But Micaiah said: The common Hebrew conjunction at the beginning of this verse is correctly rendered But in both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation because the prophet’s response is contrary to the request of the messenger. The verb said may be translated according to the context as “replied” (New Living Translation) or “answered” (Good News Translation, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

As the LORD lives is literally “[By] the life of the LORD.” This expression is used frequently in the Old Testament. It constitutes a very strong oath or promise. Here Micaiah swears he will actually say what God tells him to say. In many languages translators will be required to add “I promise” or “I swear” to show clearly that this is a forceful oath.

What my God says, that I will speak: My God seems to express an intentional contrast between Yahweh and the god worshiped by the other prophets. This phrase may be rendered “the God whom I serve” or “the God whom I worship.” The Hebrew word order in these two clauses places emphasis on the word rendered that. Revised Standard Version preserves this emphasis in English, but Good News Translation does not. Compare Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, which also preserves this emphasis: “what my God will tell me, it is that which I will say!” Good News Translation reverses the order of these two clauses, which may be more natural in a number of languages.

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 .

Some men came and told Jehoshaphat is literally “And they came and told Jehoshaphat.” The subject is indefinite in the Hebrew text. There is certainly no emphasis on the maleness of the people who brought this news, so it is probably better to render men as as “messengers” (Good News Translation) or simply “people.” In languages where passive verbs are common, this whole clause may be rendered “It was reported to King Jehoshaphat.”

A great multitude is coming against you from Edom, from beyond the sea: The messengers report that a large army from Edom had invaded Judah. A great multitude is coming against you may be rendered “A large army has invaded our country” (similarly Contemporary English Version). Edom was a country southeast of the Dead Sea (see the comments on 1 Chr 18.11). In Hebrew from Edom is in apposition to the phrase from beyond the sea. This phrase locates Edom in relation to Israel as on the other side of the Dead Sea. In order to avoid misunderstanding about which sea is meant, translators may wish to name the sea, as Good News Translation and some other modern versions have done.

There is a textual problem with the name Edom. One Hebrew manuscript, the Old Latin translation, and the original reading in the Septuagint have this name, which is followed by most modern versions. Other Hebrew manuscripts have the name “Aram” (so New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Nouvelle Bible Segond), that is, Syria (so Nouvelle version Segond révisée), a nation to the northeast of Israel. The geographic facts of this passage support the reading Edom, and so do verses 10, 22, and 23. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends this reading with a {C} rating.

And, behold, they are in Hazazon-tamar” (that is, En-gedi): The Hebrew focusing particle rendered behold draws the attention of the king to the nearness of the attack from Edom. The name Hazazon-tamar occurs only here and in Gen 14.7. Because it is relatively unknown, the writer provides the information for the original readers that it is also called En-gedi. En-gedi, whose name means “fountain of the young goat,” was on the west shore of the Dead Sea. Since En-gedi was part of the kingdom of Judah, Good News Translation renders they are in Hazazon-tamar as “They have already captured Hazazon Tamar.”

The direct quotation of this verse may be translated indirectly in those languages where direct discourse is not acceptable. A possible model is as follows:

• Some people came and reported to Jehoshaphat that a large army was invading Judah from the other side of the Dead Sea, that is, from Edom. They told him that this army was already in Hazazon Tamar, which is also called Engedi.

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 .

After this Jehoshaphat king of Judah joined with Ahaziah king of Israel: Since the reign of Jehoshaphat has already been summed up in the previous verse, it is unclear exactly how the Hebrew word rendered After this is to be understood. It has been translated “Later” (New International Version, New Century Version, Revised English Bible) and “Afterwards” (New Jerusalem Bible). Some take it to refer to the final days of the life of Jehoshaphat by saying “At the end of his life” (Knox) or “But near the end of his life” (New Living Translation). Others take it as referring to the time after the defeat of the enemy armies in verses 1-30. But Good News Translation translates it in a rather neutral way by saying “At one time.” A general rendering such as this is preferable here. Joined with means specifically that military cooperation was agreed on between the two kings. So this phrase is better translated “made an alliance with” (Good News Translation) or “allied himself to” (Moffatt).

Who did wickedly is literally “he did evil to do.” This clause stands alone as the second half of the verse in the Hebrew text, and it is not clear whether it refers to Jehoshaphat or to Ahaziah. Some take this clause as a description of the habitual character of Ahaziah, the king of Israel, and not in the sense of a particular act that he committed (so Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New American Bible). However, others believe this clause refers to Jehoshaphat, showing that his decision to align himself with Ahaziah was a serious error; for example, New Century Version translates this whole verse as “Later, Jehoshaphat … made a treaty with Ahaziah … which was a wrong thing to do.” Compare also “Afterwards, Jehoshaphat formed a partnership with Ahaziah … which was very wrong of him” (New Jerusalem Bible) and “Afterward, King Jehoshaphat of Judah entered into a partnership with King Ahaziah of Israel, thereby acting wickedly” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

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 in the seventh year Jehoiada took courage: But translates the common Hebrew conjunction. The priest Jehoiada had been afraid of Queen Athaliah for six years while he and his wife Jehosheba hid Joash, the son of Ahaziah, from her (see 2 Chr 22.11-12), but now he was no longer afraid to act by making Joash king. The majority of modern versions do not translate this conjunction since it is an awkward way to begin a new section. The seventh year would have been 837 or 835 B.C. Good News Translation says “After waiting six years,” which is a natural way in English of expressing this time lapse. Took courage is literally “strengthened himself” (King James Version, NASB). But this expression may be understood in two rather different ways. God’s Word interprets it to mean “strengthened his position,” and Dillard is similar with “consolidated his power.” But the majority of modern versions take it in the same sense as Revised Standard Version by saying “determined” (Anchor Bible), “decided to take action” (New Jerusalem Bible), “made a bold move” ( NET Bible), or “was emboldened to act” (Knox).

And entered into a compact with the commanders of hundreds …: Compact translates a Hebrew noun that Revised Standard Version usually renders “covenant” (so New International Version, NASB). Several versions translate it simply as “agreement” (New Century Version, God’s Word, Revised English Bible) or “pact” (Good News Translation, New Living Translation, NET Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). But New American Bible brings out the intrigue involved by rendering entered into a compact as “entered a conspiracy.” Commanders of hundreds refers to military commanders (see the comments on 1 Chr 13.1). Good News Translation and Moffatt say “army officers,” which is a more generic expression than what is in the Hebrew. New International Version has “commanders of units of a hundred,” and New Jerusalem Bible translates “regimental commanders.” The text then provides the names of five of these officers. (This list of names does not occur in the parallel text of 2 Kgs 11.) Each person is said to be the son of someone else. For languages where it is important to know this information, the names that follow this expression were most likely the fathers of the men mentioned and not their mothers.

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 those who were engaged in the work labored: So renders the common Hebrew conjunction as a logical connector. Here it introduces the next event. Those who were engaged in the work refers to the different groups of workers mentioned in the previous verse. This expression may be rendered simply “The workmen” (Revised English Bible). New International Version says “The men in charge of the work,” but probably the reference is more general than this.

And the repairing went forward in their hands means that as a result of their hard work the repair project advanced toward its conclusion. Some will prefer to say “and they made progress in the repairs” or “and more and more repairs were completed.” The words in their hands is a Hebrew way of saying “under their guidance,” if the subject is thought to be the foremen (so New International Version), but otherwise it is simply a way of referring to the manual labor.

And they restored the house of God to its proper condition is literally “and they restored the house of God to its measurement/proportion.” This clause is usually taken to mean “they restored the house of God according to its original design” (Revised English Bible) or “They rebuilt the Temple of God to be as it was before” (New Century Version). Contemporary English Version says “and when they were finished, it looked as good as new.” But the Hebrew may also be understood to mean “They followed the measurements specified for God’s temple” ( NET Bible).

And strengthened it: This clause suggests that the repaired Temple was even stronger than it had been before. New International Version and God’s Word say “and reinforced it.” The Good News Translation rendering “as solid as ever” may be an undertranslation.

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 Joash king of Israel went up: The common Hebrew conjunction is properly rendered So because what follows is the logical consequence of God’s decision to make Amaziah refuse Jehoash’s advice. The notion of upward movement in the verb phrase went up is not essential to the meaning, so it may be rendered “attacked” (New International Version, God’s Word), “advanced” (New American Bible), or simply “went.”

And he and Amaziah faced one another in battle …: Faced one another in battle is literally “saw each other’s faces.” This is the same expression as in verse 17. Here it may be rendered “met in battle” (New American Bible) or “clashed” (Revised English Bible).

At Beth-shemesh, which belongs to Judah: Four different towns are referred to in the Old Testament by the name Beth-shemesh. Two were in the territory of the northern tribes of Issachar (Josh 19.22) and Naphtali (Josh 19.38), and the third was in Egypt (Jer 43.13; called “Heliopolis” in Revised Standard Version). The Beth-shemesh mentioned here was a town on the northwest border of Judah (see Josh 15.10; 21.16). Originally it was in the territory of the tribe of Dan and also called Ir-Shemesh (Josh 19.41). It was about 24 kilometers (15 miles) west of Jerusalem. The writer underlines the fact that this town was within the realm of Judah. Most battles in the Old Testament between the northern and southern kingdoms took place further north in the hill country.

The context makes it clear that Amaziah and Jehoash did not go alone to battle. Rather, they both went with their armies. This may be made explicit in translation, as New Living Translation has done by rendering the whole verse as follows:

• So King Jehoash of Israel mobilized his army against King Amaziah of Judah. The two armies drew up their battle lines at Beth-shemesh in Judah.

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 .

He built the upper gate of the house of the LORD: The Hebrew pronoun for He is emphatic, so some versions begin this verse with “It was he who…” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Nouvelle Bible Segond, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Since the previous verse mentions both Jotham and his father, Good News Translation and Bible en français courant say “It was Jotham who…” to avoid any ambiguity. The verb built must be taken here in the sense of rebuilding or restoration since the Temple gate in view here was already there long before the time of Jotham. For this reason several modern versions say “rebuilt” (Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, La Bible du Semeur). Since he did not rebuild the gate himself, it is even better to say “had [it] rebuilt.” The upper gate is probably the same gate as the one called “the upper Benjamin Gate” in Jer 20.2. According to Ezek 9.2, it was located on the north side of the Temple area. Ezekiel refers to it as “the north gate” (Ezek 8.14; 40.35, 40, 44; 44.4; 46.9; 47.2), so Good News Translation says “the North Gate.” However, some interpreters think the upper gate was located south of the Temple. 2 Chr 23.20 seems to indicate this. Possibly the upper gate is the same as the New Gate mentioned in Jer 26.10 and 36.10, since the New Gate seems to have been located south of the Temple, although the location of the New Gate is not certain.

And did much building on the wall of Ophel: The exact sense of this clause in Hebrew is not clear. Jotham may have made extensive repairs on the wall in view here or he may have added to it. New Living Translation says “He also did extensive rebuilding on the wall at the hill of Ophel,” and Revised English Bible has “and [he] built extensions on the wall at Ophel.” Ophel was the section of Jerusalem located on a hill south of the Temple and of the royal palace. Since Ophel refers to a part of the city, Good News Translation renders the wall of Ophel as “the city wall in the area of Jerusalem called Ophel” (similarly Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Other ways of expressing this phrase include “the wall of the quarter of [town called] Ophel” (Bible en français courant) and “the wall in the area known as Ophel” ( NET Bible).

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 connector For introduces why the religious leaders were to purify themselves and the Temple.

Our fathers have been unfaithful: The ancestors of the people of Judah were unfaithful to God, which Good News Translation and Parole de Vie make explicit. For the Hebrew verb rendered have been unfaithful, see the comments on 1 Chr 10.13.

And have done what was evil in the sight of the LORD our God: See the comments on 2 Chr 21.6. God’s Word says “and did what the LORD our God considered evil.”

They have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD, and turned their backs: These three clauses are quite similar in meaning and may be seen as a kind of parallelism intended to have a cumulative effect. Good News Translation reduces the three clauses to two. The receptor language may have idiomatic expressions that are very different from the Hebrew ones here, but which carry the same meaning. However, many languages use the expression “turn the back” in a figurative way. The habitation of the LORD refers to the Temple. But it is not the most common way of referring to this structure. The Hebrew word for habitation is the same one rendered “tabernacle” in 2 Chr 1.5. It literally means “dwelling place” (New International Version, New Living Translation, Bible de Jérusalem). For this whole sentence Moffatt has “they have abandoned him, they have ignored the dwelling-place of the Eternal and turned their backs upon 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 .