And at that time is literally “and it was at that time.” Jewish Publication Version says “And it came to pass at that time.” The writer uses this verbal transition to indicate that the events about to be described took place during the time that Jeroboam was working for Solomon. Since the Hebrew does not refer to a specific time, some English translations use the general expression “One day” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation).

When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem: These words are to be understood literally, but the author may also have intended for them to be understood symbolically, as a reference to Jeroboam who will leave Jerusalem to become king of Israel.

For prophet see the comments on 1 Kgs 1.8.

Ahijah reappears in chapter 14, where his name in Hebrew is sometimes “Ahijahu.”

Shilonite means “from the city of Shiloh” (see the comments on 1 Kgs 2.27).

Found him on the road: The text is not implying that Jeroboam was lost. The meaning is rather “met him on the way/road” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Revised English Bible, New American Bible) or “saw him…”; that is, Ahijah found or met Jeroboam while Jeroboam was walking on the road. The context, however, has led some translators to use an expression like “accosted him on the road” (New Jerusalem Bible).

Ahijah had clad himself with a new garment is literally “he had clad himself with a new garment.” The Septuagint says “Ahijah was clad….” Anchor Bible, however, argues that it was Jeroboam who was wearing the new garment. According to most interpreters, however, the following verse makes clear that it was Ahijah and not Jeroboam who was wearing the new garment. In order to avoid confusion, Revised Standard Version substitutes the proper name for the pronoun (also New Jerusalem Bible). Another rendering based on the same interpretation says that “the prophet was wearing a new cloak” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible). Good News Translation omits this information here since it is repeated in the next verse.

The Hebrew word translated garment refers to an outer garment and should not be rendered in such a way as to give the impression that the prophet was completely naked when he removes the garment in the next verse. New Century Version has “coat” while New International Version and Revised English Bible say “cloak.” Both of these options refer to an outer garment.

The two of them were alone in the open country: This means that the two men were not within the city of Jerusalem.

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 .

So: The common Hebrew conjunction is translated by Revised Standard Version as a logical connector. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh is similar with “Thus.”

Israel: See the comments on verse 1. Note that two separate kingdoms did not yet exist at the time of the events narrated in verse 1, so Good News Translation translated Israel there as “northern Israel.” But now that separate kingdoms exist, Good News Translation correctly says “the northern kingdom of Israel” here. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and New Living Translation translate “The northern tribes of Israel,” while Bible en français courant and Parole de Vie say “the Israelite tribes of the North.” Contemporary English Version provides a different model by inserting the words “in Judah,” so the whole verse reads “Ever since that day, the people of Israel have opposed David’s family in Judah.”

Has been in rebellion translates a single verb in Hebrew. It will be better translated in some languages as “has been rebelling.” Knox translates “have refused allegiance,” while Bible en français courant says “has rejected the authority of.”

Translators are reminded that the expression the house of David here and in the following verse refers to the family of David, including his descendants (see verse 16). Compare 1 Sam 20.16. A literal translation is not recommended.

To this day: See the comments on this phrase in 1 Kgs 8.8.

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 .

And renders the common verbal transition in Hebrew that is sometimes translated “And it happened” or “And it came to pass” (Jewish Publication Version). But many modern versions (Good News Translation, New International Version, Revised English Bible) simply begin a new paragraph here to express this transition.

The Hebrew of this verse is difficult to understand. The subject of the verbs eaten and drunk is most naturally taken to be the prophet from Judah. But the sense would then be “After the prophet from Judah had finished his meal, he saddled the donkey for the old prophet whom he had brought back.”

Some modern translations, based on the Septuagint, omit the words for the prophet whom he had brought back. New American Bible, for example, reads “After he had eaten bread and drunk water, the ass was saddled for him, and he again 24 set out.” New Jerusalem Bible corrects the Hebrew text to read “After he [the prophet from Judah] had eaten and drunk, the prophet [who had brought him back] saddled the donkey for him” (also Osty-Trinquet).

The Masoretic Text reads “And it happened after he had eaten bread and after he had drunk, he saddled for him the donkey belonging to the prophet who had brought him back.” “The prophet” must be the old prophet from Bethel. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and explains that the words “the donkey belonging to the prophet who had brought him back” are an explanatory remark, indicating whose donkey was saddled. This means that the Hebrew preposition translated for in Revised Standard Version should be understood as indicating possession, meaning “belonging to.” An alternative model that follows the Masoretic Text for this verse is:

• After they had eaten and drunk, the prophet of Judah prepared the donkey that the old prophet had made available for him to use.

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 .

And there were also …: This verse begins with the common Hebrew conjunction, which is linked with another conjunction that usually means “also” or “even.” This combination is rendered “Worst of all” in Good News Translation. While this may not be a good model for every language, the translation should show that what follows is seen as a supreme evil.

Male cult prostitutes renders the Hebrew noun that is literally “holy man” (also in 1 Kgs 15.12; 22.46; 2 Kgs 23.7). It is impossible to determine exactly what this refers to. It is possible to understand the Hebrew noun collectively (that is, plural in meaning) and also as including both men and women (so Good News Translation). Other translations include “sodomites” (King James Version), “male temple prostitutes” (New Revised Standard Version), “male prostitutes attached to the shrines” (Revised English Bible), “cult prostitutes” (New American Bible), “shrine prostitutes” (New Living Translation), and “male sacred prostitutes” (New Jerusalem Bible). Deut 23.17 (23.18 in Hebrew) has often been understood as prohibiting Israelites from serving as temple prostitutes. An increasing number of scholars, however, question whether the Hebrew here and in Deut 23.17 refers to cultic prostitution. There is little, if any, evidence to show that people practiced prostitution at the sacred places of worship (see van der Toorn). Anchor Bible, therefore, translates here “male prostitutes” (also New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

All the abominations of the nations refers to the worst evils practiced by the pagan peoples whom the Israelites had replaced in the Promised Land.

Which the LORD drove out before the people of Israel: It may be helpful to make explicit some of the information that remains implicit in these words. For example, Good News Translation adds that the people had been driven out at the time that the people of Israel had “advanced into the country.” It may also be wise to add an indication of time by saying “whom the LORD drove out long ago….”

A possible model for languages that require shorter sentences may be found in International Children’s Bible, which translates the last part of this verse as follows:

• The people who had lived in the land before the Israelites had done many evil things. And God had taken the land away from them. Now the people of Judah were doing the same evil things.

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 .

Baasha … of the house of Issachar: Baasha was introduced earlier in verse 16. He was from the tribe of Issachar. Good News Translation makes this identification explicit by translating house of as “tribe of.” Nadab was from the tribe of Ephraim, which may indicate that the members of the ten northern tribes fought for control of this kingdom.

Conspired against him: The Hebrew verb rendered conspired against indicates scheming against or planning to do harm to another person. The pronoun him refers to Nadab and this may have to be made clear by using the proper name in translation as Good News Translation has done.

Struck him down: Since this expression is ambiguous at best, it will be better to translate the meaning clearly as “murdered him” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “killed Nadab” (New Century Version).

Gibbethon, which belonged to the Philistines: Gibbethon is most likely to be identified with Tell Malat. This town was located about twenty kilometers (12.5 miles) east of the Mediterranean Sea on the western edge of the Judean hills. It had been given to the tribe of Dan at the time of the conquest (Josh 19.44), before the tribe of Dan moved further north, but it was now under control of the Philistines (see 1 Kgs 4.21).

For Nadab and all Israel were laying siege to Gibbethon: For renders the common Hebrew conjunction. In this context it is better to say “as” (Good News Translation) or “while” (New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) since it introduces simultaneous action here.

In 1 Kgs 16.16 the expressions “the troops” (literally “the people”) and “all Israel” occur as synonyms referring to the armed forces. The words all Israel here are therefore correctly translated as “his army” (Good News Translation) and “all his forces” (Revised English Bible). In this context all Israel does not refer to the general population of the country.

Laying siege: See the comments on the related Hebrew verb rendered “besieges” at 1 Kgs 8.37. This verb refers to the armed forces surrounding the town for the purpose of taking complete control of it and destroying the enemy.

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 author pronounced the same severe judgment on Ahab’s father “Omri” in verse 25.

Did evil in the sight of the LORD: See the comments on 1 Kgs 11.6.

All that were before him refers to all of the kings who ruled before him in Israel, as explicitly stated in verse 33. See verse 25.

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 .

Go through the land: The second person singular verb Go translates the Masoretic Text. Some translations, following the Septuagint, read “Let us go” (so Revised English Bible, Good News Translation, New American Bible, Anchor Bible, Osty-Trinquet). As Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament shows, however, the second person singular in the Masoretic Text makes sense. In this verse Ahab charges Obadiah to go search for grass, and verse 6 indicates that Ahab himself has decided to make a similar search. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text. So it will be better to translate this verb as a direct command to Obadiah by saying “You, go through the land.” The Hebrew word rendered land probably refers in this context to the area surrounding the city of Samaria. But it is best for translators to retain a rather general term in the receptor language.

Springs of water is a literal rendering. This will be redundant in some languages because the word springs clearly implies water. So translators should look for the most natural equivalent here rather than seeking to imitate Revised Standard Version. Good News Translation says simply “spring.”

Valleys translates a Hebrew noun that often refers to a river valley that has water flowing in it only during the winter months (see 1 Kgs 17.3, where Revised Standard Version renders it “brook”). Translations such as “wadi[s]” (New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, Anchor Bible), “stream bed” (Good News Translation), and “streams” (New American Bible) express the meaning better in English than does valleys.

Perhaps we may find grass …: The Hebrew particle translated perhaps introduces a possible result of the proposed course of action. The result is not certain but only a possibility. In some languages it may have to be translated by a verbal expression like “it may happen that” or something similar.

The first person plural pronoun we in Ahab’s words to Obadiah should be taken as inclusive and so translated.

Mules: See the comments on 1 Kgs 1.33.

Not lose some of the animals: Lose translates the same Hebrew verb that is rendered “cut off” in verse 4. While the Revised Standard Version rendering is possible, the use of the same verb may be maintained in some languages by saying “killing off the prophets” and “kill off our animals.” New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible use the verb “slaughter” here in verse 5. The irony is that while Jezebel was killing the prophets of God, Ahab was worried that he might have to kill some of his animals.

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 .

While the repetition of the words answer me is redundant, it serves to underline the pleading of the prophet. Both occurrences should be retained in the receptor language unless it is considered very unnatural to do so.

Thou hast turned their hearts back: New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “You have turned their hearts backward,” and then indicates in a footnote that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain. As the footnote in Good News Translation indicates, the Hebrew expression may be understood to mean either “you are bringing them back to yourself” or “you yourself made them turn away from you.” The form of the Hebrew verb may be understood as referring to past action or to present action, although it is probably more natural to understand the form of the verb in this context as referring to past action.

For many readers today, the interpretation expressed in the text of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation makes better sense in this context than the alternate interpretation expressed in the Good News Translation footnote since it is difficult to think that God was the one who turned the hearts of the Israelites away from him. Compare also “it is you who have brought them back to their allegiance” (Revised English Bible), “you have brought them back to their senses” (New American Bible), and “you … are winning back their hearts” (New Jerusalem Bible). But despite the wide acceptance of this interpretation, it is far from certain that the original readers would have found the alternate interpretation to be a problem in their understanding of how God deals with his people. Translators must choose the interpretation that seems better in the context. A footnote giving the other alternative could be considered.

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 .