Translation commentary on 1 Kings 8:26

For Now therefore, see verse 25.

Let thy word be confirmed: The Hebrew verb rendered confirmed expresses the idea of firmness or certainty. This may need to be expressed in an active form in some languages; for example, “make your word [or, promise] certain,” “cause your promise to happen,” or “make to exist what you promised.” Hebrew contains the particle of entreaty here (see 1 Kgs 1.12; 2.17). This is sometimes rendered “pray” or “please,” but it is not translated here in either Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation. Compare Moffatt: “pray let this promise be fulfilled.”

For the third consecutive verse, Solomon refers to his father as thy servant David my father. See the comments on verse 24.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 8:59

Since this begins a new appeal, it may be helpful in some languages to restate the fact that this is something that Solomon is requesting of God. New Century Version begins with “I ask that….”

Let these words … be near to the LORD our God day and night: A literal rendering of this expression will probably sound awkward in many languages. The meaning is more clearly communicated in the following renderings: “May the LORD our God be constantly aware of my request” and “I ask that the Lord our God always remember this prayer” (International Children’s Bible).

The words wherewith I have made supplication mean simply “which I have prayed,” but may be translated even more simply as “my prayer” or “this prayer.”

Day and night is an idiomatic way of saying “continually” or “always.”

May he maintain the cause of his servant: For maintain the cause, see the comments on verse 45. His servant refers to Solomon, who is the one making this prayer (see the comments on verses 28, 36, and 52).

As each day requires is literally “a thing of a day in its day.” This may be translated “all the things we need every day” or “each day, in whatever way we need it” (Contemporary English Version).

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 10:1

The queen of Sheba: The exact location of Sheba is debated, but it was probably located on the southwest coast of the Arabian peninsula, corresponding to modern-day Yemen. However, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus called the queen the “Queen of Egypt and Ethiopia” (k Jewish Antiquitiesk* 8.6.5-6), and Ethiopian tradition says that their kings descend from Solomon and the queen of Sheba (see the comments on verse 13).

Fame of Solomon: The Hebrew word translated fame often means “hearing” (coming from the verb “to hear”) or “report.” But in this context it refers to the widespread reputation for wisdom that Solomon had. In certain languages this idea is expressed by the word “honor.”

Concerning the name of the LORD: The sense of these words in this context is not clear to many interpreters. They are absent from the parallel text in 2 Chr 9.1, so some translations omit them here also (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Osty-Trinquet). The shorter text is followed also in La Bible Pléiade, which omits concerning the name of the LORD and in place of these words places empty square brackets.

But these words are part of the Masoretic Text and should be followed. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and suggests that the words concerning the name of the LORD may be understood in two different ways:
(1) “to the glory of the LORD,” that is, when the queen heard of Solomon’s fame, she gave glory to (or, praised) the LORD.
(2) “received from the LORD.” This second interpretation means that the queen heard of Solomon’s fame, which he owed to the name of the LORD (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), that is, it came from the LORD. This interpretation agrees with the statement in verse 24 that Solomon’s wisdom came from God.

Another possible meaning is “which brought honor to the name of the LORD” (New Living Translation; similarly De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling).

For the first half of the verse, the Septuagint and the ancient Syriac say “When the queen of Sheba heard the fame of Solomon and the name of the LORD.” This is the basis for the following translation by Moffatt: “When the queen of Sheba heard about the fame of Solomon and the temple he had built in honour of the Eternal.”

She came: The text does not state at this point where the queen of Sheba came to. That information is given in verse 2, but it is acceptable to shift it forward as Good News Translation has done. If it is more natural to do so, translators may say here that “she came to Jerusalem.”

Hard questions refers to questions that are not easy to answer because the answer requires wisdom or good understanding. Some translations include “enigmatic questions” (Revised English Bible, Osty-Trinquet), “difficult questions” (New Jerusalem Bible), and “subtle questions” (New American Bible). In some languages this will be best translated by the word for “riddle.”

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 11:6

So translates the common Hebrew conjunction. Since it introduces a kind of summary statement, some versions prefer a logical connector like “Thus” (Revised English Bible).

The expression did what was evil in the sight of the LORD occurs frequently in 1–2 Kings. This is the standard formula to summarize the reign of a bad king. The meaning is clearly that the usual way this king behaved was contrary to the will of God. For this reason translators should ensure that a verb form indicating habitual action is used. The Hebrew noun translated evil has been rendered “displeasing” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Jerusalem Bible) and “wrong” (Revised English Bible, New Century Version).

Did not wholly follow translates a Hebrew idiom that means “did not remain loyal to” (for example, Num 14.24; Deut 1.36). Some other ways of expressing this are “refused to follow … completely” (New Living Translation) and “was not wholehearted in his loyalty to” (Revised English Bible).

In some languages it will be more natural to speak first of the ideal (David) before talking about Solomon’s failure to live up to that ideal. Contemporary English Version provides a model for this type of restructuring:

• Solomon’s father had obeyed the LORD with all his heart, but Solomon disobeyed and did what the LORD hated.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 11:43

Regarding the expression slept with his fathers, see the comments on 1 Kgs 1.21.

The city of David: See the comments on 1 Kgs 2.10.

Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead: Rehoboam became the first king of the southern kingdom. Regarding his reign, see 1 Kgs 12.1-24 and 14.21-31. According to 1 Kgs 14.21, he became king when he was forty-one years old.

In his stead is “in his place.” The last clause of the verse may be restructured as “his son Rehoboam succeeded him as king” (New American Bible), or simply “his son Rehoboam became the next king” (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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 13:3

All translations consulted treat this verse as part of the scene that the author is describing. Walsh (pages 178-179), however, argues convincingly that both verses 3 and 5 are parenthetical comments that the author makes to the readers in his own day. For a detailed discussion of this interpretation, and its consequences for translation, see verse 5. All of verse 3 should be enclosed within parentheses in order to show that this verse is an interruption of the story as the author directly addresses the readers.

This verse also contains a quotation within a quotation. Here, as it often does, Good News Translation changes the embedded quotation into an indirect quotation.

He gave a sign: The preceding verse includes the names of both David and Josiah; and since the pronoun “he” in that verse refers to Josiah, Good News Translation substitutes “the prophet” for the pronoun he at the beginning of this verse.

The Hebrew noun rendered sign occurs several times in Exodus in reference to the ten plagues inflicted on the Egyptians. It is also used in reference to Moses changing a rod into a snake (Exo 7.9), and Revised Standard Version translates it there as “miracle.” The different Hebrew words used in the Old Testament for “sign” have a range of meanings that must often be determined by the context. Here this noun means “a proof that what the prophet has said is true.”

For Behold see the comments on the previous verse.

The altar shall be torn down: The Hebrew verb rendered shall be torn down is frequently used in reference to the tearing of clothing. In this context it is not clear whether the altar will be broken down by human beings or whether it “will be split asunder” (Revised English Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible) by some unnamed event, perhaps by an earthquake. In addition to Revised English Bible and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, other modern versions that follow the second interpretation include “shall break up” (New American Bible), “shall break apart” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “will split apart” (New Living Translation), and “will burst apart” (New Jerusalem Bible). But since 2 Kgs 23.15 says that King Josiah tore down this altar, it seems better here to say something like shall be torn down, as in Revised Standard Version. This passive construction will have to be rendered actively in some languages as “they will tear down the altar.”

The ashes that are upon it shall be poured out: The idea here is that the ashes on the altar will somehow spread throughout the area where the ruined altar had been. The Hebrew noun translated ashes refers specifically to ashes of burnt wood mixed with fat of the animals sacrificed on the altar. Like Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, many translations say simply ashes. On the other hand, De Vries focuses on the fat instead of the ashes by saying “the fat that is upon it shall be spilt out.” A better rendering than either of these is “greasy ashes” (em>Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). According to the Law (Lev 6.10-11), ashes were to be carried to a ritually clean place and deposited. So the statement that the ashes would be poured out was a clear statement that the sacrifice was not acceptable to God. In languages that do not have passive constructions, this clause may be rendered “the ashes on it will fall to the ground” (New Century Version).

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 14:3

Take with you is literally “take in your hand” (so De Vries). The text implies, but never actually says, that the food mentioned in this verse is to be given to the prophet and not to be eaten by the king’s wife along the way. For this reason Good News Translation says more explicitly “Take him….” International Children’s Bible is even clearer, saying “Give the prophet….”

Ten loaves: The Hebrew word rendered loaves is literally “bread.” But in this context it clearly refers to “loaves of bread” (New International Version). In some languages it may be quite natural to speak of “ten breads” (as in most French translations). Other languages may refer to “ten sticks of bread” or something similar.

Cakes renders a Hebrew noun that occurs only here and in Josh 9.5-12 (where Revised Standard Version renders it “moldy”). The exact meaning of this noun is uncertain. In Joshua it refers to dry, crumbling bread, which is the basis for the King James Version rendering “cracknels” here in 1 Kings. Other translations include “wafers” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “raisins” (Revised English Bible), and “savoury food” (New Jerusalem Bible). Gray argues that the noun comes from a Hebrew root meaning “speckled” and that it refers to sweet bread with seeds sprinkled on the crust. The English rendering “cakes” (Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, New International Version) should not be understood to mean the sweet dessert food, but rather it refers to food that is pressed flat.

Jar of honey: The Hebrew noun rendered jar refers to an expensive container with a long neck. When liquids were poured from this type of jar, it made a gurgling noise, which may explain the Hebrew name baqbuq. Nearly all translations render the next Hebrew term as honey here, but the precise nature of this substance is not certain. New American Bible says “preserves.” Some suggest that it may have been a sweet secretion of plant parasites. If it refers to honey, then it is wild honey and not honey made in man-made beehives.

The writer does not state here the reason why Jeroboam’s wife is supposed to take this food. On the basis of other Old Testament texts such as 1 Sam 9.7-8; 2 Kgs 5.15 and 8.7-9, it seems correct to conclude that people generally took gifts when they went to consult a prophet; and that is most likely how the original readers would have understood this verse. As noted above, she was not taking this food for herself to eat during the journey, but was rather taking it as a gift for Ahijah.

He will tell you what shall happen to the child: The text seems to imply that Jeroboam’s wife is to inquire about the prospects for her sick child. For this reason Good News Translation, New Century Version, and Contemporary English Version supply the words “Ask him.” The pronoun he is emphatic in Hebrew.

Child translates the Hebrew noun naʿar, which has a wide range of uses (see the comments on 1 Kgs 11.17). It usually refers to a young man (Jeroboam in 1 Kgs 11.28), but it may refer to a baby only a few months old (Moses in Exo 2.6). In 2 Kgs 2.23-24 it refers to “boys,” who were probably teenagers. This noun is used of young soldiers in 1 Kgs 20.15 and of officials of the Assyrian king in 2 Kgs 19.6. Note that in Exo 2.6 the Hebrew words naʿar and yeled are both used in reference to the baby Moses; and in 2 Kgs 2.23-24 both nouns are used to refer to the same group of boys. The noun yeled, which is also used of Jeroboam’s son in verse 12, comes from the Hebrew verb that means “to bear” and is mostly used in reference to young children, as in 1 Kgs 3.25. But it is sometimes used of young men, as in 1 Kgs 12.8-14 and 2 Kgs 2.24.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 15:6

For the details of the war between Abijah and Jeroboam, see 2 Chr 13.3-21.

This verse is almost identical in Hebrew to 1 Kgs 14.30. Some Greek manuscripts omit this verse, and a number of translations follow the Greek, thinking that a scribe copied 14.30 here (so Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Osty-Trinquet). But Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament correctly argues that verses 5b-6 have been accidentally omitted in the Septuagint.

Some Hebrew manuscripts read “Abijam” here instead of Rehoboam, and this is followed by a number of modern versions, including New Century Version, New Living Translation, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh; but Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text, which should be followed. The author states that the war between Abijam and Jeroboam (verse 7) already had its beginnings in the war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam.

Some other translations follow the Hebrew by keeping this verse in the translation, but they have restructured the text by taking the information about war between Abijah and Jeroboam at the end of verse 7 and moving it forward to the end of verse 6 as follows: “[the war] continued throughout Abijah’s lifetime” (so Good News Translation, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). The first edition of Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch combines verses 6-7.

Another possible way of conveying the meaning of this verse may be seen in the following model:

• During the entire lifetime of Abijah, the soldiers of Rehoboam kept on fighting the soldiers of Jeroboam.

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 .