Since verse 24 already indicated that David had gone to Mahanaim, the verb tense or the verb itself may have to be changed here. New Century Version attempts to deal with the problem by restructuring the sentence and putting David in a subordinate clause: “Shobi, Makir and Barzillai were at Mahanaim when David arrived.” Then New Century Version goes on to give the details about each of these three participants. This may be a good model for others to follow, since the structure of Revised Standard Version (following the Hebrew) is rather complicated.

Shobi was probably the king of the Ammonites and the brother of Hanun (10.1). Some scholars indicate that he was probably appointed by David after the conquest of Rabbah (see 10.1-3 and 12.26-31). On Rabbah see also 11.1.

Machir and Lodebar are mentioned earlier at 9.4-5.

The Gileadite from Rogelim: Rogelim is mentioned only here and in 19.31. It was apparently a town located to the east of Mahanaim in the region of Gilead. Since these men were in the territory of Gilead (verse 26), it is possible to translate this “who was from the town of Rogelim in that region.” The reader learns more about Barzillai in chapter 19.

Verses 27 through 29 are a single sentence in Hebrew, but this sentence is far too long and complex to be translated literally. Even if verse 27 is not broken down following the model of New Century Version as suggested above, there should certainly be a full stop at the end of this verse.

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 .

Deeply moved: this expression in English may have a positive or negative meaning. But it will be better to show clearly in translation that the emotion felt by David was that of extreme sadness and distress. Both New American Bible and New International Version say that he was “shaken.” Knox speaks of the king being “in bitter sorrow,” while New Century Version says that he was “very upset.”

The chamber over the gate: on the architecture of the city gates in biblical times, see the comments on verse 24 above.

As he went: this is the reading of the Masoretic Text, followed by Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and most other modern translations. The Septuagint and the ancient Syriac, however, read “as he wept,” and this is followed by New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible. The two Hebrew words translated “as he went” and “as he wept” differ in spelling by one letter only. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project suggests that the reading “as he went” was changed to agree with the statement that he wept. Translators are urged to follow the Masoretic Text, to which Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating. The verb he went does not mean that he went somewhere else after he went up to the chamber over the gate. Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation correctly say as he went.

He said: the quotation that follows was almost certainly not something that was said only once. New Jerusalem Bible translates “he kept on saying….” In some languages a habitual form of the verb should be used. And in most cases a more vivid verb than said will also be required.

While the fivefold occurrence of the words my son may seem awkward, this way of speaking in time of sorrow is an indication of the extreme grief felt by David. Where it is not too unnatural, as much repetition as possible should be retained.

After the initial cry, my son Absalom, the structure of David’s lament is such that it focuses on his statement about wishing that he had died instead of his son. The structure may be seen more clearly when laid out graphically as follows:

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 .

I am this day eighty years old: this does not mean that it was Barzillai’s birthday on the day he met King David! Rather the idea is that at that time he had already reached the age of eighty. Knox says “I am eighty years old now.” New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, New American Bible, and Revised English Bible likewise use the word “now” in place of this day.

A further series of questions is used by Barzillai to make several strong affirmations. Can I discern what is pleasant and what is not? (literally “… between good and evil”) is a way of saying “I cannot tell the difference between pleasure and pain” or “I no longer find pleasure in life.” Compare the description of old age in Eccl 12.1-7.

In the same way the question Can your servant taste what he eats or what he drinks? means “I can’t enjoy what I eat or drink!” And, of course, the words your servant are yet another indirect self-reference that should be translated in most languages by a personal pronoun.

When Barzillai asks Can I still listen to the voice of singing men and singing women? he is really saying that he cannot hear well when people are singing. In some languages it will be sound strange to speak of singing men and singing women rather than simply “people singing” or possibly “singers, whether they are men or women.”

Finally, the question Why then should your servant be an added burden to my lord the king? is an indirect way of saying “I don’t want to be an added responsibility to you” or “There is no reason why I should add to your burdens.” In many languages all of these questions will be more naturally translated as statements. In others perhaps only the last will be stated in the form of a question. Translators should try to find the most natural way of communicating the meaning.

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 Jairite: while Good News Translation seems to suggest that Jair was a town, it may be that this term is used to describe the ancestry of Ira. Bible en français courant translates, perhaps more accurately, “descendant of Jair.” It is quite possible that this is the intended meaning. Jair was a son of Manasseh (compare Num 32.41; Deut 3.14; 1 Kgs 4.13).

David’s priest: as the Hebrew adverb translated also indicates, David had more than one priest. Abiathar and Zadok were certainly considered priests in his service. For this reason it may be better in many languages to follow the model of Good News Translation in translating “one of David’s priests” in this case. On the word for priest see 8.17 and 1 Sam 1.3.

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 .

After pausing in verse 12 to build again the picture through intensification, the poet continues the progression of events. Note that Good News Translation makes this verse a continuation of the sentence that begins in the previous verse.

There is some uncertainty about the meaning of this verse, which is literally “from the brightness before him coals of fire were kindled.” But it is perhaps easier than the counterpart in Psa 18.12. The picture seems to be that of a storm that included lightning (brightness), which strikes the earth and causes fires. Coals of fire are not normally associated with a thunderstorm but can be the result of a lightning strike. New American Bible (“From the brightness of his presence coals were kindled to flame”) appears to follow the same general interpretation as Good News Translation. Contemporary English Version and New International Version, on the other hand, seem to see the lightning simply as lighting up the sky before Yahweh.

If the translator follows the imagery found in Good News Translation, it may be necessary to recast the sentence so that the lightning is the agent; for example, “The lightning before him caused fire to flame up [on the earth].”

Some Greek manuscripts and the Syriac have a reading at the end of the verse in agreement with the longer parallel text in Psa 18.12, but Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} rating to the shorter Masoretic Text.

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: the common conjunction here introduces a statement that is contrary to what is normally done with weeds. Instead of handling the thornbush with bare hands, some kind of instrument must be used.

The man who touches them: the subject here is not a specific male person but is any person who has to deal with the thorns described in the previous verse. The man may therefore be better rendered “whoever” (New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “anyone.” As the context clearly shows, this person does not actually touch the thorns in the sense of coming into direct contact with them. The whole point of the sentence is that some sort of instrument is necessary to handle them. In some languages, therefore, the verb touches will not be appropriate, since it would imply direct physical contact. A verb like “handles” will be required.

The words arms himself translate a Hebrew verb meaning “to be filled.” If the Masoretic Text is followed, the sense seems to be “his hands are filled with….” Some interpreters, however, follow the Septuagint and correct the Hebrew to read “unless [or, except]” instead of “to be filled.” This correction results in the translation “nor will any man touch them except with…” (Anderson). Although Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament does not mention this possible correction to the Masoretic Text, it is quite likely a valid correction. However, whether translators follow the MT or the Septuagint here, the meaning is essentially the same.

Iron and the shaft of a spear: Good News Translation indicates that the writer intended the use of one instrument or the other. Similarly New Jerusalem Bible speaks of “a pitchfork or a spear-shaft.” And Contemporary English Version takes the expression to refer to a single tool, “a sharp spear” (similarly Anderson). But it is quite possible that the original meaning was that two instruments were necessary to root out the thornbush and place it on the fire. New American Bible, like Revised Standard Version, uses the conjunction “and,” speaking of the person being armed “with iron and with the shaft of a spear.”

Consumed with fire: in some languages it will be unnecessary to use a noun and a verb to express this idea. A single verb will express the idea “burned up.”

The Masoretic Text ends with a word that may be interpreted as meaning “where they lie” (New International Version, Revised English Bible, and New Century Version) or “on the spot” (New Revised Standard Version and Contemporary English Version). This, however, is not reflected in Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New English Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text here, and there is no good reason not to follow this recommendation.

As the note in Good News Translation indicates, verses 6 and 7 are unclear in Hebrew. If translators think it is important enough, they may add a similar footnote.

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 .

So: since David’s action came as a result of the instructions of Gad in the previous verse, a transition word like So seems appropriate here. But receptor language considerations will determine whether or not a transition word is required.

On the verb went up see the comments on “go up” in the previous verse.

The translation of this short verse is complicated by the fact that David’s action is said to be in accordance with both Gad’s word and as the LORD commanded. To keep these two elements in proper perspective, it may be good to adopt one of the following models for the verse as a whole: “So David went there in obedience to the command of the LORD that had come to him through the words of Gad” or “David did what Gad told him to do according to the commandment of the LORD.”

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 .