The Cushite invasion of Judah (verses 9-15) is mentioned only in 2 Chronicles.

Zerah the Ethiopian came out against them: Nothing more is known concerning this Zerah, although some scholars think he may have been a commander under Pharaoh Osorkon I, who ruled in Egypt around 929–893 B.C. Others think he may have been the chief of Arab tribes from the Sinai region. Ethiopian is literally “Cushite” (New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The term “Cush” referred to a broad area south of Egypt, including both modern-day Sudan and Ethiopia (see the comments on 2 Chr 12.3). God’s Word states that this man was from “Sudan.” As an alternative translation, New Revised Standard Version has “Nubian.” This is also the reading in the text of Traduction œcuménique de la Bible.

With an army of a million men and three hundred chariots: A million men is literally “a thousand thousands” (similarly King James Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). This is probably a round figure suggesting an extremely large number of troops, too numerous to count. According to 2 Chr 16.8, Zerah’s army included soldiers who were Cushites and Libyans. For chariots see the comments on 1 Chr 18.4 and 2 Chr 1.14.

And came as far as Mareshah: Since the Cushite army was invading Judah, some versions use a verb here that expresses military action. Good News Translation says the army “advanced as far as,” and New Jerusalem Bible has “penetrated to.” Mareshah was a town in southern Judah that Rehoboam had fortified earlier (see 2 Chr 11.8). It was located about 40 kilometers (25 miles) southwest of Jerusalem, near the city of Lachish.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Were not the Ethiopians and the Libyans a huge army with exceedingly many chariots and horsemen?: This negative question is rhetorical, expecting a positive answer. Since King Asa defeated the enormous army of Cushites and Libyans by trusting in God (2 Chr 14.9-13), he should have trusted in God again to defeat King Baasha of Israel rather than trusting in the Syrian army of Benhadad. For Ethiopians and Libyans, see the comments on 2 Chr 12.3. As there, it is best to render Ethiopians as “Cushites” (New Century Version, Nouvelle version Segond révisée). For chariots and horsemen, see the comments on 1 Chr 18.4. As there, the Hebrew term rendered horsemen refers to soldiers who were in charge of caring for the horses and driving the chariots. New American Bible says “drivers.” For this whole question New Living Translation has “Don’t you remember what happened to the Ethiopians and Libyans and their vast army, with all of their chariots and charioteers?” Since it is a rhetorical question, some translators may prefer to render it as a statement. Two models that do this are “Remember that the Ethiopians and the Libyans formed a strong army blessed with a great number of chariots and their crews/teams” (La Bible du Semeur) and “The Cushites and Libyans had a large and powerful army and many chariots and horsemen” (New Century Version).

Yet because you relied on the LORD, he gave them into your hand: Yet translates the common Hebrew conjunction. Here it introduces something unexpected, so this translation is justified. Other possible connectors are “But” (Good News Translation) and “However.” As elsewhere, your hand is an idiom for “your power” (New American Bible). Some modern English versions attempt to retain some of the imagery by rendering the last clause of this verse as “he handed them over to you” (New Century Version, God’s Word). In some languages it may be necessary to reverse the order of the two clauses in this sentence. Parole de Vie does it by saying “Yet the LORD delivered them into your power, because you relied on him.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Now the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah were sitting on their thrones: Good News Translation simplifies the structure of the complex subject here in Hebrew by beginning with “The two kings….” Sitting on their thrones means that each king was sitting on his own throne. An American Translation says “sitting each on his throne.”

Arrayed in their robes: The verb arrayed is surprisingly kept in New Revised Standard Version. This passive verb may be translated “were dressed” (Contemporary English Version, God’s Word) or “clothed” (New American Bible). But a possible active verb is “wearing” (New Jerusalem Bible). The Hebrew noun rendered robes is a general word that covers any kind of garment or clothing. In this context most interpreters understand the reference to be to “royal robes” (Good News Translation, New International Version, New Living Translation, Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, El libro del Pueblo de Dios), “robes of state” (New American Bible), or “ceremonial outfits” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). However, Osty-Trinquet suggests that the reference is to “military uniforms.” Compare also “armour” (Moffatt), which seems to be based on the Septuagint text of the parallel in 1 Kgs 22.10. The mention of the kings’ royal robes anticipates what will happen in verse 29, where Ahab tells Jehoshaphat to wear his robe during the battle while he disguises himself.

And they were sitting at the threshing floor at the entrance of the gate of Samaria: The Hebrew noun rendered threshing floor refers to an open public place where grain was threshed (see the comments on 1 Chr 13.9). The word floor in English might make the reader think of something made of wood, but threshing floors were hard level surfaces of stone in the open air, located outside of towns where the blowing winds could separate the seeds from the husks. People either walked on the grain or dragged a heavy board over it and then tossed both grain and husks into the air. The wind blew away the lighter husks but the heavier grain fell to the ground. But the point in this context seems to be that this was an open area where many people were able to gather. The phrase at the entrance of the gate of Samaria is understood by Good News Translation and New Jerusalem Bible to mean “just outside the gate of Samaria.” Contemporary English Version says “near the gate of Samaria,” but does not indicate whether inside or outside the gate. The meaning found in Good News Translation and New Jerusalem Bible is most likely the correct understanding and should probably be followed in other languages. In Old Testament times the gate was at the same time the normal market place for the inhabitants of the city and the place where legal cases were considered (see the comments on 2 Chr 8.5).

And all the prophets were prophesying before them: The Hebrew verb rendered were prophesying is the same one translated “prophesies” in verse 7, where it refers to the activity of the prophet Micaiah in foretelling the future or speaking out with judgments on behalf of God. Even though most modern versions use the verb prophesying here in verse 9, it is not the only possible translation. In 1 Kgs 18.29, where Revised Standard Version renders the same Hebrew verb “raved on,” the verb may refer to ecstatic behavior that consists of dancing and shouting. Since the prophets had already given their pronouncement in verse 5, it is likely that they are now engaged in “prophetic frenzy” (Osty-Trinquet) while the kings are waiting for Micaiah to be brought to them. Peregrino similarly says that they were “were gesticulating.” “Gesticulate” means to talk excitedly while making gestures with one’s hands. Compare also An American Translation, which says “were engaged in ecstatic prophecy.” Since the following verses indicate that these prophets were still prophesying victory for Ahab, the Hebrew verb may include both prophecy and ecstatic behavior here.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And he charged them may be rendered “He gave them these orders” or “Jehoshaphat commanded them” (New Century Version).

Thus you shall do …: The Hebrew adverb rendered Thus refers to the manner in which the duties of the judges were to be performed. In some languages the meaning of this clause may be expressed as “This is how you shall act…” (New Revised Standard Version), but New International Version says simply “You must serve….”

In the fear of the LORD: As in verse 7, this phrase refers to honoring the LORD. Contemporary English Version omits this phrase, but it should be kept. NET Bible renders it “with respect for the LORD.”

In faithfulness, and with your whole heart emphasizes the necessity of complete fidelity to Yahweh in performing the duties of a judge. Some other ways of expressing these two phrases are “faithfully and wholeheartedly” (New International Version), “with faithfulness and an undivided heart” (New Living Translation), and “with loyal heart and single mind” (Moffatt). For with your whole heart, see the comments on 1 Chr 28.9.

If the direct discourse of this verse is a problem, then it may be translated indirectly. But this may prove quite difficult since the quotation continues to the end of the chapter.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet: The realm of Jehoshaphat may be better translated “the kingdom of Jehoshaphat” (New International Version, NASB; similarly New Living Translation) or “Jehoshaphat ruled” (Good News Translation). While he ruled, his kingdom was quiet, that is, “undisturbed” (New Jerusalem Bible) by war. This phrase may be rendered “was not at war.” The meaning is roughly synonymous with the words gave him rest that follow.

For his God gave him rest round about: See the comments on 2 Chr 15.15. For renders the common Hebrew conjunction, but it conveys the meaning well since what follows is an explanation of why the kingdom was at peace. There was peace because God caused the surrounding nations not to attack it. This clause may be rendered “because his God gave him peace with all the surrounding countries” (similarly New Century Version).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And when Jehu was executing judgment upon the house of Ahab: And renders the Hebrew verbal transition that is sometimes translated “And it came about” (NASB), but it is often eliminated in modern English versions since it is not considered natural. The Hebrew verb phrase here may mean either was executing judgment upon or “was in conflict with” (so Revised English Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond). The first meaning is followed by most translations. Since it is explicit in the context that this was God’s judgment, the idea is most likely that Jehu was simply carrying out the decision that God had made concerning the descendants of Ahab. For this whole clause New Century Version says simply “While Jehu was punishing Ahab’s family.”

He met the princes of Judah and the sons of Ahaziah’s brothers …: The Hebrew noun translated princes refers to someone important (see the comments on 1 Chr 19.3 and 2 Chr 12.5). In English the word princes usually refers to the sons of a king, which is not the intended meaning in the Hebrew here. It is better rendered “leaders” (Contemporary English Version, New Century Version) or “officials” (New Living Translation) in this context. The sons of Ahaziah’s brothers were “Ahaziah’s nephews” (Good News Translation, New Jerusalem Bible; similarly New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Bible en français courant). In some languages it may be necessary to indicate whether the nephews were sons of Ahaziah’s brothers or of his sisters. The Septuagint, which omits the words the sons of, is the basis for the Revised English Bible rendering “the kinsmen of Ahaziah.” In the Revised English Bible translation the Hebrew word brothers is taken in the larger sense of “kinsmen.” New Living Translation is similar with “Ahaziah’s relatives.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the reading in the Masoretic Text, which is followed by Revised Standard Version and most other versions.

Who attended Ahaziah may be rendered “who were in the service of Ahaziah” (Nouvelle Bible Segond) or “who served under Ahaziah” (similarly Moffatt).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And proclamation was made is literally “And they gave a proclamation.” The implied subject is most likely the Levites (see verse 6). But Contemporary English Version takes the subject to be King Joash by beginning this verse with “He then sent letters.” In languages where passive forms are unacceptable, it is probably best to use the indefinite “they” or to follow the model of New Century Version, which says “Then the Levites made an announcement.”

Throughout Judah and Jerusalem: See the comments on 2Chr 24.6.

To bring in the tax that Moses the servant of God laid upon Israel in the wilderness: See the comments on 2Chr 24.6. Laid upon is literally “upon.” There is no verb here in Hebrew, but the context requires a verb in English. Since it involves a tax, modern versions use verbs such as “levied” (Moffatt) and “imposed” (Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible). It is also possible to say “required” (Contemporary English Version, New International Version). For the Hebrew word rendered wilderness, see the comments on 1 Chr 12.8.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But renders the Hebrew verbal transition that is sometimes translated “And it came to pass” (King James Version). Here it introduces Amaziah’s negative response to the prophet’s rebuke. Good News Translation uses a paragraph break to express it.

As he was speaking the king said to him is literally “as he was speaking to him and he said to him.” This expression indicates a rather abrupt interruption, so the verb said may be rendered “broke in” or “interrupted” (Good News Translation).

Have we made you a royal counselor?: The pronoun we seems to be another case of a “royal we,” so it may be translated “I” (Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie). New American Bible uses a passive construction to avoid this pronoun, saying “Have you been made the king’s counselor?” A royal counselor is literally “one who counsels the king.” But since the king himself is speaking, it will be unnatural in many languages to have him speaking of himself in the third person (so Good News Translation, New International Version, Revised English Bible). The meaning of this question is simply “Have I appointed you to be my adviser?” This is a rhetorical question, so it may be rendered “I never appointed you to be my adviser.” Contemporary English Version says “You’re not one of my advisors!”

Stop!: This command is literally “Stop yourself!” Good News Translation says “Stop talking,” and Contemporary English Version has “Don’t say another word.”

Why should you be put to death?: This question leaves information implicit and is rhetorical. The sense is “If you do not stop talking, you will be put to death.” Some other ways to render this question and the command before it are “Be silent! Why should it be necessary to kill you?” (New American Bible) and “Stop [talking], or you will be put to death.”

So the prophet stopped, but said: It is contradictory to say that the prophet stopped speaking, but said something. Good News Translation avoids the contradiction by saying “The prophet stopped speaking, but not before saying,” and so does La Bible du Semeur with “The prophet did not insist, but before withdrawing, he said however.”

I know that God has determined to destroy you: The Hebrew verb translated has determined is the same verb rendered counselor. The Hebrew has a play on words: God has “counseled” to destroy Amaziah.

Because you have done this and have not listened to my counsel: The demonstrative pronoun this refers most likely to Amaziah’s worshiping the gods of Edom and not to his interrupting the prophet. This should somehow be made clear in translation. The Hebrew noun rendered counsel comes from the same root as the verbs translated counselor and has determined, so this is another play on words.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .