Those who bore the ark of the LORD: apparently it was no longer considered necessary or wise to use the new cart on which the ark was transported in the earlier part of the story. Note that the writer here reverts to the ark of the LORD, while the previous verse has “the ark of God.” According to Num 4.6-15 the Levites were to carry the ark on poles.

The word here rendered paces is usually translated “steps” (see 2 Sam 22.37; Job 14.16; and Psa 18.36, for example). And this would be more natural in this verse, although New Revised Standard Version retains the rendering of Revised Standard Version.

While it is only implied in Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation states explicitly that David made the men carrying the Covenant Box stop. If there is any danger that the reader or hearer of the receptor language may think that David offered his sacrifice while these men were still moving, then this information should probably be made explicit.

He sacrificed: the pronoun here refers to David, and this should probably be indicated by using the name in the receptor language. Some textual evidence actually has the name in place of the pronoun at this point. The verb sacrificed may be made clearer by showing that the sacrifice was offered to the LORD. It is possible to understand this expression as indicating that David was merely responsible for having the sacrifice made rather than performing the action himself. But probably he actually made the sacrifice. So it may be unnecessary to say “he caused a sacrifice to be made….” Some commentators suggest that a sacrifice was performed after every six steps (see Anchor Bible), but this seems very unlikely. Assuming that the distance between the two places was forty kilometers (twenty-five miles) (it may have been more), this would have required about eight thousand sacrificial animals. The text clearly mentions only one sacrifice after the first six steps.

An ox and a fatling: some commentators take this as one of those cases where two terms are used to refer to a single item. Anchor Bible, for example, translates the two as “a fatted bull.” But almost all English versions make it refer to two separate animals.

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 .

Translators are reminded that the archaic English language used in this prayer, which is so prominent in translating the pronouns and verb forms of this verse, should not be imitated, since it reflects nothing in the original text.

Establish: this seems to be a keyword in this chapter. Note its use in verses 12 and 13 above. In this context, however, it may be more naturally translated by another verb in many languages. God may be said to have “received Israel as his very own people” or to have “agreed to become the God of Israel.” Or possibly it may be translated “You have chosen Israel” (Contemporary English Version).

The words for thyself and to be thy people are talking about the same truth and may therefore have to be translated by a single expression in certain languages.

Didst become their God: this does not mean that God became God at this point in time, but rather it speaks of the establishment of a relationship between the eternally existing God and the people of Israel, who then acknowledged him as their God. Compare also Deut 26.17; 29.13; and Jer 7.23.

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 .

Saul’s servant: the Hebrew term for servant here is not the same as in verse 1 above. The word here is translated “steward” by New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Anchor Bible. New American Bible has “attendant.” But many versions take it as having exactly the same meaning as the term used in verse 1. Since Saul was already dead at this time, it may be better in many languages to say “who used to be Saul’s steward” or “who had attended Saul.”

The inverted structure of the direct quotation in Revised Standard Version reflects the Hebrew but may be unnatural in some languages. Good News Translation puts the subject and main verb first in what David says here. This is followed by the grammatical object.

The verb rendered I have given in Revised Standard Version represents a verb form that emphasizes the fact that a firm decision has been made, but it may be unnatural to translate as a past tense in other languages. Several modern English versions represent this verb form by a present tense, “I give” (An American Translation and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible); “I am giving” (New American Bible); “I assign” (Revised English Bible).

Your master’s son: this refers to Mephibosheth, who was actually Saul’s grandson (see verse 6). It will be better in many cases to translate son as “grandson” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, and Revised English Bible as well as Good News Translation) and to mention the name of Mephibosheth specifically. The term “grandson” should also be used in the same context in verse 10 and 19.24.

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 .

Nevertheless: the transition word here is unusual but clearly introduces something that is contrary to expectation. In spite of the fact that David is promised that he will not die because of his sin with Bathsheba, their child will be taken from them. A rather strong contrastive conjunction will probably be required in the receptor language. Anderson uses “However.”

You have utterly scorned: literally “to scorn you scorned.” This is a special kind of construction in Hebrew that places two forms of the same verb together for the purpose of emphasis. Fox maintains the emphasis in English by translating “you have scorned, yes, scorned….” While this verb is not the same as that translated despised in verses 9 and 10, it has a very similar meaning. The verb used here is found in 1 Sam 2.17.

The LORD: the Masoretic Text has “the enemies of the LORD” (King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, and New International Version). If this is correct, the meaning of the whole clause would have to be “by doing this you have made the enemies of the LORD show utter contempt.” Most modern scholars, however, think that the original reading was as in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, and that this was changed by later scribes who found it offensive to speak of showing “utter contempt for the LORD” (see the comments on verse 9 above). Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends the reading reflected in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, and it is followed by the majority of modern versions. On the idea of blaspheming God, compare 1 Sam 3.13.

The child that is born to you: since the child had already been born (11.27), translators should be careful to reflect this fact in the translation of this phrase. Some may say “the child that has been born to you,” “that child who has just been born to you,” or possibly simply “your child,” if this will be understood as referring back to the one born of the union between David and Bathsheba.

Shall die: some versions read “shall surely die” (New American Standard Bible), reflecting the Hebrew construction used here, in which two forms of the verb are put together for emphasis. This is the same kind of construction as discussed under the expression utterly scorned in this same verse. Here it emphasizes the certainty that the child will not live. New American Bible retains this emphasis by translating “must surely die,” and Fox says “he must die, yes, die.”

In some languages the structure of this verse will have to be reversed, indicating first that the child will die and then giving the reason.

Then: the transition word here indicates nothing more than the next step in a series of events. But this is also the final event in this part of the larger story.

It will be more natural in some languages to say that “Nathan went back home” or “Nathan returned to his house” (New American Bible).

The verse division is unfortunate here, since the second half of this verse is a part of the next episode. See the comments under verse 15b below.

And: if a new section is begun at this point, it will be unnecessary to provide an overt translation of the Hebrew conjunction here. The beginning of a new section and a new paragraph will be sufficient in many languages.

Struck the child: this should not be translated in such a way as to give the idea of a literal, physical blow. What it means is that the LORD made the child very sick. In many languages a single verb phrase may be used to translate this expression and became sick at the end of the verse.

Uriah’s wife: the writer continues to refer to Bathsheba as Uriah’s wife. This seems to have been done intentionally and is probably designed to insist on the fact that at the time of the conception of the child she was indeed still Uriah’s wife. Contemporary English Version refers to the child simply as “David’s young son,” which is, of course, correct, but the emphasis of the original seems to be weakened by such a rendering.

Some languages may say something like:

• The child delivered by the wife of Uriah after David got her pregnant, the LORD caused him to become very sick.

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 young man who served him: this expression refers to the personal attendant of Amnon. New Jerusalem Bible, like Good News Translation, has “his personal servant.” Neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation translates the particle of entreaty, that is, “Please send her out of my presence,” perhaps because it would not be used in this kind of situation.

This woman: literally “this one” (feminine). The use of this expression indicates Amnon’s utter contempt for his sister at this point. Such a derisive reference would certainly never be used of closely related persons. It is similar to the scornful “this man” in 1 Sam 10.27. Here Moffatt has “this wench.” In some languages this may be translated “this person,” as if Amnon does not even know her name.

Out of my presence: the words of the original are another way of showing contempt. They are used in dismissing a person whose presence is very objectionable. Compare, for example, Exo 10.28. Some other ways of saying this are “out of my sight” or “far away from me.”

Bolt the door: the verb used here carries the idea of “fasten” or “fix in place.” In some cultures the closest equivalent will be “lock the door,” but in others a verb meaning “tie” or “fasten” may be more natural here. This will depend on how doors are normally secured in the receptor language culture.

After her: that is, “after she leaves the house” or “when she is outside.”

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 archaic wording of Revised Standard Version is made simpler in New Revised Standard Version (“Please let your servant speak…”), even though the third person indirect reference and the politeness formula are retained.

Pray: or “Please” (New Revised Standard Version). Regarding this particle, see the previous verse and 13.6.

Formulas of politeness already seen in this conversation are repeated here. When the woman says let your handmaid speak, she is speaking of herself, and in most languages she would more naturally say “let me speak” or “may I say something [else].” Similarly, when she says to my lord the king, the meaning is “to you, sir.” Translators should attempt to retain the politeness of her address without using unnatural-sounding phrases in the receptor language.

The meaning of speak a word is to add something to what has already been said. Some may say simply “speak another word” or “say something else” (New Jerusalem Bible and Anchor Bible). The repetition of the same verb, Speak, in the response of King David is merely a way of giving her permission to do what she had asked. Because this imperative standing alone has other connotations in English, it has been translated “All right” in Good News Translation. The idea is that the woman is asked to continue speaking. New Jerusalem Bible translates “Go on.” In other languages translators may prefer to say “Continue speaking” or “Follow up the matter.”

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 timing of the two main events described in this verse (the offering of sacrifices and the invitation of Ahithophel) is the subject of some disagreement among commentators. Based on the way Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation are worded, the reader gets the impression that it was during the offering of sacrifices that Absalom called someone and told him to go and bring Ahithophel back from Giloh. Other versions, however, indicate that Ahithophel was called in to be present while the sacrifices were being offered (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Revised English Bible, on the other hand, makes it sound as if it was Ahithophel who was offering sacrifices when the messengers came to invite him to Hebron. The Hebrew allows for the understanding found in Revised English Bible, but it is more likely that Absalom was the one offering sacrifices.

Offering the sacrifices: the terminology used here involves the slaughter of animals. The sacrifices referred to were probably intended to be a part of an overall coronation ceremony rather than to fulfill the vow that Absalom talked about in verses 7 and 8. The way this is expressed in this passage should be in keeping with the terminology used in other passages where sacrifice is spoken of. See, for example, Gen 31.54; 46.1; Josh 8.31; 1 Sam 1.3, 4; and 2 Sam 6.13.

Sent for Ahithophel: the idea here is that Absalom sent someone to the town of Giloh to get Ahithophel and bring him back to Hebron. The English expression “sent for…” may have to be filled out in other languages. The Hebrew text here says literally “sent Ahithophel.” Some Greek manuscripts and a manuscript from Qumran say “sent and called Ahithophel.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament argues that the verb sent has the meaning here “commissioned,” that is, “gave Ahithophel a mission to carry out.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} evaluation to the Hebrew text and argues that the verb sent has the meaning here “commissioned,” that is, “gave Ahithophel a mission to carry out” (so Bible de Jérusalem, 1998 ed.). Most modern translations follow the Greek here and say that Absalom “sent for” Ahithophel, but the Masoretic Text makes good sense and should be translated in the sense of “commissioned” or “charged.”

The Gilonite … from his city Giloh: these two expressions may be considered repetitious and may easily be reduced in translation, since both indicate the origin of David’s advisor. New Century Version says simply “from his hometown of Giloh,” and this seems quite adequate. Scholars do not know the exact location of Giloh, but according to Josh 15.51, it was a town in the Judean hill country, perhaps near Hebron.

Conspiracy: this word has to do with the joining together of several people for an evil purpose. It may be considered treason or an unlawful alliance. Most English translations use the word “conspiracy,” but some other possible models are “scheme,” “intrigue,” or “plot.” New Century Version has simply “plans.”

The people with Absalom kept increasing: that is, the number of people who were willing to go along with Absalom’s plot to take power from David kept getting larger.

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 .