Carried … upon a new cart: when the Covenant Box was moved from Ekron to Beth-shemesh, it was also transported on a new cart (see 1 Sam 6.7). It was probably out of respect for the Box that the people of Israel wanted to use a cart that would not have been in danger of ever having been contaminated by any other load.

The house of Abinadab: according to 1 Sam 7.1, this is where the Covenant Box had been left. Abinadab had two sons named Uzzah and Ahio who helped with the moving of the Box. The consonants of the name Ahio are the same as the Hebrew word translated “his brother” or “his brothers.” The Septuagint translated this as “Uzzah and his brothers,” but nearly all modern translations render this word as the name Ahio. The hill mentioned here was located in the town of Kireath-jearim, which was also called Baalah (see verse 2).

Driving: as the following verse makes clear, the two men were not seated on the cart but were walking with it and steering it along the way. Translators should take care to select a verb that conveys this meaning.

Both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation follow the shorter form of verse 3b and 4a, which is attested by the Septuagint and a manuscript from Qumran. The Masoretic Text has the following words at the end of this verse and at the beginning of verse 4: “and brought it out of the house of Abinadab which was on the hill.” Although the MT is followed by several translations (for example, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Nouvelle version Segond révisée), Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the shorter text and suggests that the longer reading found in the MT is the result of an error by a scribe, who accidentally repeated words found earlier in verse 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 .

There is an allusion to this verse in Acts 2.30.

He: the pronoun in Hebrew is emphatic, and it is important to retain this emphasis in translation. New International Version does so by saying “He is the one who….” Similarly Knox says “he it is….” Compare also Good News Translation. Fox shows this emphasis in the Hebrew by using italic font for the pronoun. The idea behind this emphasis is that it definitely will not be David who will do the building of the temple.

Here again the word house refers to a temple as the play on words between the meanings “temple” and “dynasty” continues.

For my name: since the name represents the person in the Old Testament, it will be better in many languages to translate as in Good News Translation, New Century Version, and Contemporary English Version, “for me.”

Establish the throne of his kingdom: this is similar to the expression used in the previous verse, but here the word throne is added. The idea is that the existence of the throne and therefore of the kingdom is guaranteed, and that it is God’s action that assures this. The verb establish, a key term in this chapter, is repeated in verse 16. Compare also 5.12 and 1 Sam 13.13. A possible translation model is “no one will be able to take his kingdom away from him” (Contemporary English Version) or “I will always keep his kingdom strong.”

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 way the English versions are worded, there is a danger that on first reading one may think that Ahitub and Ahimelech were the mother and father of Zadok, and that Abiathar was his grandfather. The translation should make it clear that there were two priests: (1) Zadok, who was the son of Ahitub, and (2) Ahimelech, who was the son of Abiathar. In some languages this may mean restructuring as follows:

• There were two priests. One was the son of Ahitub and his name was Zadok. The other was the son of Abiathar and his name was Ahimelech.

Zadok later anointed Solomon as king (1 Kgs 1.32-40), and his influence continued for centuries (compare 1 Sam 2.35; 1 Kgs 4.2; 2 Chr 31.10).

Ahimelech the son of Abiathar: there is considerable confusion in the Old Testament texts as to which of these men was the father of the other one. In 1 Samuel (22.20; 23.6; and 30.7) Abiathar is presented as the son of Ahimelech, but here and in 1 Chronicles (18.16 and 24.6) Ahimelech is said to be the son of Abiathar. It is possible that the original order was “Abiathar the son of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, and Zadok” and that this text was deliberately rearranged in the form found in the Masoretic Text, which is followed by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation; and Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament favors the reading of the Masoretic Text. Probably some scribe was surprised that Abiathar, descendant of Eli’s evil sons, was listed first, and that Zadok had no ancestors listed, while Abiathar had both a father and grandfather mentioned.

This supposition about the original form of the text has clearly influenced the translators of New Jerusalem Bible, which reads “Zadok and Abiathar the son of Ahimelech son of Ahitub were priests.” Revised English Bible is almost identical with New Jerusalem Bible, and Moffatt has essentially the same meaning, although the word order is different: “Abiathar the son of Ahimelech (the son of Ahitub) and Zadok were priests.” Both Anchor Bible and Contemporary English Version also propose “Abiathar the son of Ahimelech.” This is in keeping with the second listing of David’s high officials in 20.25, which states clearly that the priests were “Zadok and Abiathar” (see also 1 Kgs 4.4, which names Zadok and Abiathar as priests under King Solomon). Since there is no manuscript support for these suggested corrections of the Masoretic Text, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} evaluation to the Masoretic Text and suggests that translators use a footnote to indicate what the original text may have been. This is, in fact, what Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch does. But it seems better to follow the correction as found in Moffatt and indicate in a footnote what the Masoretic Text says.

Secretary: although the precise meaning of this term is not settled, it is certain that the office involved more than that of a modern secretary in the usual sense of the English word. This person may have been responsible for the king’s official correspondence or may have served as an ambassador. The meaning is closer to that of the cabinet-level offices in the administration of the U.S. government that are called “Secretary of…” followed by a term indicating their specific responsibility. The verbal root on which this noun is based is “to count” or “to number.” Both New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Anchor Bible use the word “scribe,” but a scribe in the time of David held a very important position. He was a man of great learning and was highly respected. For this reason Anderson’s “royal scribe” is better. While Revised English Bible has “adjutant-general,” this modern terminology is unlikely to help translators in most areas of the world. Some languages may require an explanatory phrase like “the assistant to the king in charge of writing matters” or “the learned one who wrote down things for the king.”

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 .

And: depending on how the end of the previous verse is translated, a conjunction like “But” may be more appropriate here. The Syrians first attacked but then retreated. This reversal of fortune may be highlighted by the transition word chosen here.

The men of seven hundred chariots: literally “seven hundred chariot.” The word “chariot” is singular but is used collectively to refer to groups of chariots. The ancient Syriac version speaks of “a thousand seven hundred charioteers,” but no modern translation consulted follows this evidence. The parallel passage in 1 Chr 19.18 has “the men of seven thousand chariots.” However, there is no evidence for such a reading here in 2 Samuel. Translators are advised to translate the meaning found in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. While New Revised Standard Version and New Jerusalem Bible speak of “seven hundred chariot teams,” most versions take this to mean seven hundred individual chariot drivers. Both interpretations are possible, and translators may follow either.

Forty thousand horsemen: following the Masoretic Text, Revised Standard Version has horsemen and Good News Translation has “cavalry.” Some manuscripts of the Septuagint, as well as the parallel passage in 1 Chr 19.18, have “foot soldiers.” This reading of the Septuagint is followed by New American Bible and New International Version. New Jerusalem Bible avoids the problem by saying simply “forty thousand men.” However, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament argues that horsemen is the original reading, and that the reading “foot soldiers” is the result of harmonizing the text to the reading in 1 Chronicles. The Masoretic Text should be followed.

Wounded … so that he died: the wording of both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation seems to suggest that there was a lapse of time between the injury and the death that resulted from it. The verb translated wounded means “strike down.” Depending on the context the verb in this form may mean either “to kill” or “to wound.” The Hebrew grammar is most naturally understood as expressing two different actions, the one occurring after the other, as in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. It is possible, though not likely, that the grammar should be understood as expressing one single action: he was struck down—that is, he died there.

The adverb there refers to the field of battle where the foregoing events took place. New American Bible and Revised English Bible translate this adverb by the prepositional phrase “on the field.”

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 .

Then: the common Hebrew conjunction indicates the next step in a sequence of events.

Sent home: since David’s home was the royal palace, Tamar was “in the palace” as Good News Translation indicates. He sent the message to her there and ordered that she do as Amnon had requested. Some translators may prefer to say “sent a messenger to tell Tamar….”

Amnon’s house: only here does the reader find out for sure that Amnon is in a different house and not in another part of the royal palace. This may affect the translation of the expression “comes to see you” and “came to see him” in verses 5 and 6. The Hebrew contains the particle of entreaty, which is not translated in Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation. Compare New American Bible, “Please go to the house of your brother.” Translators should use an expression that a king would use when asking his daughter to do something.

Prepare food: here the more general terminology is used as in verse 5. There is no mention of the specific kind of food that Amnon speaks of in verse 6.

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 .

And translates the common Hebrew conjunction. Since verse 2 states what Joab did as a result of seeing how David felt about Absalom (verse 1), Good News Translation connects verse 2 to verse 1 with the English conjunction “so.”

Sent to Tekoa: some will have to say “sent someone to Tekoa” (New International Version) or “sent a messenger….” The name Tekoa is used in the Old Testament for a wilderness (2 Chr 20.20) and for a town (2 Chr 11.4) that was located about ten miles (sixteen kilometers) south of Bethlehem. In this case the reference is almost certainly to the town. In some languages it will be helpful to add the classifier term in an expression like “the town called Tekoa” (so Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

Fetched: the verb so translated may be better rendered “brought” (New International Version, New Revised Standard Version). But in some languages the verbs sent and fetched may be translated by a single verbal expression as in Good News Translation. Others may use a conjugated verb followed by an infinitive, “sent a servant to get [a certain wise woman…].”

A wise woman: or “a clever woman” (Moffatt). Note that the same expression is used in 20.16 in the story of Sheba’s rebellion. The translation should make it clear that this was not just any wise woman in the town of Tekoa but a specific person who had a reputation for wisdom. Some may prefer to say “a certain woman who was known to be very wise” or something similar.

Note that Good News Translation explicitly supplies the information “When she arrived” before going on to the instructions that Joab gave her. This information may need to be supplied in other languages as well.

Pretend to be a mourner: literally “cause yourself to mourn.” As in 13.5, where Jonadab urges Amnon to pretend to be ill, here the reflexive form of the verb is used as Joab asks the woman of Tekoa to make believe that she is mourning for someone who had died. The same kind of expression as was used in the earlier story can probably be used here.

Since the introductory words of Joab’s speech to the woman, Pretend to be a mourner, are a kind of summary of what follows, they are considered unnecessarily repetitious by some translators. The words behave like later in the verse carry the same meaning as pretend.

The Hebrew text contains a particle that may be translated “I pray thee” (Goldman, King James Version) or “please” (New American Standard Bible) but is not represented in Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation. It will be quite natural to include such an element in some languages, but it will probably come before the verb Pretend rather than after it.

Put on mourning garments: the Hebrew again contains the particle of entreaty after this verb, but neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation attempt to translate it. The Hebrew noun translated garments is a general word used for a wide range of clothing. Here it refers to clothing such as the coarse sackcloth that was worn in times of mourning.

Do not anoint yourself with oil: this is the opposite of what a person would do to make himself or herself attractive to other people. Compare Ruth 3.3, where Ruth is encouraged to do this. Contemporary English Version‘s “don’t use any makeup” seems to be a needlessly modern expression, and Good News Translation‘s “don’t comb your hair” may be too limited. More in keeping with the culture of the Old Testament are “don’t put lotion on yourself” (New Century Version) or “don’t rub yourself with oil” (Anchor Bible).

Behave like: the verb used here is actually a form of the verb “to be.” In some cases this may have to be translated “I want you to be…,” or “you should be…,” or “you should appear as….”

Many days: this expression simply means “a long time” and may be so translated in some languages.

The dead: this, of course, does not refer to the dead in general but to some specific related person. For this reason it may be better to say “a relative who has died” or “the death of a loved one” (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 .

Used to rise early: the verb form here and in the following verses (through verse 6) indicates a repeated or habitual action, showing that the activities described in the passage were typical of Absalom’s activities over a considerable period of time. Languages that have habitual verb forms should use them here. In other languages there will be other ways of indicating frequently repeated actions over a period of time. It may be necessary to begin with “every morning” here and “every day” later in this passage.

Implied in the text is the fact that Absalom went from his house to the city gate. Some languages may find it necessary to say “got up early and went to the gate….”

Beside the way of the gate: this probably refers to the principal road leading into Jerusalem that passed through the main gate to the city. Anyone going to talk with King David about a problem would have normally passed this way. The gate may possibly refer to the actual entrance to the king’s palace, but it is more likely that it was the city gate, or as Fox says, “the main gate.” Absalom positioned himself in such a way as to intercept those people who were going to speak to the king about a matter of concern.

Suit: the noun used here refers generally to a contest or a controversy. The same term is found in 1 Sam 25.39, where David says “Praise be to the LORD who upheld my suit [or, cause] against Nabal.” And this same noun is rendered as “disputed cases” in 2 Chr 19.8. Here it has been rendered by various English translations as “a case” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Revised English Bible), “a lawsuit” (New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible), and “a complaint” (New International Version and Contemporary English Version).

Would call … and say: the habitual aspect of this action should be brought out in translation. This did not happen just one time but on many occasions. In some languages the two verbs will be better translated as one. For example, “he used to ask each person….”

Your servant: in the response the subject uses the third person self-reference to show respect, but in many languages this will be better rendered by the first person pronoun, if the direct quotation is retained, and a term like “sir” (Revised English Bible) can be used to show respect. However, the direct quotation will be more naturally rendered indirectly in many cases—especially in view of the content of the response. In a direct quote a person would have probably named a particular tribe but would not have said of such and such a tribe or even “one of the tribes of Israel” (New Century Version), which is actually a more literal rendering of the Hebrew. An indirect quotation will be better in most languages here.

In Israel: while most interpreters take this to refer to the whole of Israel, some scholars think that it is a more exclusive reference to the northern tribes. This interpretation gives the impression that Absalom was preparing his rebellion by flattering only those who responded to his question by stating that they were from the north. Contemporary English Version adopts this interpretation and translates the response “I’m from a tribe in the north.” Compare also Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, “I’m coming from such and such a town in the northern territory.” However, it is probably best not to include this interpretation so directly in 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 .