And they killed the passover lamb: The priests are clearly the subject of the verb sprinkled and the Levites are the subject of flayed, but the referent for the pronoun they at the beginning of this verse is unclear. In the following verses it is clear that the Levites are the subjects of the third person plural verbs in Hebrew (see especially verse 14), so that is probably true here also. For the passover lamb, see the comments on 2Chr 35.1. New Living Translation provides a helpful model for this clause, saying “The Levites then slaughtered the Passover lambs” (similarly Contemporary English Version).

And the priests sprinkled the blood which they received from them: The Hebrew does not state here where the blood was sprinkled. Some translations make it explicit that the blood was sprinkled “on the altar” (Good News Translation, Moffatt). The blood which they received from them is literally “from their hand” in the Masoretic Text. The strangeness of this expression has led to numerous additions and changes in the ancient versions. But these words here appear to be nothing more than an elliptical expression of the fuller statement found in 2 Chr 30.16, which reads “the blood which they received from the hand of the Levites.” In fact, Osty-Trinquet places the word “Levites” in square brackets, saying “with the blood received from the hand of the [levites].” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the Masoretic Text, stating that the changes in the ancient versions are simply attempts to explain the meaning of the Hebrew. However, we recommend the following rendering of this clause for reasons of translation: “and the priests sprinkled [on the altar] the blood that they received from the Levites.”

While the Levites flayed the victims: For the verb flayed, see the comments on 2 Chr 29.34. The victims is supplied by Revised Standard Version since there is no object in Hebrew. But what is clearly implied is the Passover animals that had just been killed. So in some languages it may be necessary to speak of “the animals” (New International Version, New Century Version) or “the carcasses of the animals.”

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 .

To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah: See Jer 25.11; 29.10. By the mouth of Jeremiah may be rendered “spoken through Jeremiah” (New Living Translation, God’s Word). This whole clause may be rendered “So what the LORD had told the people of Judah through the prophet Jeremiah happened” (similarly New Century Version).

Until the land enjoyed its sabbaths: The land refers to the physical land of Judah. In some languages it may not be appropriate for the noun land to be the subject of the verb enjoyed. Older versions such as King James Version tended to render this verb as Revised Standard Version has done, but more recently scholars have come to realize that there are two separate Hebrew verbs that have the same spelling. One of these verbs means “to enjoy,” and the other verb means “to pay,” “to redeem,” or “to restore.” New Revised Standard Version uses the second verb by rendering this clause as “until the land had made up for its sabbaths.” The idea here is that the land would have to be left uncultivated for the time period mentioned. The footnote in Good News Translation explains clearly the sense of sabbaths. According to Lev 25.1-7, the land was to be left uncultivated for a whole year every seven year period, but this law had not been respected.

All the days that it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfil seventy years: These words combines elements from Lev 26.34-35 and Jer 25.11-12. It lay desolate means “Judah was [like] an empty desert” (Contemporary English Version). It kept sabbath means the land was allowed to rest by not being farmed. To fulfill the seventy years explains the purpose of not farming the land during this period. The land of Judah remained like an empty desert for seventy years to make up for all the years it was not allowed to rest. The land was supposed to rest every seventh year, but this had not happened.

Some versions turn the second part of this verse into direct discourse (so Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie, La Bible Pléiade, El libro del Pueblo de Dios), but in others it is indirect. The Hebrew text has no quotation marks when a speaker’s words are quoted. Here it is not clear whether the words until the land … seventy years are intended to be Jeremiah’s words or the words of the Chronicler. Either interpretation is possible. If they are taken as Jeremiah’s words, then these words tell what Jeremiah prophesied. If they are taken as the author’s words, these words state that Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning seventy years of exile will not be fulfilled until the Promised Land has had seventy years of desolation. These words are not a direct quotation from any verse in Jeremiah. If translators treat them as a direct quotation, they may find the following footnote in El libro del Pueblo de Dios useful: “The quotation [in verse 21] is not literal. See Jer 25.11; 29.10; Zech 1.12.”

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 .

The name of Abishur’s wife was Abihail, and she bore him Ahban and Molid: Abishur was one of the sons of Shammai (verse 28), a grandson of Onam and great-grandson of Jerahmeel. The Revised Standard Version rendering for this verse reflects the order of the Hebrew, but it supplies the verb was, which is not in the original. Good News Translation restructures the verse, providing the verb “married” and translating she bore him as “they had.” Good News Translation also specifies “two sons” before naming them. Some of these changes may be useful in other languages, but it is certainly not necessary to follow Good News Translation in all of these changes.

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 .

All these were David’s sons, besides the sons of the concubines: The demonstrative pronoun these refers to the sons of David mentioned in verses 1-8. All these were David’s sons is literally “All David’s sons.” King James Version says “These were all the sons of David,” which gives the wrong impression that David had no other sons. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch is better with “They all were fully legitimate sons of David,” which means they had the full rights of sonship. The sons born by the wives of David had a status higher than that of the sons born by his concubines. For concubines see the comments on 1 Chr 1.32. This verse does not indicate how many other sons David had by his concubines.

And Tamar was their sister: Tamar was the sister of David’s sons, not a sister of the concubines, as the Revised Standard Version rendering might seem to suggest. If a literal translation results in ambiguity or misunderstanding, it may be necessary to restate the relationship as in Good News Translation (also New Living Translation, Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). In some languages it may be better to say “David also had a daughter named Tamar.”

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 .

These were the potters and inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah: It is not clear to whom the demonstrative pronoun These refers, but it should probably be seen as referring backward and not forward. It is not clear whether the pronoun includes the people mentioned in both verses 21 and 22 or only verse 22. In some languages there exists a pronoun that refers to “the ones just mentioned previously.” It would be appropriate here. Contemporary English Version begins this verse with “The members of these clans….”

The Hebrew waw translated and may also be rendered “namely.” The sense of this whole clause would then be “These were the potters, namely, the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah.” The ancient versions and the Targums express this sense by saying “They were the potters who lived in Netaim and Gederah.” But it is also possible to understand the Hebrew to mean that even though all of the people in the previous verse were potters, only some of them were the king’s potters: those who lived in Netaim and Gederah. Revised English Bible, for example, renders this verse as “They were the potters, and those who lived at Netaim and Gederah were there on the king’s service.”

The two names Netaim and Gederah almost certainly refer to towns or villages in spite of the fact that King James Version takes the Hebrew words rendered Netaim and Gederah to mean “plants and hedges.” Jewish Publication Version and Reina-Valera revisada are similar with “plantations and hedges.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible reads “the plantations and the enclosures” in the text and gives “Netaim and Gederah” as an alternative translation in a footnote. Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente does just the reverse of Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, translating the Hebrew as place names in the text and giving the alternative translation “the plantations and the enclosures” in a footnote. Netaim was probably a town in Judah; and, according to Josh 15.36, Gederah was a town in the foothills of Judah.

They dwelt there with the king for his work may mean that these people worked on land owned by the king as they worked for him. More likely it means that the king provided the financial support for them to make jars and other kinds of pottery for him. This statement does not mean that they lived in the royal palace. The specific work of these people was making pottery, but this was done in the service of the king. Bible de Jérusalem translates this clause as “They remained there with the king, attached to his workshop.” New Living Translation says simply “They all worked for the king.”

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 they dwelt in Gilead, in Bashan and in its towns: The pronoun they refers to the clans of Gad mentioned in the previous verses. If this will be unclear in the receptor language, this pronoun is better rendered “These clans,” “The Gadites” (New Living Translation), “The descendants of Gad” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), or “The Gadite people” (International Children’s Bible). Interpreters have noted that the phrase in Gilead, in Bashan seems odd since Gilead refers to the southern territory and Bashan refers to the northern territory east of the Jordan River. Gilead was not in Bashan. Furthermore, the pronoun its in Hebrew is feminine. Cities in Hebrew are grammatically feminine but regions are not. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia suggests that the Hebrew word translated in Bashan should be corrected to read “in Jabesh.” Knoppers has accepted this correction of the Masoretic Text and translates the beginning of this verse as “They lived in Gilead, in Jabesh and its dependencies.” This is an appealing conjecture, but it has no basis in the manuscripts, so should not be accepted. The Hebrew for in Gilead, in Bashan should be understood to mean “in Gilead and in Bashan.” Towns is literally “daughters.” The Hebrew term here indicates a relationship of dependency on a larger or more important unit, in this case Bashan and Gilead (see the comments on 1 Chr 2.23). “Daughters” has been translated “towns,” “villages” (Revised English Bible), “surrounding settlements” ( NET Bible), “outlying villages” (New International Version), and “dependencies” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Another possible rendering for “its daughters” is “regions that depended on them [Bashan and Gilead].”

And in all the pasture lands of Sharon to their limits: The Hebrew word for pasture lands refers to open land normally used as places where cattle and flocks of sheep and goats could feed on the grass. Sharon is not the better-known plain on the Mediterranean coast south of Mount Carmel, but some place east of the Jordan River. The Mesha Inscription (also called the Moabite Stone) shows that a region or city named Sharon existed east of the Jordan River. But there is another way of interpreting the text here. Some interpreters change a letter in the Hebrew name Sharon and read “Sirion” (so New American Bible), since “Sirion” is another name for Mount Hermon in Deut 3.9 and 4.48. Menge provides a possible model for this interpretation by translating “Sharon” in the text and then stating in a footnote, “Probably should read ‘Sirion,’ that is, Hermon.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating to the text of the Masoretic Text. But since there is no manuscript evidence for “Sirion,” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, which is the final report of Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, does not discuss the problem because it is considered a historical problem and not a textual problem.

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 .

They ministered with song may be rendered “They served by making music” (New Century Version) or “They performed their musical duties” (Revised English Bible). Good News Translation leaves it implied that the duties of these men were specifically related to the making of music. But it is probably better to make this explicit as does the original text unless this repetition after verse 31 is considered unnatural.

The tabernacle of the tent of meeting refers to the portable sanctuary that the Israelites had carried with them in the wilderness. It is described in Exo 25–30 and was the place where God revealed himself to his people (Exo 29.42-46). The literal translation of Revised Standard Version does not adequately convey the full meaning of this expression, and it may even be misunderstood as referring to a place where Israelites met each other rather than where they met God. For many languages Good News Translation provides a better model with “the Tent of the LORD’s presence.” The word tent may be difficult to translate in some languages. It may be rendered “temporary shelter” or “house made of skins.”

Until Solomon had built the house of the LORD in Jerusalem: Good News Translation identifies Solomon as “King Solomon.” In this context the house of the LORD refers to the Temple. Good News Translation leaves implied the location of the Temple, because this information was moved up to the preceding verse. Regarding Solomon’s building of the Temple, see 1 Kgs 6.

And they performed their service in due order: These words translate four Hebrew words whose exact meaning is not clear. The verb translated performed is literally “stood.” The sense is apparently that they “stood,” that is, were in position, to perform the duties to which they had been appointed. The noun translated due order is often rendered in other contexts as “judgment” or “legal claim,” since it is frequently used in contexts of legal matters. Here the Hebrew noun seems to mean “custom” or “what is due,” but God’s Word translates it “regulations set down for them.” The final two Hebrew words, which Revised Standard Version translates their service, regularly refers to service of a religious or liturgical nature in 1–2 Chronicles. A comparison of various translations shows the different ways the Hebrew has been understood. The major differences in translation are due to the different ways the word translated due order have been understood. Here are the two major understandings of this clause:

• (1) Some consider it as referring to taking regular turns of service. Following this interpretation, Good News Translation says “They took regular turns of duty.”

• (2) Others take it as referring to performing their prescribed duties. Following this interpretation, Parole de Vie says “these men accomplished their service … according to fixed rules.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh similarly says “and they carried out their duties as prescribed for them.”

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 .