The verb said may be better translated in some languages as “asked,” since it is followed by a question.

Is this your voice…? This question seems to imply that David was concealed from Saul’s sight and that the king was uncertain whether it was actually David who was speaking. But verses 8 and 11 suggest that Saul could in fact see David clearly. Saul’s question, therefore, does not mean that he is uncertain who is speaking. Rather, Saul’s question expresses surprise at what David has said. The sense seems to be “Am I really hearing you, David my son?”

My son: see the comments on the words “my father” in verse 11.

Lifted up his voice and wept: this is a common idiom in the Old Testament, indicating the expression of great sorrow and many tears (as in 2 Sam 13.36). Revised English Bible says “and he burst into tears,” and New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible say that he “wept aloud.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Righteous renders a Hebrew term with a wide range of meanings. It may refer to that which is right in a legal sense. In some contexts the primary focus seems to be on right ethical behavior. It is, furthermore, sometimes used to indicate that someone has acted loyally or in the proper way within an established relationship. This latter sense seems to be in focus in this verse.

In languages where comparisons are difficult to translate, the more categorical wording of Good News Translation may provide a better model for the first part of the quotation.

For: the transition word between Saul’s admission of wrong and his reasons for doing so is important. It is possible to render it “because.” In some languages the two parts may be reversed, giving the reasons first and then the evaluation, and connecting the two with a “therefore.”

The verb repaid is not to be taken in the sense of repayment for something owed. So a literal rendering is not advised. The basic meaning of the verb is “deal with [someone or something].” It is translated in other versions as “treated” (Revised English Bible) and “done” (Moffatt). In some languages two different verbs will be required to convey the ideas “done good” and “done wrong.” The second person singular pronoun, you, is emphatic in Hebrew.

Whereas: literally “and I,” using the emphatic pronoun, which highlights the contrast between Saul’s actions and those of David.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

You have declared: the second person singular pronoun, you, is again emphatic. Some interpreters propose that the Hebrew verb should be corrected to a verb meaning “to make great.” This suggestion lies behind the translation in New American Bible, “Great is the generosity you showed me today.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, however, gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, on the other hand, does not give a rating to the MT here, since there really is no textual problem. Various scholars have suggested that the Hebrew verb should be corrected, but there is no basis for this either in the Hebrew manuscripts or in the ancient versions.

The LORD put me into your hands: see verses 4 and 10.

Into your hands: see the comments on 4.8.

In some languages it may be advisable to restructure this verse along the following lines:

• Although the LORD gave you the opportunity to kill me, you did not do it. So you have proven today that you are good to me.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Saul’s question is rhetorical and may be translated as a statement, as in Revised English Bible: “Not often does a man find his enemy and let him go unharmed.” This, of course, is true of both women and men, so it will be better to say “a person” instead of “a man.”

The rhetorical question is really intended to make a strong affirmation. So some may translate the first part of this verse “People don’t let their enemies go free when they have the opportunity to harm them.” Contemporary English Version provides another possible model, “If you were really my enemy, you wouldn’t have let me leave here alive.”

The common Hebrew conjunction is legitimately translated so in Revised Standard Version, since it has the effect of a logical connector. But many modern versions leave this relationship implicit.

Reward: in this context the verb carries the meaning of doing good to someone in return for good that person has already done. Saul acknowledges that David had been good to him by refusing to kill him when he had the opportunity to do so. He now asks God to do good to David in return for this kind action.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

You shall surely be king: literally “to be king, you will be king.” Regarding this emphatic verbal construction, see page 20 and following. Others may convey the emphatic nature of this construction by saying something like “I have no doubt that you will become king.”

The kingdom of Israel shall be established in your hand: the verb rendered shall be established is often translated “to stand [up].” From that comes the sense of “to be valid,” “to last,” or “to continue.” If the primary sense here seems to be that David will become the legitimate or valid king, then New Jerusalem Bible provides a good model, “Now I know that you will indeed reign and that the sovereignty in Israel will pass into your hands.” See also New American Bible, “and that sovereignty over Israel shall come into your possession.”

If, however, the focus is on the continuing or lasting rule of David, then Revised English Bible is a good model, “the kingdom of Israel will flourish under your rule.” See also New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, “and that the kingship over Israel will remain in your hands.” Either understanding of the Hebrew is possible, so translators must simply choose one.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Saul asks of David in this verse that which his son Jonathan had asked earlier (see 20.14-16).

Swear … by the LORD: see the comments on 20.42.

Cut off my descendants after me: it was not unusual for a new ruler to kill all of the descendants of the previous king (see Judges 9.5; 1 Kgs 15.29; 16.11; 2 Kgs 10.1-17; 11.1). The Hebrew verb “cut off” is frequently used in the sense of “to kill” or “to eliminate.” This is probably the intended meaning here. In some cases the negative statement (not cut off) may be worded positively by using a verb like “save” or “allow to live.”

The exact sense of the words after me is not clear. Many understand this to mean the descendants who come after Saul chronologically. But since all descendants come “after” an ancestor, many translations omit these words as being redundant and say simply “my descendants” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, and New American Bible). More likely, however, these words mean “after my death” (so La Bible du Semeur). Compare also New Jerusalem Bible (“that you will not suppress my descendants once I am gone”) and Bible en français courant (“So swear to me in the name of the Lord that after my death…”).

Saul’s two wishes, (1) that his descendants not be killed and (2) that his name not be destroyed, are basically synonymous. Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente provides a model in which the two wishes are expressed as one: “Therefore swear to me in the name of the LORD, that you will not cause my family to disappear, killing my descendants.”

Not destroy my name: may be translated positively as “allow my name to continue” or something similar. On the significance of the name, see the comments at 18.30.

My father’s house: that is, “my father’s family.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The demonstrative pronoun in the expression swore this refers to the request of Saul in the previous verse. This should be made clear to the reader. Some may say that “David agreed with a promise [or, vow]” or “David made a vow proving that he accepted what Saul had said.” The Hebrew is literally “And David swore to Saul.”

Went up: while David and his men probably went to a higher elevation, it may be more important in some languages to indicate that they “returned” (Knox) to the place where they had been previously. New Jerusalem Bible, like Good News Translation, says “went back.”

Stronghold: see the comments on 23.14.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Rose: see the comment on this verb at 9.3 and on page 20. There is no need to translate in such a way as to indicate that David had been sitting or lying down prior to the events described in this verse.

The wilderness of Paran: Paran was a region located north of the Sinai Peninsula; it was between Egypt, southern Palestine, and the country of Edom. Since Paran is located so far away, quite a few modern translations follow the Septuagint in reading “the desert of Maon” (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, New Century Version, Moffatt, An American Translation, and Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel). Modern commentaries also prefer this solution (so Anchor Bible, Klein, and Gordon). Smith, however, notes that “the historical improbability of David’s going so far into the wilderness is not a sufficient reason for changing the text” (page 220). Regarding Maon, see the comments on verse 2. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text.

On the translation of the word wilderness, see the comments at 4.8.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .