Living Translation, “and he caused David to harm them by taking a census.”

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 24:2

So: this reflects the common Hebrew conjunction, but the transition word shows that what follows was a result of what has just been said in the previous verse. For this reason a number of English versions use a transition word like “So” or “Accordingly” (New American Bible), although some leave it untranslated (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Century Version, New Jerusalem Bible).

It will be more natural in some languages to use the name “David” than to say the king as in Revised Standard Version and the Hebrew original. Others may prefer to combine the two, “King David.”

The difference in meaning between Revised Standard Version (Joab and the commanders of the army) and Good News Translation “Joab, [who was] the commander of his army” reflects a textual problem in which the bulk of the evidence supports the singular of the noun “commander” and thus supports the Good News Translation rendering. Other versions follow those manuscripts of the ancient Greek version that have the plural (Revised English Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible, and New American Bible), which is in keeping with the parallel in 1 Chronicles. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, recommends the reading “Joab, the commander of the army,” which is adopted by New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Fox, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and New American Standard Bible as well as Good News Translation. In verse 4 the plural form is clearly used, but this is not necessarily proof that the plural should be read here. The most compelling argument in favor of the plural is the fact that the verb number [the people] is plural, which implies that the army commanders are included in the instructions. Good News Translation provides a good model, showing that David spoke to Joab only, but that the instructions are directed toward both Joab and his commanders.

From Dan to Beer-sheba: that is, “from one end of the country to the other” as in Good News Translation. Compare 3.10; 17.11; Judges 20.1; 1 Sam 3.20. Since Good News Translation omits the names of these cities, a better model may be “From Dan in the north to Beersheba in the south” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Or compare Contemporary English Version, which is very similar: “From the town of Dan in the north all the way south to Beersheba.”

The verb translated number [the people] is different from the Hebrew verb translated “number” in verse 1. The verb used in this verse often means “to search out,” but these two verbs in verses 1 and 2 are used here as synonyms.

As often in 1 and 2 Samuel, the Hebrew noun the people is used in the restricted sense of “the soldiers” or “the troops.” New International Version provides a useful model, “… and enroll the fighting men.” As noted in the comments on verse 1, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch says here “the men fit for military service.”

The direct quotation of what David said to Joab may also be made indirect if it is more natural to do so in the receptor language. One possibility is to say “David told Joab … to take his officers and go through all the tribes of Israel from one end of the country to the other in order to count the men fit for military service. He said this because he wanted to know how many people there were.”

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 24:3

The common Hebrew conjunction is here rendered But, and this is probably best in the present context, since Joab’s words are somewhat in opposition to the instructions of King David.

Joab refers to God as the LORD your God, but the translation of these words should not suggest that Joab served a different god. Joab is here emphasizing David’s responsibility before God.

Joab twice uses the words my lord the king to refer to David while speaking directly to him. Since this will be quite unnatural in many languages, it will be advisable to use the personal pronoun instead. But some adjustment should be made to show that Joab was being very respectful. Good News Translation does this by introducing his words with “Your Majesty….”

As in the previous verse, the people refers to soldiers. Compare New International Version, “May the LORD your God multiply the troops….”

While it will be perfectly natural in some languages to say while the eyes … see it, in others this will be awkward. In those cases the subject of the verb will be more likely “while you can still see it.” But to retain the emphasis of the original, a number of languages will be able to say something like “[I hope] you will see it with your own eyes.”

The verb translated delight has appeared a number of times in 1 and 2 Samuel. It is used of the affection that King Saul had for David (1 Sam 18.22) and of the affection between David and Saul’s son Jonathan (1 Sam 19.1). Here it expresses the idea of desiring something, that is, of desiring strongly to take the census.

This thing: refers to the taking of the census. The question is a form of mild disapproval. This is highlighted in New American Bible by the wording “a thing of this kind.” If it seems necessary in other languages to fill out the meaning, translators may consider “counting the people like this” 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 24:4

The same conjunction as in the beginning of verse 3 now introduces the response of King David, which is contrary to the implicit advice of Joab and is therefore correctly rendered But. Others have translated it “However” (New American Bible), “Nonetheless” (New Jerusalem Bible), and “Notwithstanding” (Goldman).

The king’s word prevailed against Joab: some other ways of saying this are “the king very strongly commanded Joab…” (New Century Version), “the king … overruled Joab” (New American Bible), “the king’s command remained firm…” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “the king … enforced his order…,” or “David refused to change his mind…” (Contemporary English Version).

The twofold repetition of Joab and the commanders of the army in this verse may be awkward and unnecessary in many languages. The second occurrence should probably be replaced by the pronoun “they” as in Good News Translation.

Went out from the presence of the king: some may wish to say “departed from the royal court,” but probably it will be most natural to say simply “left the king.”

In the first verse of this chapter the noun Israel referred specifically to the northern tribes, in distinction from the southern tribe of Judah. Here, however, Israel is used inclusively of both groups, as verses 5-7 make clear. And the people still refers to “the fighting men” (New International 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 .