So: the common conjunction is rightly taken as a logical connector by many modern versions, although it is also possible to take it as a temporal connector. New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible have “Then,” and some omit it altogether (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Revised English Bible).

Burnt offering and peace offerings: see the comments on 10.8. In this context Saul is asking for the material to be offered and not for the finished sacrifices. In many languages it will be important to make this clear. Knox, for example, indicates that Saul “bade them bring the victims for the burnt-sacrifice and the welcome-offering.”

Offered the burnt offering: that is, “sacrificed the animal for the burnt offering.” Saul offered the burnt offering himself instead of waiting for Samuel to come and make the offering, as he had said that he would (10.8). God will later punish Saul because he offered the sacrifices himself (see verses 13-14).

In order to avoid the direct quotation in this verse, some languages will say “so Saul instructed them to bring the animals for the burnt sacrifices and the fellowship offerings to him.”

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 people who were with him: see verses 2 and 17.

Rallied: the Hebrew is literally a passive form of the verb meaning “to cry out.” But in this context it refers to “being called together.” In languages that naturally use the passive form, translators may say “the army was assembled.” Where the passive is not an option, a possible model for translating this verb may be “[Saul] called his army together” (Contemporary English Version).

Behold: the focusing particle here highlights the unusual fact that the Philistines were killing each other.

Every man’s sword was against his fellow: that is, the Philistine soldiers were killing each other. See the similar expression in Judges 7.22. Klein captures the force of the interjection behold as follows: “Surprisingly, the sword of each man [of the Philistines] was turned against his companion—a very great confusion.” Contemporary English Version provides a simpler, common-language equivalent with “By this time the Philistines were so confused that they were killing each other.”

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 imperative verbs in this verse alternate between singular and plural, with the verb utterly destroy in the second person plural. But go and smite as well as do not spare and kill are all singular. The reason for the shift from singular to plural is not clear. But it will be more natural in most languages to make them either all singular (Bible en français courant, Osty-Trinquet, La Bible du Semeur) or all plural.

In the Septuagint the verbs in this verse are all singular, and the verb utterly destroy has two objects: “him and all that belongs to him.” Perhaps the plural verb in the Masoretic Text and the omission of the direct object “him” are the result of a scribal error. New Jerusalem Bible is based on the text of the Septuagint and says “put [singular] him under the curse of destruction with all that he possesses” (similarly New American Bible). See also Revised English Bible, “destroy them and put their property under ban.”

Amalek lived at the time of Moses and was no longer living (see the comment on verse 2). Here, as previously, the name of the ancestor is used to refer to his descendants.

All that they have: literally “all that is to him [that is, to Amalek].”

Do not spare them: literally “do not spare him.” If translators follow the recommendation of this Handbook and change Amalek to “the Amalekites,” then it will also be necessary to change the pronoun “him” to “they” and “them.” See also verse 18 below.

Utterly destroy: this verb in Hebrew is a technical term meaning “to put to the ban” (see the comments below on verse 8). This holy-war practice, which was followed also by Israel’s neighbors, consisted of devoting everyone and everything to the god or gods that the people worshiped. This devotion to the deity required the total destruction of everything captured in war (see Josh 6.17). See also comments on 22.19. Fox translates this verb “devote-to-destruction.” All of the nouns that follow are singular in Hebrew, referring to particular classes or groups. The sense is plural, since these nouns are collective, that is, “men,” “women,” “children,” and so on. Translators will need to use the appropriate form in the receptor language.

Infant and suckling: this refers to “children and small babies” (New Century Version). The latter would be those that were still young enough to be nursing at their mother’s breast. Contemporary English Version attempts to capture the meaning with “children, and even their babies.” The list is intended to be all-inclusive.

Camel: in some languages camels are completely unknown. The same Hebrew term is used in 27.9 and 30.17. The word translated sheep means “member of a flock” and very probably includes goats as well as sheep, as in 8.17. Here La Bible du Semeur translates this term “sheep, goats, ….”

Verse 9 states that Saul did not completely obey the command of Samuel.

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 .

Contemporary English Version begins this verse with the words “One day,” marking the beginning of a new episode in the ongoing story of Saul and Samuel.

The placement of the question mark in Revised Standard Version may be confusing. The question is only How long will you grieve over Saul? And in some cases this may be rendered as a statement, “You cannot go on grieving over Saul forever.”

I have rejected him is a decisive statement and not a part of the question. See 15.23 and 26 for the statement that God has rejected Saul.

Fill your horn with oil, and go: that is, go to anoint the new king. The same Hebrew word translated horn may refer to the horn of a live animal, but the term is also used for containers made from animal horns and used for holding liquids (the same term occurs in 1 Kgs 1.39). The oil was “olive oil” (see Exo 30.22-25), and this may be made explicit as Good News Translation has done.

I will send you: this is not an indefinite future notion. Rather it indicates that the LORD is in the process of sending Samuel to the home of Jesse. The future tense should therefore probably be avoided. New American Bible and Revised English Bible translate “I am sending you,” while Good News Translation simply uses the imperative “go.”

Jesse the Bethlehemite: Jesse was from the tribe of Judah, from the clan of Ephrathah according to 17.12. He lived in the city of Bethlehem. Ephrathah in the Old Testament refers both to the clan and to a city. The city is identified with Bethlehem in Micah 5.2 (see also Gen 35.19; 48.7). Probably Ephrathah had originally been a separate village but later became a part of the city of Bethlehem. See also Ruth 1.2. Here it is probably best to translate “Jesse from the town of Bethlehem” or “Jesse, who lives in Bethlehem” (New Century Version, Contemporary English Version).

I have provided: literally “I have seen.” This verb is used here, as also in 16.7; Gen 22.8; 41.33; and 2 Kgs 10.3, with the meaning “to choose” or “to select.”

For myself: although these words are omitted by Good News Translation, they may be important. The addition of these words may be taken to indicate that God has chosen the person he wanted as opposed to one whom the people wanted (so Gordon, page 150). This seems to be the implication of New American Bible, “I have chosen my king….”

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 .

All Israel in this context means all of the Israelite soldiers with Saul. Some languages may need to say “Saul and all the rest of the Israelites.” Compare “the men of Israel” in verse 2, which has the same meaning.

These words of the Philistine: Good News Translation replaces this phrase with the demonstrative pronoun “this.” Translators should use a style that is natural in the receptor language.

Dismayed and greatly afraid: depending on the context, the verb rendered dismayed may mean “in fear [or, terror],” “in confusion,” or “weak.” Many translations follow the interpretation found in Revised Standard Version, saying, for example, “they were all shaken and deeply afraid” (Revised English Bible) or “were dismayed and terror-stricken” (New American Bible). These two verbs are nearly synonymous here, and some translations combine the two into one as in Good News Translation and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible (“they were crushed with terror”).

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 dead bodies of the host of the Philistines: literally “the dead body [singular] of the army of the Philistines.” The Septuagint, which is followed here by Revised English Bible, New American Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible, says “your dead body and the dead bodies of the Philistines.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, though, gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and states that the singular noun “dead body” must be understood in the collective sense as “all the dead bodies.” If this text is accepted, the implication is that many Philistine soldiers would be killed in addition to Goliath.

The host of the Philistines: that is, “the army of the Philistines.” See the comments on verse 20.

By using the words to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth, David is saying that he will do to Goliath what Goliath had threatened to do to him (verse 44). As in the earlier verse, the redundant elements in this expression may be left implicit.

All the earth: many take this to mean “the whole world” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New International Version). As elsewhere in the Old Testament, there is some ambiguity as to whether the Hebrew word in this context means “the earth [or, world],” or whether it refers specifically to the land of Israel. New American Bible, based on the second interpretation, translates these words “thus the whole land shall learn that Israel has a God.” Either interpretation is possible, but the more widely accepted interpretation is “the whole world.”

That there is a God in Israel: the Hebrew text says literally “that there is a God for Israel” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Revised Standard Version follows the Septuagint with “… in Israel.” But it is preferable to follow the Masoretic Text here. Moffatt, Bible en français courant, and others, like Good News Translation, take this to mean “that Israel has a God.” All towns and nations had at least a god, so the sense is most likely that Israel has a God who really does things for his people.

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 .

Servants: Good News Translation refers to them as “they,” meaning the people just mentioned.

In the ears of David is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The precise meaning is not clear. Most translations say “to David,” but others include “within earshot of David” (that is, the men spoke close enough for David to overhear them; so Klein), and “in private” (New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version). In addition, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh all include the idea of privacy in different ways in their translations.

The form of David’s response is a question in Hebrew. Good News Translation apparently takes this to be a rhetorical question and therefore expresses David’s words in the form of a statement. It is likely, however, that David’s question does more than affirm his insignificance. To marry the daughter of a king will require that he pay a large bride price, too large for a poor man like David.

Does it seem a little thing: the Hebrew participle comes from a verb meaning “to appear to be insignificant” and is similar in meaning to of no repute below. But here David is asking whether the officials think that the status of one hoping to become the king’s son-in-law could be that of someone unimportant. Some languages may say “Do you [plural] think it is nothing…?”

To you: literally “in your [plural] eyes.” David was speaking to the king’s officials and not to the king himself. Therefore it may be better to introduce the quotation with “He said to them” (Bible en français courant).

On the expression become the king’s son-in-law, see the comments on verse 22.

Seeing that I: literally “and I.” But the common Hebrew conjunction seems to convey the idea “since” or “because” in this context.

Of no repute: this is a translation of a Hebrew participle meaning “to be light,” “to be considered of little value,” or in some cases “to be dishonored,” as in Isa 23.9. Here it is generally taken to mean “unimportant” or “insignificant” (New American Bible). Contemporary English Version makes both qualities into negatives, saying “I’m not rich or famous enough….”

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 .

Fled: see the comments on 19.18. In this context some languages may prefer to say “continued running away” or “started running again,” since this is not the first time David tried to get away from Saul.

Naioth in Ramah: see the comments on 19.18.

The difference between the verbs came (Revised Standard Version) and “went” (Good News Translation) is a matter of the perspective of the writer. Since the writer of the books of Samuel was probably not located where Jonathan was, the verb “went” will be more appropriate in most languages. And since David had previously been where Jonathan was, some may prefer to say “went back [to Jonathan].”

The words came and said before Jonathan sound strange in English. Indeed, certain manuscripts of the Septuagint change the word order to something that sounds more natural: “came before Jonathan and said.” In any case this seems to be the meaning of the unusual order, so it is possible to translate simply “came and said to Jonathan.” And since a question follows, many translators may wish to render it “came and asked Jonathan.”

The three questions What have I done? What is my guilt? And what is my sin…? are not three different matters. Rather they focus on a single fact. David cannot see that he has done anything at all to deserve Saul’s anger. For this reason the conjunction and introducing the third question may be out of place in many languages. Since the intent of these questions is to deny forcefully any wrongdoing, one or more of them may be translated by an emphatic statement like “I have done nothing wrong!” Because of the cumulative effect of the three items, they should not be reduced unless absolutely required by the receptor language. In using the words guilt and sin, David is not thinking of any technical distinctions. They are simply synonyms for wrongdoing.

Seeks my life: the Hebrew word (nefesh), translated life, is often rendered “soul” in other contexts. But the whole expression indicates that Saul wanted to take away David’s life; that is, he wanted to kill him.

In some languages the crucial question about why Saul wanted to kill David may come more naturally at the beginning of the series of questions (so Contemporary English Version) rather than at the end.

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 .