Unlike the parallel account in 2 Sam 12.26-31, the author does not tell the reader how David came to be present at Rabbah, but immediately goes on to say what David did in Rabbah.

And David took the crown of their king from his head: In many languages there is no specific word for crown. If so, it may be rendered by “headgear of the chief,” “hat of kingship,” or something similar. Their king (also New International Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, An American Translation, Nouvelle Bible Segond, La Bible du Semeur, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Nueva Versión Internacional, Reina-Valera revisada) is the reading of the Masoretic Text. However, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends with a {B} rating that the Masoretic Text be corrected to read “Milcom,” the name of an Ammonite god. In Hebrew the word malkam (“their king”) and the name “Milcom” have exactly the same consonants. Since the vowels were added much later to the Hebrew text, there is good reason to believe that “Milcom” was the intended meaning of the original text. In agreement with the Septuagint, numerous modern versions correct the vowels in the Hebrew noun for their king to read “Milcom” (so New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Osty-Trinquet, La Sainte Bible: La version Etablie par les moines de Maredsous, Peregrino, who is also mentioned in 1 Kgs 11.5, 33 and 2 Kgs 23.13. If this reading is followed in the receptor language, it will be helpful to say “the god Milcom,” “their idol Milkom” (Moffatt), “the statue of their god Milcom” (Contemporary English Version), “the statute of the Ammonite god, Milcom” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), or “the Ammonite god Milcom” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). While this correction of the Hebrew text is recommended to translators here and in 2 Sam 12.30, it may be wise to add a footnote to explain the difference in readings to readers that will be consulting other translations.

Some scholars claim that Milcom and “Molech/Moloch” (Good News Translation, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje) referred to the same deity. But that view is no longer prevalent, and many interpreters recognize that Milcom and Molech/Moloch refer to different gods (see Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible). Therefore the Good News Translation rendering should not be followed. The reference to Molech in 1 Kgs 11.7 should probably read “Milcom.”

If the Masoretic Text is followed, the sense is that David declared himself ruler over the Ammonites by removing the Ammonite king’s crown for himself. But if David removed the crown from the god Milcom, then David was showing that the Ammonite god had no power.

He found that it weighed a talent of gold: Since modern readers have no idea what kind of measure a talent is, this should be translated in such a way as to make it meaningful. A talent was the equivalent of about 34 kilograms (so Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje, Peregrino or 75 pounds (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version). Bible en français courant rounds this off to say “more than thirty kilos” (similarly La Bible du Semeur). Biblia Dios Habla Hoy and Nueva Versión Internacional are more precise with “thirty-three kilos,” and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente speak of “thirty-five kilos.” A rounded figure like thirty or thirty-five would probably sound more natural in many languages. The weight of this crown lends support to the belief that it was not taken from the head of a human being who would have had difficulty bearing such a weight for any length of time, but removed from the head of an idol.

And in it was a precious stone: Contemporary English Version renders a precious stone as “a valuable jewel.” While the Hebrew word for stone is singular, some versions take it as a collective noun, saying “precious stones” (New International Version, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Nueva Versión Internacional) or “gems” (New Living Translation; similarly New Century Version).

And it was placed on David’s head is literally “and it was on David’s head.” Scholars differ on whether the pronoun it refers to the crown or the jewel. For some versions this pronoun refers to the crown; for example, International Children’s Bible renders this whole clause as “The crown was put on David’s head” (similarly New International Version, New Living Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Nueva Versión Internacional). Logically, it seems difficult to imagine David wearing a 34 kilogram or 75 pound crown on his head for any length of time. If the reference is to the jewel, then the intended meaning is probably that David later or eventually had the jewel made a part of his crown. Bible en français courant makes this clear by rendering this clause and the previous one as “and it contained a precious stone, which was placed on the royal crown of David” (similarly Good News Translation, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje, Peregrino. Good News Translation similarly says “In it there was a jewel, which David took and put in his own crown” (similarly Contemporary English Version, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). New Jerusalem Bible seems to say that David wore just the jewel: “and in it was set a precious stone which went on David’s head instead” (similarly New American Bible, La Sainte Bible: La version Etablie par les moines de Maredsous, Osty-Trinquet).

And he brought forth the spoil of the city, a very great amount: The word spoil refers to whatever items the Israelite soldiers found in Rabbah and considered valuable. Some English versions use the technical term “booty” (New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible). For this whole clause New International Version has “He took a great quantity of plunder from the city” (similarly Nueva Versión Internacional), and New Century Version says “And David took many valuable things from the city.”

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 .

Then the LORD commanded the angel is literally “And the LORD said to the angel,” but the context allows for a stronger verb here such as “ordered.” The content of the command is left unstated, but the rest of the verse, which tells what the angel did, indicates indirectly what the LORD had said. Some versions make explicit what the LORD told the angel to do; for example, Good News Translation says “The LORD told the angel to put his sword away” (similarly Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has “Then the LORD told the angel to put his sword back into the sheath,” leaving unstated the implied information that the angel did so. Contemporary English Version is similar with “Then the LORD commanded the angel to put the sword away.”

And he put his sword back into its sheath: The word translated sheath is a loanword from the Persian language, which indicates that 1 Chronicles was written in the period after the Babylonian Exile. A sheath was a case or bag about the size and shape of a sword, used to cover and to carry the sword. For put his sword back into its sheath, Revised English Bible says “sheathed his sword.” New Century Version avoids the difficult word sheath by saying “put his sword back into its holder.” Others may prefer “put his sword back into its place” or simply “put away his sword.”

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 information from the second sentence in this verse to the end of the following verse interrupts the listing of names, so Good News Translation sets it off as parenthetical.

The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses: Amram’s sons are listed also in 1 Chr 6.3. Verses 18-20 list the sons of Kohath’s other three sons. Good News Translation attempts to show the relationship of this verse with the previous one by repeating the information that Amram was the oldest son of Kohath.

Aaron was set apart: See Exo 28.1. The Hebrew verb rendered was set apart expresses the idea of separation from other duties for a specific purpose (see, for example, Deut 10.8). Contemporary English Version and New Century Version use the verb “were chosen,” and God’s Word says “were designated.”

To consecrate the most holy things is literally “to consecrate him holy of holies.” The Hebrew verb rendered consecrate is very similar in meaning to the verb translated was set apart. But it has at its root the idea of being holy. For this reason it is sometimes rendered “sanctify” (King James Version, New American Standard Bible). It has also been translated “dedicate” (New Living Translation, Revised English Bible). This whole clause is difficult to understand. The pronoun “him” may be the subject of the verb “consecrate.” The sense is then that Aaron, with his descendants, was set apart to consecrate something. The Hebrew idiom “holy of holies” means “most holy.” When this phrase is used of the part of the Temple called “the Holy of Holies” or “the Most Holy Place,” the Hebrew has the definite article. When it is used without a definite article, as here, it refers to holy things used in connection with the Temple worship. Since this expression (“holy of holies”) is used elsewhere in the Old Testament to refer to the altar (Exo 29.37), the holy food of sacrifices (Lev 2.3), and the objects used in worship, including the Tabernacle (Exo 30.29), it is not clear which is intended here. Some translations take the words to consecrate the most holy things to mean that Aaron and his sons were set apart in order to be in charge of the sacred objects (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) or the Most Holy Place (Bible en français courant, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). With this understanding consecrate means they followed the proper rituals.

It is also possible that the pronoun “him” may function as the object of the verb “consecrate,” meaning that Aaron and his sons were consecrated (so New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, An American Translation, Moffatt, Nouvelle Bible Segond, La Bible du Semeur). New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, for example, says “Aaron was set apart, he and his sons, forever, to be consecrated as most holy.” New American Bible similarly says “Aaron was set apart to be consecrated as most holy, he and his sons forever.” However, if the reference here is to Aaron and his sons, then this is the only place in the Old Testament where this expression is used of people.

Regardless of which interpretation is followed, the meaning is not greatly different since Aaron and his sons had to be consecrated as most holy in order to sanctify the most holy things. In any case, Aaron and his descendants were set apart from the other Levites to serve as priests. However, Moses and his descendants remained Levites.

That he and his sons for ever should burn incense before the LORD: The phrase he and his sons for ever is better taken with the previous clause (so Good News Translation). For ever may also be expressed as “on a permanent basis” ( NET Bible). The Hebrew verb rendered burn incense can refer to burning incense or to offering sacrifices. Since the Old Testament often refers to sacrifices as “a pleasing odor to the LORD” (Lev 1.9), that may explain why this verb sometimes was used a a general term for offering sacrifices. Either “burn incense” or “offer sacrifices” is an acceptable translation here, although in light of instructions to Moses in Exo 30.7-8 and 34-38, “burn incense” is most likely the intended sense here. Translations include “make offerings” (New Revised Standard Version), “burn sacrifices” (Revised English Bible), “sacrifice” (Braun), and “burn incense” (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New Jerusalem Bible).

And minister to him may be rendered “to serve him” (Good News Translation; see the comments on 1 Chr 15.2).

And pronounce blessings in his name for ever: See the comments on 1 Chr 16.2. The Hebrew does not make explicit whom the priests were to bless. The implied object is “the people” (see Num 6.27), and this may be made explicit, as in Good News Translation (also Contemporary English Version, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch adds “the community” as the explicit object. In Deut 10.8 the entire tribe of Levi was given the task of blessing the people, but here only the priests are in view.

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 had as their appointed duty in their service to come into the house of the LORD: In Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation the demonstrative pronoun These refers back to the men previously mentioned. However, in Hebrew it points forward to the following noun rendered appointed duty, which is singular. So some interpreters change one vowel to make this noun plural. American Bible, for example, makes this correction and says “official classifications.” HALOT similarly suggests the noun may be read as plural and translated “duty groups.” It is not clear whether the word “assignments” in Good News Translation is based on a correction of the Hebrew vowel or is simply a use of the plural in English as the context requires. American Bible provides a good model for expressing the intended meaning of the first half of this verse as follows: “These were their official classifications for their ministry when they entered the house of Yahweh.”

According to the procedure established for them by Aaron is literally “as the decision for them by the hand of Aaron.” The passive expression in Revised Standard Version will have to be made active in certain languages. But since the agent is clearly expressed in the text, it may be easily transformed by saying “as Aaron decided for them” or “as Aaron made these rules for them” (similarly God’s Word).

The following translations of this verse may provide useful models:

• The groups kept to this order for their service in the temple of the Lord; they carried out their tasks according to the instructions passed on by their ancestor Aaron, who had received them from the Lord, the God of Israel himself [Bible en français courant].

• The Levites of each family worked in the temple in the order of this list. They performed their service according to the procedure established by their ancestor Aaron on the command of the Lord, God of Israel [Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente].

• In this way the shifts were organized for the service in the LORD’s temple, just as the LORD, God of Israel, had commanded by Aaron, their ancestor [Nueva Versión Internacional].

• This was the order in which they carried out their assigned responsibilities when they entered the LORD’s temple, according to the regulations given them by their ancestor Aaron, just as the LORD God of Israel had instructed him [ 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 .

Obed-edom’s came out for the south, and to his sons was allotted the storehouse: The verbs came out and was allotted are not in the Hebrew text. Revised Standard Version supplies them. New International Version repeats the subject and verb from the beginning of verse 14, saying “The lot for the South Gate fell to Obed-Edom, and the lot for the storehouse fell to his sons.”

Regarding for the south, see the comments on the previous verse. In this context his sons may refer specifically to the family of Obed-edom’s son Shemaiah (verses 6-7). The passive verb was allotted may be rendered “received” or “took” in some languages.

The Hebrew expression translated storehouse is literally “house of the stores.” The noun for “stores” occurs only three times in the Old Testament (also verse 17, and Neh 12.25). The most common understanding of this Hebrew noun is that it comes from a root that means “to gather.” However, some interpreters think that this word may be related to the Akkadian word asuppu, meaning “annex” (or, “outbuilding”), and this is the basis for the translation “vestibule” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) and “vestibules” (Klein). But a translation such as “vestibule” has no clear meaning since it is not clear in what building this vestibule was located. Good News Translation has the plural “storerooms” here and in verse 17 since the Hebrew noun for “stores” is plural. Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version have the singular “storehouse” both times, even though there were probably two storehouses. Rather than referring to storehouses in general, some scholars think that the Hebrew word here probably refers to the Temple treasuries mentioned in verse 20 (see also 1 Chr 28.12; 29.8). The exact function of these buildings is not known today. Revised English Bible says “gatehouse,” but a general translation such as “storehouses” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “storerooms” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) is recommended. Some older versions took the Hebrew noun for “stores” as a proper name. King James Version, for example, renders the storehouse as “the house of Assupim.” This interpretation is seldom followed today.

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 .

Ahithophel was succeeded by Jehoiada … and Abiathar: Ahithophel committed suicide according to 2 Sam 17.23. So although the Hebrew does not state here that Jehoiada and Abiathar succeeded Ahithophel because he died, Good News Translation makes that explicit by beginning with “After Ahithophel died” (similarly Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

Revised Standard Version‘s rendering of this sentence reflects the ambiguity of the Hebrew, which is literally “and after Ahitophel Jehoiada the son of Benaiah, and Abiathar.” Did Jehoiada and Abiathar succeed Ahithophel at the same time, or did Abiathar follow Jehoiada after a period of time? Contemporary English Version follows the second sense by saying “Jehoiada the son of Benaiah was the king’s advisor after Ahithophel, and later, Abiathar was his advisor.” However, it is more likely that they became advisers at the same time (so Good News Translation, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Nueva Versión Internacional). New Jerusalem Bible expresses this sense by saying “Jehoiada son of Benaiah and Abiathar succeeded Ahitophel,” but this rendering sounds as if Benaiah and Abiathar were both parents of Jehoiada. Translations should be clear that Jehoiada was not the son of Abiathar also. New International Version, for example, says “Ahithophel was succeeded by Jehoiada son of Benaiah and by Abiathar.”

According to the Masoretic Text, both Jehoiada and Abiathar were advisers to King David. Since Abiathar was a priest, some interpreters think that a scribe accidently omitted the words “his priest,” so they correct and Abiathar to read “and his priest was Abiathar” (Knoppers). Einheitsübersetzung says “Abiathar was priest,” and then states in a footnote that this rendering is “expanded by analogy.” However, there is no textual support for such a correction.

Joab was commander of the king’s army: See 1 Chr 11.6 and 18.5.

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 now we thank thee, our God: And now renders the common Hebrew conjunction plus an adverb that usually has a temporal sense. But this expression is probably a logical connector in this context. For this reason New American Bible translates it “Therefore,” and Bible en français courant has “This is why.” Even New American Standard Bible has “Now therefore.”

And praise thy glorious name: The Hebrew verb here is usually rendered praise. It has the same sense here as the one rendered “blessed” in verse 10 (see the comments there). Thy glorious name is literally “the name of your splendor” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). To praise the name of someone is to praise that person. But because the idea of praising the name of God is so common in the Old Testament, most versions retain the expression. However, Contemporary English Version has simply “We … praise you.” But this leaves out the idea contained in the word glorious. A better rendering is “and we praise you because you are so glorious.”

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 .

This verse is the last verse of chapter one in the Masoretic Text, that is, it is verse 18 of chapter one in the Masoretic Text. So in some versions 2.1 in Revised Standard Version is numbered 1.18 (so New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Bible en français courant, La Bible du Semeur, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

Now Solomon purposed to build a temple: Now translates the common Hebrew conjunction, which may be omitted in translation since the beginning of a new section serves the same purpose. Good News Translation again identifies Solomon as king at the beginning of a new section. Purposed is literally “said.” The Hebrew verb here may be understood two different ways, depending on whether Solomon (1) “said to himself” or (2) “said to others.” If the first interpretation is followed, the Hebrew may be rendered “said in his heart,” “said to himself,” “decided” (New Revised Standard Version, Bible en français courant), “purposed” (English Standard Version), or “resolved” (Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). But since Solomon had long known that he was going to build a Temple for Yahweh (1 Chr 22.6-16; 28.11-19), the word “decided” may incorrectly suggest that he just now made the decision to build the Temple. If the second interpretation is followed, the Hebrew may be translated “gave orders” (New International Version, God’s Word) or “ordered” ( NET Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Osty-Trinquet). Either interpretation is possible and acceptable here. However, the first one seems somewhat more likely.

A temple is literally “a house” (King James Version, NASB, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible). But the context clearly indicates that the reference is to the Temple of Yahweh.

For the name of the LORD: It is not Yahweh but literally his name that will dwell in the Most Holy Place in the Temple. But his name refers to the full presence of God in this cultic context. Some other ways that this phrase has been translated are “as a place to worship the LORD” (New Century Version), “consecrated to the Lord” (Bible en français courant), “in honor of the LORD” (Parole de Vie), and simply “for the LORD.”

And a royal palace for himself is literally “and a house for his kingship.” The same Hebrew word for “house” is used for both the palace where Solomon would live and for the Temple.

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 .