Thus says the king is a way of formally stating that what follows is a royal command. But it is the king who is speaking, so in many languages the third person reference will be transformed into first person as follows: “this is what I say.” Bible en français courant has only one level of quotation for verses 26-27 and conveys the meaning of this clause by saying “You will order them on my behalf to….” While this element is not present in Good News Translation, it should be retained where possible. By using indirect discourse here, both Good News Translation and Bible en français courant have avoided the need for the three levels of quotation in Revised Standard Version.

Put this fellow in prison: This fellow is literally “this.” Some interpreters think that the Hebrew construction here has a negative connotation, but that is far from certain.

Feed him with scant fare of bread and water is literally “feed him bread of oppression and water of oppression.” Micaiah is to be given only enough food and water to keep him alive.

Until I come in peace means until Ahab returns safely from fighting against the Syrians. Bible en français courant makes this explicit by translating “until I return safe and sound from this expedition.” The presence of the word peace implies that he thinks he will return without having any harm done to him. Certain versions omit this element (International Children’s Bible, for example), but it should be retained. Many versions do so by adding the adverb “safely.” Compare “until I return safely from the battle” (New Living Translation).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The king sent to him a captain of fifty men with his fifty: Translators should make certain that readers understand that the captain was sent to Elijah. In some languages the pronoun him may need to be replaced by the name Elijah.

For a captain of fifty men with his fifty (literally “a captain of fifty and his fifty”), some may prefer to say “a group of fifty men led by an officer” or “an officer accompanied by the fifty men under him.” Contemporary English Version, which says “an army officer and fifty soldiers,” changes the focus a bit since it does not clearly indicate that the fifty soldiers were under the command of the officer; that is, it does not translate his.

He went up to Elijah: The pronoun He refers to the officer who was leading the fifty men and not to the king. This should be made clear to the reader.

Who was sitting on the top of a hill is literally “and behold, sitting on the head [or, top] of the hill.” The Hebrew focusing particle begins this statement (see the discussion on Hebrew focusing particles in “Translating 1–2 Kings,” pages 13-14). The presence of the definite article in Hebrew with the word hill is troublesome since no hill is mentioned previously in this context. The Hebrew noun for hill is often translated “mountain” (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Segond, Bible en français courant, Nouvelle Bible Segond), but in this verse it probably refers to a hill and it may be best to translate “… on a certain hill,” since the definite article is often used in Hebrew when the reference is not to a specific thing but only to a certain thing.

Said to him, “O man of God, the king says, ‘Come down.’ ”: At the end of this verse there are two levels of quotation. First, the captain is quoted and he, in turn, quotes the king directly. In many languages it will be necessary to make one of these indirect. In addition to the Good News Translation model, translators may also consider “told the man of God that the king had said ‘Come down!’ ” Or both quotations may be made indirect by saying “informed the man of God that the king ordered him to come down.”

For man of God, see the comments on 1 Kgs 12.22 and 13.1. Here is it is used as a form of direct address as in 1 Kgs 17.18.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He turned around: It should be made clear in translation that the pronoun he refers here to the prophet Elisha.

When he saw them: The wording of Revised Standard Version seems to imply that Elisha had not seen the young men up to this point. But this is almost certainly not the case since there was a crowd of nearly fifty insolent young people. The Hebrew verb here may be rendered “looked at” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). But given the context of this incident, it is possible to use an even stronger verb like “glared at” (Good News Translation) or “stared at” (Contemporary English Version; similarly Nueva Versión Internacional).

Cursed them in the name of the LORD: This should not be translated in such a way as to convey the image of an angry prophet swearing at the youths. Rather, it is to be understood as “put a curse on them…” in the sense that the prophet asked God to cause something evil to happen to them. In some cases it may have to be rendered “called on the LORD to curse them.”

And two she-bears came out of the woods: The connecting word And may seem weak in such a context. Contemporary English Version begins with “Right away.” Some other renderings of the conjunction are “Then” (New American Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, Hobbs) and “Thereupon” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

The Hebrew noun rendered she-bears may be either feminine or masculine, but most interpreters seem to assume these were female bears (for example, Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Nueva Versión Internacional). Female bears, like most other female animals, are particularly vicious because they are often protecting their young (2 Sam 17.8). New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, Knox, and Contemporary English Version do not reflect the feminine form, but there seems no satisfactory reason for omitting it. It should be made explicit that these were female bears. If translators choose the term for female bears, in some languages New Century Version may provide a better model: “mother bears.” In situations where bears are completely unknown, translators have two alternatives. Either they may borrow a term from the dominant world language of the area or they may use a more general expression, such as “large ferocious female animals.” Parole de Vie, for example, says “wild animals.” Compare also 1 Sam 17.34-37; Dan 7.5; Amos 5.19.

The Hebrew term rendered woods is a rather general one ranging in meaning from dense forest (Zech 11.2) to a less wooded, bushy area (Micah 3.12) or “scrub” (Gray). Such woods are often described as hiding places for dangerous wild animals (Jer 5.6; Amos 3.4; Micah 5.8).

Tore forty-two of the boys: The Hebrew verb rendered tore means to break through, rip, or tear something. It may be taken in this context to mean that the bodies of the youths were torn to pieces as implied in some versions. Or it may mean that their skin was torn or “lacerated” (Gray), but not necessarily that they were killed. New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New International Version, and American Bible use the English verb “mauled,” which may or may not imply resulting death. Similarly, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “mangled.” Most likely, the intended meaning is that the boys were killed by the bears.

As in 2 Kgs 10.14, forty-two was perhaps a number used to indicate a large number. In any case, the exact number should be translated.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Go in: This verb is the opposite of “Go outside” in verse 3 and means the widow is to go back into her own house. In the view of the New American Bible translators, Elisha was giving instructions to the widow while at her house. They therefore find it more natural to translate this verb “come back.” But there is nothing in the context that indicates that Elisha went to the woman’s house. The contextual clues point rather to the fact that she must have gone to Elisha. For this reason it will be better to use a verb meaning “go back home.”

Shut the door upon yourself and your sons: This expression is clearly intended to emphasize the privacy of what takes place next. The door of the house is to be closed so that only the woman and her sons are inside. In some languages it may be necessary to say “be sure that no one but you and your sons are in the house, then close the door.”

Revised Standard Version refers to the sons as “children” in verse 1, but the Hebrew word there for “children” nearly always refers to male children. The fact that they were both male is new information at this point in the Hebrew text. However, certain English versions take the word sons in this context as being more generic and continue to translate “children” here (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New American Bible).

Pour into all these vessels: Pour will require an object in many languages. The meaning is obviously to pour some of the oil mentioned at the end of verse 2 into the containers. Nouvelle version Segond révisée adds the words “the oil” in parentheses, but this implicit information may be made explicit without the use of parentheses (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New International Version, Nouvelle Bible Segond).

When one is full, set it aside: Each time one of the containers was full, the widow was instructed to remove it from the area where the pouring was taking place. Some may say “each time you fill one of the containers, put it in another place.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

She came: Good News Translation does not translate this part of the Hebrew text since the previous verse already says “she came to him.” However, the sense here seems to be that “She came closer to him” (Bible en français courant; similarly Parole de Vie).

Fell at his feet: His feet refers to Elisha’s feet and not those of the woman’s son. This should be made clear to the reader.

Bowing to the ground is an extension or further explanation of fell at his feet. It intensifies the previous clause and shows that the woman bowed so low that her face was touching the surface on which Elisha was standing. The word ground is not to be taken literally since Elisha and the woman were on the upper floor of the house in Shunem. It is true, however, that the floor would have been made of earth. If there is any doubt as to why the woman bowed before Elisha, it will be possible to add “to show her gratitude” (compare the comments on 1 Kgs 1.16).

Then; that is, after the woman first gave appropriate thanks to the prophet for bringing her son back to life. Some may render the common Hebrew conjunction in this context as “after that.”

She took up her son: As in the previous verse, the Hebrew verb here may be translated “picked up” or “took.”

Went out: This refers to the woman going out of the guest room but probably not outside her house. In order to avoid confusion, some may find it necessary to translate “left the room.” For the last half of the verse, New Living Translation says “she picked up her son and carried him downstairs.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He said to him: Once again the pronouns here may need to be made more explicit in certain languages. In verses 26-27 Elisha is speaking to Gehazi.

Did I not go with you in spirit…? is literally “Did not my heart go [with you]…?” Apparently Elisha had extrasensory perception and was able to travel in spirit even though his body did not go. Elisha is not really asking a question but is strongly affirming the fact that he was very well aware of Gehazi’s selfish actions. Both of the rhetorical questions in this verse may be changed to strong affirmations in order to make the meaning clear as follows: “My heart was with you … and now you want to get more money….”

Turned from his chariot translates a Hebrew expression that is different from the one rendered “alighted from the chariot” in verse 21. The expression in verse 21 is rendered well by New Revised Standard Version with “jumped down from the chariot.” In this verse a possible translation is “left his chariot” (New Revised Standard Version, La Bible de Jérusalem Nouvelle Version, Nouvelle version Segond révisée).

Was it a time to accept money and garments…?: Elisha’s question makes the point that now, when God has performed a miracle, is not the time to be greedy. Revised Standard Version has translated the Masoretic Text here, which Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends with a {B} rating. The ancient Greek reads “and now you have received the money, and now you have received the garments, and you will receive with it gardens and olive orchards and vineyards and sheep and cattle and male servants and female servants”; that is, in the Greek translation Gehazi has accepted money and garments in order to buy with it gardens, olive orchards, and so forth. The Greek text is followed by several translations. New Jerusalem Bible (also em>Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), for example, says “Now you have taken the money, you can buy gardens with it, and olive groves, sheep and oxen, male and female slaves.” Gray, similarly, follows the Greek with “Have you now taken the money to buy orchards and olive-trees and vineyards and sheep and oxen and menservants and maidservants?” Note that these translations correct the Hebrew words that are literally “and to accept garments” to read “to buy gardens.”

After money and garments, the addition of olive orchards and vineyards, sheep and oxen, menservants and maidservants may seem extraneous since there is no indication earlier in the story that these things were involved. Perhaps the prophet added them because of the apparently unsatisfied greed of Gehazi. Other commentators see in these words Elisha’s suspicion of what Gehazi was planning to purchase with the money he had received. In any case, translators must ensure that these elements are included in translation.

Olive orchards and vineyards will sometimes be translated as “fields that produce olives and fields that produce grapes.” For olive orchards, see the comments on 1 Kgs 5.11; for vineyards see 1 Kgs 21.1.

All translations agree that sheep are the first kind of animal listed. The second kind of animal is called oxen in Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible, and “cattle” in Good News Translation and New American Bible. The Hebrew noun for oxen is a collective term that is often translated “cattle” or “herd.” It refers to bovine cattle and may include bulls, cows, calves, and heifers. The word itself does not necessarily refer to male animals. See the comments on 1 Kgs 1.9.

In place of menservants and maidservants, it will be more natural in some languages to say simply “servants” (so Good News Translation).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse has two occurrences of the Hebrew focusing particle hinneh, which is often translated “behold”. However, neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation translates these particles here. The Hebrew for this verse is literally “While he was still speaking with them, and behold the messenger came down to him and said, ‘Behold this trouble….’ ” The focusing particles here draw attention to what follows.

The king came down: The traditional Hebrew text as well as all of the ancient versions say “the messenger came down” (King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Nouvelle version Segond révisée, Jewish Publication Version; similarly Contemporary English Version). However, the two words for “king” and “messenger” are very similar in Hebrew, and the first-century Jewish historian Josephus knew a text in which it was the king himself who came to Elisha. Certainly the quotation that follows seems to be from the king himself, and this is confirmed in 2 Kgs 7.18. So translators are advised to follow Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation, using “king” in the text and adding a footnote that says the Hebrew has “messenger.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project strongly recommends the reading “king” but gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text, which reads “messenger,” since there are no textual witnesses for the reading “king.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, gives a {C} rating to the corrected text “king,” which is followed by Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and Bible en français courant. If the Masoretic Text is followed here, then it must be assumed that the king himself came soon after his messenger. Even though the text does not explicitly say that the king came, this is clear from 2 Kgs 7.2.

This trouble is from the LORD: In certain languages it will be more natural to make the LORD the subject of this sentence by saying “The LORD is the one who has caused this trouble.”

Why should I wait for the LORD any longer?: What is implied here is that the king of Israel had been waiting for Yahweh to deliver him and his people from the Syrian army. He now finds that it is useless to wait any longer since he is convinced that the trouble has, in fact, been caused by Yahweh. Since this question may be understood as rhetorical, two possible models for translating it as a statement are “I see no reason to expect any help from the LORD now” and “There is no reason to think that the LORD will help us now!”

In some cases the king’s whole response will be considered more natural if its two main elements are presented in reverse order. A possible model is “Why should I wait any longer for the LORD to help us? He is the one who has caused all this trouble.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But: The Hebrew text at this point contains the verbal expression commonly translated “And it happened” or “And it came to pass” (King James Version). But the expression is used here to introduce a new episode in the story. It also marks a contrast between Hazael’s statement about the king’s recovery and his opposing action described in this verse.

He took the coverlet …: The pronoun he almost certainly refers to Hazael. This should be made clear in the receptor language. It is possible, but not probable, that the subject of these actions was King Benhadad himself, who may have accidentally and clumsily caused his own death or who may have deliberately committed suicide.

The Hebrew word translated coverlet is difficult because it occurs only here in the Old Testament. It almost certainly refers to some sort of netted cloth. New International Version translates the coverlet as “a thick cloth.” Moffatt says “the bath-towel,” while New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “a piece of netting.” Other versions have simply “a cloth” (New American Bible, American Bible) or “a blanket” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). But the word is preceded by the definite article, which would seem to indicate that it was something that was well known because it was closely associated with a person on his sickbed.

Till he died is literally “and he died.” Most interpreters think the common Hebrew conjunction here is intended to indicate purpose. But did Hazael intentionally murder Benhadad? Or did he merely discover that he was dead when he removed the cloth after having attempted to ease his master’s fever by placing a damp cloth over his face? This is the position of at least one major commentator (Gray), but most agree that what is involved here is assassination by suffocation. The story is so interpreted by Josephus (k Jewish Antiquitiesk* 9.4.6). It is therefore legitimate to translate “so that he died” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible), indicating the intent to kill on the part of Hazael. Compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, which reads “and suffocated him” (similarly Good News Translation, Bible en français courant).

Became king in his stead or “reigned in his stead.” This is the usual Hebrew expression used when there is a change in leadership whether the previous ruler dies a natural death, is killed in battle, or is assassinated. See the comments on 1 Kgs 1.35.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .