Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 30 May 2021
Reading
of the NAW version of the passage from v.17: Then Saul said to
David, “Look at my oldest daughter Merab; I will give her to
you to be your wife. Just be an army guy for me, and fight Yahweh’s
battles.” Meanwhile, Saul said, “It won’t be my
hand that’s against him; rather, let hand of the Philistines
be against him!” But David said to Saul, “Who am I? And
what are the lives of the family of my father in Israel that I
should become an in-law to the king?” But when it was time to
give Merab the daughter of Saul to David, she instead was given to
Adriel the Mecholatite to be his wife.
Now, Saul’s
daughter Michal loved David, and {this was} related to Saul, and
{it} was right in his eyes. So Saul said, “I shall give her to
him, and she will become a snare for him while the hand of the
Philistines is against him!” And Saul said to David, “For
a second time you may become an in-law to me today!” Then Saul
commanded his servants, “Speak to David on the sly, saying,
‘See, the king is delighted with you, and all his servants
love you, so make yourself an in-law to the king!’” So
Saul’s servants spoke these words in David’s ears, but
David said, “Is it insignificant in y’all’s eyes
to be an in-law with the king? I am but a poor man and
insignificant.” So Saul’s servants related it to him
saying, “David spoke along the lines of these words...”
Then Saul said, “Speak thus to David, ‘There would be
nothing more delightful to the king for a dowry than a hundred
Philistine foreskins – to get revenge on the king’s
enemies!” (Now, this was Saul’s scheme to cause David to
fall by the hand of Philistines.) Well, his servants related these
words to David, and the deal was right in the eyes of David to
become an in-law to the king, and the time-limits had not been
surpassed, so David got up and went, and he struck down 200 men
among the Philistines. Then {he} brought their foreskins, and he and
his men gave them in fulfillment to the king in order he might
become an in-law to the king. So Saul gave his daughter Michael to
him to be his wife.
When Saul saw and understood that Yahweh
was with David and that Michal-bat-Shaul loved him, Saul grew in
fear from the presence of David still more, so Saul was an enemy to
David all his days. Still, the Philistine army-officers came out,
but as often as they came out, David was more prudent in execution
than all of Saul’s servants, so his name became very popular.
Saul says, “Look at my oldest daughter Merab; I will give her to you to be your wife. Just be an army guy for me, and fight Yahweh’s battles...”
Now, all the other occurances in the Bible of this Hebrew phrase ben chaiyl (“brave/valiant man”) seem to indicate a task force, usually of soldiers: Deut. 3:18 (militia), Judges 18:2 (spies), Judges 21:10 (militia), 1 Samuel 14:52 (army draft), 2 Sam. 13:28 and 1 Kings 1:52 (revolutionaries in a coup)... 2 Kings 2:16 (a search party), 1 Chronicles 5:18 (qualifications for being in the army), 1 Chronicles 8:40 (archers), and so forth.
I think1 Saul is trying to cut a deal with David to drop his claim to the throne: “I’ll give you my daughter and make you related to the king as long as you will abandon hopes of becoming king and just be a good army-guy for me.” Die in battle and be remembered as a great warrior, and forget your anointing as king. That is Saul’s plan for David’s life.
Understood in that light, it’s no wonder David declined. “God didn’t call me to be a RELATIVE of the king; God had me anointed to BE king.”
But without any current prospects of becoming king, this must have been a real act of faith for David to pass on such an offer of job security and privilege.
Another thing to note is that Saul is adding on to the conditions for marrying his daughter. In the face-off against Goliath he had already promised his daughter; now he is backpedaling and saying, “Well, I’m not giving her to you just yet, David, but if you keep on performing well in battles, then, some time in the future, maybe I will let you marry her. (Tsumura)
The injustice of it wasn’t lost on David, however, David didn’t use hard words in response to his King.
Solomon would later write down David’s philosophy as a proverb: “A soft answer turns away wrath.” (Prov. 15:1a, NKJV)
“Who am I,” David asks, “that I should become a close relative to the king?”
The term “son-in-law” is a little more specific than the Hebrew word denotes. The same Hebrew word is translated "bridegroom" in several other passages, “father-in-law” in Ex. 18:5, “son-in-law” in Judges 15:6, and refers to daughters-in-law in Gen. 34:9 and Deut. 7:3, so the common theme is that they’re all close relatives by marriage.
My favorite commentator on 1 Samuel, the 16th century Puritan Andrew Willett wrote, “David... considereth the great dignitie, which was now offered him, partly his owne tenuitie and meane parentage, and so in respect of himself, without any dissimulation, he confesseth himself unmeet and unworthie: and this lowly and humble mind he still caried toward Saul” ~Andrew Willett
Remember, David’s great-grandmother wasn’t even a Jew. (Ruth was a Moabite.) David meekly says, “Wow, that would be a great honor, O king, but surely it’s not my place.”
“[N]either on personal grounds, nor on account of his social standing, nor because of his lineage, could he make the slightest pretension to the honour of becoming the son-in-law of the king.” ~Keil & Delitzsch
Now, Saul, at this point, could have said, “Well, I promised my daughter to whomever would take on the challenge with Goliath and best him. And, David, You’re my best soldier. So really, I’d be honored to have such a man of faith and skill and bravery as my son-in-law! And with all the other single girls in the country swooning over you, Merob counts herself lucky to have the first chance to beat them all out for your affections! What do you say?!”
But instead Saul says…. nothing! He leaves David hanging2, and then holds a wedding to marry Merob off to an obscure man named Adriel the Meholathite.
Presumably, “Meholathite” means he was from Abel Mehulla on the west bank of the Jordan River.
The only other place Adriel is mentioned is 2 Samuel 21:8, where it says that his five sons were hanged for violating a treaty.
Poor Merob.
Well, some time later, it comes to King Saul’s attention that his second daughter Michal likes David.
We are not told how her love was demonstrated, but since v.20 says that Saul heard about it from third parties, it seems likely that maidservants in the palace had engaged in small talk with her and had heard her comment about how brave and handsome – and eligible – David was.
Notice that when Saul offered Michal to be engaged to David, then on that day (“today”) David would become his "son-in-law;" they treated engagement more seriously than we do now.
Saul’s intent is revealed in v.21: he hopes she will be a “snare” to him. He wants David killed.
Saul may have purposefully snubbed David by giving Merob to another man in order to make David angry, hoping that David would do something stupid while he was angry that Saul could use against him. (Henry, Jamieson)
Perhaps Saul thought Michal would conspire together with him against David after the marriage.
Perhaps David was referring to Saul when he penned the words in Ps. 55:20-21: “He has put forth his hands against those who were at peace with him; He has broken his covenant. The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, But war was in his heart; His words were softer than oil, Yet they were drawn swords.” (NKJV, M. Henry)
David also wrote about snares in several of his psalms:
Psalm 64 “Hear my voice, O God... Hide me from the secret plots of the wicked… They encourage themselves in an evil matter; They talk of laying snares secretly; They say, "Who will see them?" They devise iniquities: "We have perfected a shrewd scheme." Both the inward thought and the heart of man are deep. But God shall shoot at them with an arrow; Suddenly they shall be wounded. So He will make them stumble over their own tongue... The righteous shall be glad in the LORD, and trust in Him. And all the upright in heart shall glory.” (NKJV)
Psalm 140 “Deliver me, O LORD, from evil men; Preserve me from violent men, Who plan evil things in their hearts. Who have purposed to make my steps stumble. The proud have hidden a snare for me, and cords; They have spread a net by the wayside; They have set traps for me. Selah I said to the LORD: ‘You are my God; Hear the voice of my supplications, O LORD... Do not grant, O LORD, the desires of the wicked; Do not further his wicked scheme, Lest they be exalted.’ ...I know that the LORD will maintain The cause of the afflicted, And justice for the poor. Surely the righteous shall give thanks to Your name; The upright shall dwell in Your presence.” (NKJV)
Psalm 141 “...Set a guard, O LORD, over my mouth; Keep watch over the door of my lips. Do not incline my heart to any evil thing, To practice wicked works With men who work iniquity... In You I take refuge; Do not leave my soul destitute. Keep me from the snares they have laid for me, And from the traps of the workers of iniquity. Let the wicked fall into their own nets, While I escape safely.” (NKJV)
We can look back on history from our vantage point and see that wicked Saul indeed fell into his own net. He encouraged David to fight Philistines, hoping David would be killed in battle, but it was Saul who was killed instead in battle with Philistines.
David had already been snubbed once by Saul offering a daughter and then marrying her off to someone else. He might have thought, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” But I think there was more going on in his mind.
David used the same Hebrew word to describe himself and to describe what the servants thought of him marrying royalty, and the KJV brings this over into English commendably: “Is it a light thing… and I am lightly esteemed,” but most English translations use two different words:
NASB = “trivial… lightly esteemed,”
NIV = “small matter… little known," and
the ESV followed the Greek Septuagint with “Is it a little thing… I am of no reputation.”
Now, in one sense, David is being humble. It is indeed a big deal to be the civil magistrate over a nation.
We should not treat our President with disrespect and say careless, critical things about him or call him names, even if we think he is foolish.
We also respect our President with our actions: we can’t just call him up on the phone or drop in on him at the White House and be chummy with him.
It is proper to treat authority with respect and not to put yourself arrogantly forward as though you were an equal.
Jesus told His disciples not to grab the seats next to the guests or honor, but to take the lower seats at the table. If the head honchos want you next to them, they’ll invite you to do so.3
There is, however, a flip side to David’s statement, which may be an indirect rebuke to Saul4. Just as it is inappropriate to take the privileges of a nobleman if you are not a nobleman, so also it is inappropriate for a king to treat the successor to his throne as though he were insignificant. David had been anointed king and announced (albeit indirectly) by the Prophet Samuel to King Saul, but Saul was doing his best to antagonize David.
He tried to kill David with a spear,
he sent David out of his presence,
he wouldn’t communicate directly with him man-to-man but communicated through messengers instead,
he broke his word to David about his first daughter,
and he had he tried to get David to accept marriage to a princess and a military career as a trade-off for being the next king.
So David’s reply is wisely humble, but it still points out that Saul had no integrity in treating David as though he were insignificant on the one hand, and then inviting him to marry into the royal family on the other hand.
The wording in v.26 connotes a process of negotiation, at the end of which the two parties reach an agreement that both are happy with.
Back up in v. 20, Saul had already given his assent that he would be “pleased” to marry Michal off to David,
but David didn’t feel he could give his assent to the arrangement at first. It appears that one of his greatest concerns was that, if protocol demanded giving King Saul a truckload of bread and wine and a goat when offering his services as a musician back in chapter 16 (v.20), how much more would he have to give to King Saul to walk off with his daughter? Such a dowry was above his pay-grade; he couldn’t even consider it.
He says, “I am a poor man…” At least seven5 older brothers would have had to die off before David could have inherited his dad’s farm, so there was no big family estate coming to him that he could use in paying a dowry fit for a princess, and, of course, he didn’t want to offend his King or his beloved by offering a paltry bride-price that said, “You’re not important.”
I remember when Pastor Edward Kasaijah came over from Uganda and preached at one of our worship services several years ago, and I introduced him to my children. We were really tickled by his response when he met my eldest daughter. He told me, “She is worth a large dowry – I’d say about ten cows!” (For some reason, I haven’t gotten Brian to give me any cows yet for her!)
But a dowry is a sensible tradition that proves to the gal’s father that this young man can make money and provide for a family, and, in the Hebrew culture, it was given to the bride to use however she wished. It could be invested, and was often saved in order to provide something to live off in case her husband died young.
Abraham’s servant gave gold rings and bracelets to Rebekah when he asked for her hand in marriage to Isaac (Gen; 24:22).
And when the Hivite prince Shechem asked Jacob for his daughter Dinah’s hand in marriage he said, “Let me find favour in your eyes, and I will give whatsoever you appoint me.” (Gen. 34.11)
My understanding is that no dowry was required with Merob because the slaying of Goliath was the bride-price already fulfilled by David6, but since he passed her up, he would have to pay a dowry for Michael, and he didn’t think he could afford it.
So Saul’s message to David that a hundred Philistine foreskins would serve as a bride-price suddenly put this princess’ dowry within the range of possibility for David. He didn’t have money, and he didn’t have a farm to produce anything to give as gifts, but he could fight, and there were plenty of Philistines he could fight with.
The challenge was: could he manage to kill 100 enemies of the state without plunging the country into another war or getting killed himself?7
Scripture reveals that Saul was hoping that this would get David killed, but Saul had designed the offer to be something that David couldn’t resist.
And David took the bait. David closed the negotiations started in v.20 by giving his own stamp of approval in v.26. “The price is ‘right;’ I’m ‘pleased.’ We’ve got a deal.”
Now, there were apparently time limits which were traditionally part of contractual negotiations in their culture, so an offer of an arranged marriage could have included an expiration date, as it were, in the offer. (Genesis 29:21 and Esther 2:12 also use this same Hebrew phrase about “days” being “fulfilled” in relation to marriage arrangements.) So there was a clock ticking on Saul’s offers of his daughters’ hands in marriage.
The clock had run out on Saul’s offer of Merob,
but there was still enough time with Saul’s offer concerning Michal for David to conduct attacks on the Philistines and deliver the bride-price before the time limit on Saul’s offer expired.
It would have been a grand tale to hear how David (and his thousand soldiers over whom Saul had just put him in command in v.13) went out and struck down 200 Philistines, but the focus of the Biblical account here is on the negotiations between Saul and David, not on David’s military exploits.
But somehow David managed to kill twice as many enemies as the King had commissioned him for, do it within the timeframe allotted, and then show up in the hilltop palace at Gibeah with these 200 pieces of skin hacked off of the Philistines he had killed.
The subject of the Hebrew verb for “gave/presented” is plural because it was a tradition for the bridegroom’s friends to deliver the dowry. (Kimchi)
2 Sam. 3:14 indicates that only 100 were the actual dowry, so the other 100 must have served some other purpose:
Perhaps to put it beyond question that he had fulfilled the agreement,
and perhaps to show his zeal for God and country - and his respect for Saul and Michal.
I have to wonder what Michal thought of this dowry. Matthew Henry opined (as only he could do), “[W]e may suppose it uneasy to Michal...”
“Disgustingly gross” might be the description I’d use, but it no doubt became the talk of the town!
Saul had no way to weasel out of this without loosing face.
Confronted with this overwhelming evidence that David was a warrior worth any expense to keep in his army,
and provided with such a generous fulfillment of the dowry agreed upon,
and in the presence of all the servants who had carried the messages back and forth between David and Saul and were witnesses to the agreement,
Saul gave Michal in marriage to David8.
And Saul’s observation in v.28 that Michal “loved” David may indicate that, since she didn’t share Saul’s hatred toward David, Saul couldn’t get her to trip David up as he had hoped. (Gill)
And so our chapter concludes with...
Once again, we see God’s sovereignty in “working all things together for good for those who love Him” (Rom. 8:28):
Andrew Willett commented that, “[T]hrough God's goodness, all things fell out contrary to Saul's expectation: he thought to make his daughter a snare unto him, who afterward was a means to deliver him: and he exposeth David to the rage of the Philistims, thinking thereby to make an end of him; whereas, by the just judgement of God, Saul fell into the hand of the Philistines, but David escaped: nay, he was preserved in their country from Saul.”
And, quoting Psalm 76:10, Mattthew Henry commented that, “God ‘makes even the wrath of man to praise’ Him, and serves His designs of kindness to his own people by it.”
In addition to being reminded of God’s sovereignty, we can also take inspiration from David’s example of relating to a proud and dangerous man in authority over him. We live in dangerous times as godlessness and wickedness increase in our society. Paul warned in 2 Timothy 3:13 “...evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse” (NKJV) How should we relate to employers and political leaders who are hostile toward us? A comprehensive answer would take far more time and space than can be offered now, but let me highlight three things David did in 1 Samuel 18 which we can imitate:
He was gracious and humble.
Pride will never win favor of sinners. No matter that David was a highly-celebrated warrior, or that the Lord had anointed him for kingship. When Saul offered him his daughter, David answered humbly and graciously, "Who am I to marry the king's daughter? I'm not an important person!" David calls himself "lightly esteemed" to blow off the fact that people were lauding his military victories over Saul's (v.7).
Jesus said in Matthew 23:11-12 “But the greater one among you will be the servant among you, and whoever will exalt himself will be humbled, yet whoever will humble himself will be exalted.” Humble yourself.
And when the king treated him unjustly, David humbly gave soft answers and patiently waited on God to vindicate him.
“It well becomes us, however God has advanced us, always to have low thoughts of ourselves… (Phil. 2:5-8) And, if David thus magnified the honour of being son-in-law to the king, how should we magnify the honour of being sons (not ‘in law,’ but in gospel) to the King of kings! ‘Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed upon us!’ (1 John 3:1)” ~M. Henry Humbly rejoice that your names are written in heaven and don’t put yourself forward on earth.
David behaved wisely and obeyed God.
In Psalm 101:2a David wrote: “I will behave wisely in a perfect way...” (NKJV)
He knew how much of a threat he was to Saul and what Saul was thinking, so he lit out when Saul tried to skewer him!
He knew better than to greedily accept the status of son-in-law to the king. He even did his best at his post so that Saul would thereby prosper.
And he did not bellyache when Saul broke his promise to David and gave his first daughter to Adriel instead.
“Those that hope to rule must first learn to obey,” wrote Matthew Henry in his commentary on this passage. “[T]he way to be both feared and loved, feared by those to whom we would wish to be a terror and loved by those to whom we would wish to be a delight, is to behave ourselves wisely.”
Rom. 13:1-7 “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God... Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same... 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience' sake... 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” (NKJV)
When authorities are hostile, be sure you are “wise as serpents but harmless as doves” as Jesus instructed in Matt. 10:16.
And if you need wisdom, ask God for it; He promises in James 1:5 “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him.” (NKJV)
Show all the honor and respect and obedience you can and find every occasion to do good for your community, and hone your skills to excellence so that whatever you do, you do well, as unto the Lord. (Col. 3:23)
And, in addition to being humble and respectfully obedient, wisely avoid the things that typically drag people down.
David avoided the snares
David did not get snared by a woman as Saul was hoping he would. David didn't lose his wits when he liked Michal and was offered her hand in marriage. David didn’t succomb to the allure of power and prestiege that Saul offered him. He didn’t let his popularity go to his head. He didn’t wallow in self-pity at the injustices done to him and loose sight of his mission in life. He didn’t drown his woes in liquor or drugs - or sideline himself with endless entertainment or gaming. He didn’t let anger cloud his judgment and lead him into saying or doing things he would regret.
History tells us that all these things (anger, entertainment, alcohol, self-pity, popularity, sex, power, money) are potentially-deadly snares that must be treated with utmost caution and moderation.
"...All things are permissible to me,” wrote Paul in 1 Cor. 6:12-14, “but it's not going to be me [who] is put under the authority of something. ‘Foods to the stomach and the stomach to foods,’ but God will put out of commission both it and them, and the body is not to sexual immorality, but rather to the Lord – and the Lord to the body. And God both raised up the Lord, and will raise up us through His power.” (NAW)
Don’t allow anything on this earth to take control of you; stay true to God and His will for your life. Steer wide of the temptations that could take you down, and God will give you success. David did it “because God was with him,” and you can too!
Septuagint |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
[17 And Saul said to David, Behold my elder daughter Merob, I will give her to thee to wife, only be thou to me a mighty man and fight the wars of the Lord. And Saul said, Let not my hand be upon him, but the hand of the Philistines shall be upon him.] |
17 And Saul said to David: Behold my elder daughter Merob, her will I give thee to wife: only be X X a valiant man, and fight the battles of the Lord. Now Saul said [within himself]: Let not my hand be upon him, but let the hands of the Philistines be upon him. |
17 And Saul said to David, BeholdC my elder daughter Merab, her will I give thee to wife: only be thou valiant for me, and fight the LORD'S battles. For Saul said, Let not mine hand be uponD him, but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him. |
17 Then Saul said to David, “Look at my oldest daughter Merab; I will give her to you to be your wife. Just be an army guy for me, and fight Yahweh’s battles.” Meanwhile, Saul said, “It won’t be my hand that’s against him; rather, let hand of the Philistines be against him!” |
17 וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-דָּוִד הִנֵּה בִתִּי הַגְּדוֹלָה מֵרַב אֹתָהּ אֶתֶּןE-לְךָ לְאִשָּׁה אַךְ הֱיֵה- לִּי לְבֶן-חַיִלF וְהִלָּחֵם מִלְחֲמוֹת יְהוָה וְשָׁאוּל אָמַר אַל-תְּהִי יָדִי בּוֹ וּתְהִי-בוֹ יַד-פְּלִשְׁתִּים: ס |
|
|
[18
And David said to Saul, Who am I, and what is |
18 And David said to Saul: Who am I, or what is my life, [orG] my father's family in Israel, that I should be son in law of the king? |
18 And David said unto Saul, Who am I? and what is my lifeH, or my father's familyI in Israel, that I should be son in law to the king? |
18 But David said to Saul, “Who am I? And what are the lives of the family of my father in Israel that I should become an in-law to the king?” |
18 וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל-שָׁאוּל מִי אָנֹכִי וּמִי חַיַּי מִשְׁפַּחַת אָבִי בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי-אֶהְיֶה חָתָןJ לַמֶּלֶךְ: |
|
[19 But it came to pass at the time [when] Merob Saul’s daughter [should have been] given to David, that she was given to Israel the Mothulathite to wife.] |
19 And it came to pass at the time [when] Merob, the daughter of Saul, [should have been] given to David, that she was given to Hadriel, the Molathite, to wife. |
19 But it came to pass at the time [when] Merab Saul's daughter [should have been] given to David, that she was given unto Adriel the Meholathite toK wife. |
19 But when it was time to give Merab the daughter of Saul to David, she instead was given to Adriel the Mecholatite to be his wife. |
19 וַיְהִי בְּעֵת תֵּת אֶת-מֵרַב בַּת-שָׁאוּל לְדָוִד וְהִיא נִתְּנָה לְעַדְרִיאֵלL הַמְּחֹלָתִי לְאִשָּׁה: |
20
Καὶ ἠγάπησεν
Μελχολ ἡ θυγάτηρ
Σαουλ τὸν Δαυιδ,
καὶ ἀπηγγέλ |
20
And Melchol the daughter of Saul loved David; and |
20
But Michol, the [other]
daughter of Saul, loved David. And |
20 And Michal Saul's daughter loved David: and they told Saul, and the thing pleasedN X X him. |
20 Now, Saul’s daughter Michal loved David, and {this was} related to Saul, and {it} was right in his eyes. |
20 וַתֶּאֱהַב מִיכַל בַּת-שָׁאוּל אֶת-דָּוִד וַיַּגִּדוּ לְשָׁאוּל וַיִּשַׁר הַדָּבָרO בְּעֵינָיו: |
21
καὶ εἶπεν Σαουλ
Δώσω αὐτὴν αὐτῷ,
καὶ ἔσται αὐτῷ
εἰς σκάνδαλον.
καὶ ἦν ἐπὶ |
21
And Saul said, I will give her to him, and she shall be a
stumbling-block to him. Now the hand of the Philistines was
against
|
21 And Saul said: I will give her to him, that she may be a stumblingblock to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be upon him. And Saul said to David: In two things thou shalt be my son in law this day. |
21 And Saul saidQ, I will give him her, that she may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him. Wherefore Saul said to David, Thou shalt this dayR be my son in law in the one of the twainS. |
21 So Saul said, “I shall give her to him, and she will become a snare for him while the hand of the Philistines is against him!” And Saul said to David, “For a second time you may become an in-law to me today!” |
21 וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶתְּנֶנָּה לּוֹ וּתְהִי-לוֹ לְמוֹקֵשׁ וּתְהִי-בוֹ יַד- פְּלִשְׁתִּים וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל-דָּוִד בִּשְׁתַּיִםT תִּתְחַתֵּן בִּי הַיּוֹם: |
22
καὶ ἐνετείλατο
Σαουλ τοῖς
|
22
And Saul charged X his [servants, saying,] Speak ye privately
to David, saying, Behold, the king delights in thee, and all his
servants love thee, and do |
22
And Saul commanded his servants |
22 And Saul commanded his servants, saying, CommuneW with David secretlyX, and say, Behold, the king hath delight in thee, and all his servants love thee: now therefore be the king's son in law. |
22 Then Saul commanded his servants, “Speak to David on the sly, saying, ‘See, the king is delighted with you, and all his servants love you, so make yourself an in-law to the king!’” |
22 וַיְצַו שָׁאוּל אֶת-עֲבָדָוY דַּבְּרוּ אֶל-דָּוִד בַּלָּט לֵאמֹר הִנֵּה חָפֵץ בְּךָ הַמֶּלֶךְ וְכָל-עֲבָדָיו אֲהֵבוּךָ וְעַתָּה הִתְחַתֵּן בַּמֶּלֶךְ: |
23 καὶ ἐλάλησαν οἱ παῖδες Σαουλ εἰς τὰ ὦτα Δαυιδ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ Εἰ κοῦφονZ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ὑμῶν ἐπιγαμβρεῦσαι βασιλεῖ; κἀγὼ ἀνὴρ ταπεινὸςAA καὶ οὐχὶ ἔνδοξοςAB. |
23 And the servants of Saul spoke these words in the ears of David; and David said, Is it a light thing in your eyes to become son-in-law to the king? Whereas I am an humble man, an not honourable? |
23 And the servants of Saul spoke [all] these words in the ear of David. And David said: Doth it [seem] to you X a small matter to be the king's son in law? But I am a poor man, and of small ability. |
23 And Saul's servants spake those words in the ears of David. And David said, [Seemeth] it to you X a light thing to be a king's son in law, seeing that I am a poor man, and lightly esteemed?AC |
23 So Saul’s servants spoke these words in David’s ears, but David said, “Is it insignificant in y’all’s eyes to be an in-law with the king? I am but a poor man and insignificant.” |
23 וַיְדַבְּרוּ עַבְדֵי שָׁאוּל בְּאָזְנֵי דָוִד אֶת-הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד הַנְקַלָּהAD בְעֵינֵיכֶם הִתְחַתֵּן בַּמֶּלֶךְ וְאָנֹכִי אִישׁ-רָשׁ וְנִקְלֶה: |
24 καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν οἱ παῖδες Σαουλ αὐτῷ X κατὰ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, [ἃ] ἐλάλησεν Δαυιδ. |
24 And the servants of Saul reported to him X according to these words, [which] David spoke. |
24 And the servants of Saul told him, saying: Such words as these hath David spoken. |
24 And the servants of Saul told him, saying, On this mannerXAE spake David. |
24 So Saul’s servants related it to him saying, “David spoke along the lines of these words...” |
24 וַיַּגִּדוּ עַבְדֵי שָׁאוּל לוֹ לֵאמֹר כַּדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה דִּבֶּר דָּוִד: פ |
25 καὶ εἶπεν Σαουλ Τάδε ἐρεῖτε τῷ Δαυιδ Οὐ βούλεται ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐν δόματι ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ἐν ἑκατὸν ἀκροβυστίαις ἀλλοφύλων ἐκδικῆσαι εἰς ἐχθροὺς τοῦ βασιλέως· καὶ Σαουλ ἐλογίσατο αὐτὸν ἐμβαλεῖν εἰς χεῖρας τῶν ἀλλοφύλων. |
25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye speak to David, The king wants no gift but a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to avenge himself on the kings enemies. Now Saul thought to cast him into the hands of the Philistines. |
25
And Saul said: Speak thus to David: The king desireth not any
dowry,
but only a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of
the king's enemies. Now Saul thought to |
25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowryAF, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. |
25 Then Saul said, “Speak thus to David, ‘There would be nothing more delightful to the king for a dowry than a hundred Philistine foreskins – to get revenge on the king’s enemies!” (Now, this was Saul’s scheme to cause David to fall by the hand of Philistines.) |
25 וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל כֹּה-תֹאמְרוּ לְדָוִד אֵין-חֵפֶץ לַמֶּלֶךְ בְּמֹהַר כִּי בְּמֵאָה עָרְלוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים לְהִנָּקֵם בְּאֹיְבֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וְשָׁאוּל חָשַׁב לְהַפִּיל אֶת-דָּוִד בְּיַד-פְּלִשְׁתִּים: |
26 καὶ ἀπαγγέλλουσιν οἱ παῖδες Σαουλ τῷ Δαυιδ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, καὶ εὐθύνθη ὁ λόγος ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς Δαυιδ ἐπιγαμβρεῦσαι τῷ βασιλεῖ.XXXXXAG |
26 And the servants of Saul report these words to David, and X X X David was well pleased to become the son-in-law to the king. X X X X X |
26
And when his servants had told David theX
words [that
Saul had said],
the word was pleasing
in the eyes of David to be the king's son in law. 27
And |
26
And when his servants told David these words, |
26 Well, his servants related these words to David, and the deal was right in the eyes of David to become an in-law to the king, and the time-limits had not been surpassed, |
26 וַיַּגִּדוּ עֲבָדָיו לְדָוִד אֶת-הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיִּשַׁר הַדָּבָר בְּעֵינֵי דָוִד לְהִתְחַתֵּן בַּמֶּלֶךְ וְלֹא מָלְאוּ הַיָּמִיםAH: |
27 καὶ ἀνέστη Δαυιδ καὶ ἐπορεύθη αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐπάταξεν ἐν τοῖς ἀλλοφύλοις ἑκατὸνXAI ἄνδρας 27b καὶ ἀνήνεγκεν X τὰς ἀκροβυστίας αὐτῶν X X XAJ τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ ἐπιγαμβρεύεται τῷ βασιλεῖ, καὶ XAK δίδωσιν αὐτῷ τὴν Μελχολ θυγατέρα αὐτοῦ αὐτῷ εἰς γυναῖκα. |
27
And David arose, and went, he and his men, and smote among the
Philistines |
X
David rose up, and went X
with
the men [that
were under]
him, and he slew of the Philistines
200
men, |
27
Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the
Philistines two hundred men; |
27
so
David got up and went, and he struck down 200 men among the
Philistines. |
27
וַיָּקָם
דָּוִד וַיֵּלֶךְ
הוּא וַאֲנָשָׁיו
וַיַּךְ בַּפְּלִשְׁתִּים
מָאתַיִם אִישׁ |
28
καὶ εἶδενAP
Σαουλ X X ὅτι
κύριος μετὰ
Δαυιδ καὶ |
28
And Saul saw X X that the Lord was with David, and that |
28 And Saul saw, and understood that the Lord was with David. And Michol, the daughter of Saul, loved him. |
28 And Saul saw and knew that the LORD was with David, and that Michal Saul's daughter loved him. |
28 When Saul saw and understood that Yahweh was with David and that Michal-bat-Saul loved him, |
28 וַיַּרְא שָׁאוּל וַיֵּדַע כִּי יְהוָה עִם-דָּוִד וּמִיכַל בַּת-שָׁאוּל אֲהֵבַתְהוּ: |
29 καὶ προσέθετο X εὐλαβεῖσθαι ἀπὸ Δαυιδ ἔτι. [kai egeneto Saoul ecqrainwn ton Dauid pasaV taV hmeraV] |
29
And |
29 And Saul began to fear David more: and Saul became David's enemy continually. |
29 And Saul was yet the more afraid of David; and Saul became David's enemy continually. |
29 Saul grew in fear from the presence of David still more, so Saul was an enemy to David all his days. |
29 וַיֹּאסֶףAR שָׁאוּל לֵרֹא מִפְּנֵי דָוִד עוֹד וַיְהִי שָׁאוּל אֹיֵב אֶת-דָּוִד כָּל-הַיָּמִים: ס |
[30 kai exhlqon oi arconteV twn allofulwn kai egeneto af’ ikanou thV exodou autwn, kai Dauid sunhken para pantaV touV doulouV Saoul kai etimhqh to onoma autou sfodra.] |
[30 And the chiefs of the Philistines went forth, and it came to pass that from the sufficiency of their expedition David acted wisely above all the servants of Saul; and his name was honoured exceedingly.] |
30
And the princes of the Philistines went forth: and from the
|
30
Then the princesAS
of the Philistines
went forthAT:
and it came to pass, |
30 Still, the Philistine army-officers came out, but as often as they came out, David was more prudent in execution than all of Saul’s servants, so his name became very popular. |
30 וַיֵּצְאוּ שָׂרֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים וַיְהִי מִדֵּי צֵאתָם שָׂכַלAX דָּוִד מִכֹּל עַבְדֵי שָׁאוּל וַיִּיקַר שְׁמוֹ מְאֹד: ס |
1 Full disclosure, I did not find any other commentator who interpreted Saul’s words this way.
2Another possible interpretation is that Merob and David didn’t have mutual interest in each other, so they let the marriage prospect die quietly.
3"When you are invited by anyone to a wedding feast, do not sit down in the best place, lest one more honorable than you be invited by him; and he who invited you and him come and say to you, 'Give place to this man,' and then you begin with shame to take the lowest place. But when you are invited, go and sit down in the lowest place, so that when he who invited you comes he may say to you, 'Friend, go up higher.' Then you will have glory in the presence of those who sit at the table with you. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." Luke 14:8-11 NKJV
4 Gill agreed with me on this.
5 Depending on whether you count David among the 8 sons of Jesse as I do, or whether you count 8 sons before David.
6“[M]ost interpreters understand it, that he was obliged to this by promise, on account of David's slaying Goliath (1Sam. 17:25), but Abarbinel is of another mind...” ~John Gill, 1766 AD. In 1891, Keil & Delitzsch reiterated this.
7Josephus seems to have gone a bit overboard with his poetic license by claiming that David killed 600 Philistines and brought back their heads. (Antiqu. l. 6. c. 10. sect. 3)
8John Gill made the following analogy: “David's marriage of the younger sister, when upon various considerations it might have been expected that he should have married the elder, may be an emblem of Christ's espousing the Gentile church, when the Jewish church, her elder sister, is neglected by him, she having rejected him.”
AMy
original chart includes the NASB and NIV, but their copyright
restrictions have forced me to remove them from the
publicly-available edition of this chart. I have included the ESV in
footnotes when it employs a word not already used by the KJV, NASB,
or NIV. (NAW is my translation.) When a translation adds words not
in the Hebrew text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use
of italics (or greyed-out text), I put the added words in [square
brackets]. When one version chooses a wording which is different
from all the other translations, I underline it. When a
version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either departs
too far from the root meaning of the Hebrew word or departs too far
from the grammar form of the original text, I use strikeout.
And when a version omits a word which is in the original text, I
insert an X. (I also place an X at the end of a word if the original
word is plural but the English translation is singular.) I
occasionally use colors to help the reader see correlations between
the various editions and versions when there are more than two
different translations of a given word. The only known Dead Sea
Scroll containing any part of 1 Samuel 18 is 4Q51 Samuela,
which contains fragments
of vs. 4-5
(highlighted in purple), and which has been dated between 50-25 B.C.
Where the DSS supports the LXX with omissions or text not in the MT,
I have highlighted
with
yellow the LXX
and its translation into English, and where I have accepted that
into my NAW translation, I have marked it with {pointed brackets}.
BHere again the Vaticanus and Rahlf’s edition of the Septuagint have no text, but these verses do appear in the Alexandrinus Greek manuscript (and also in Theodotian’s version), and the translation in [brackets] is Brenton’s translation of the Alexandrine text from his appendix.
CNASB, NIV, ESV = “Here is”
DNASB, NIV, ESV = “against”
E“The term will give (impf.) is not a performative utterance (e.g., Gen. 15:18 <pf.> = “I (hereby) give,” which is usually in perfect; see on 17: 10). The Hebrew of if only you become… is an imperative clause…” ~David Tsumura, 2007 AD
FAll the places where this Hebrew phrase ben chaiyl occur seem to indicate a task force, usually of soldiers: Deut. 3:18 (militia), Judges 18:2 (spies), 21:10 (militia), 1 Samuel 14:52 (draft), 2 Sam. 2:7, 13:28 (revolutionaries in a coup), 17:10, 1 Kings 1:52 (usurper), 2 Kings 2:16 (prophets), 1 Chronicles 5:18 (able to be in army), 8:40 (archers), 26:7-9 & 30-32, 26:17 (priests), 28:6 (soldiers).
GThe Syriac supports this added conjunction, but it’s not in the Greek or Hebrew.
H“Life”
(plural) is the literal rendering of this word, but NIV = “family”
and ESV = “relatives.”
Gill took it to mean
“lifestyle” i.e. that of a shepherd, and Keil &
Delitzsch agreed: “Gesenius (Thes. p. 471) and Böttcher
give the meaning ‘people’ for
חַיִּים,
and Ewald (Gramm. §179, b.) the meaning ‘family.’
But neither of these meanings can be established. חַיִּים
seems
evidently to signify the condition in life...”
Goldman
commented: “Better, as R.V. margin, ‘who are my
kinsfolk,’ the Hebrew noun for life
being identical with the Arabid chayy,
denoting ‘a group of families united by blood-ties.’”
INIV, ESV = “clan”
JThis word is translated "bridegroom" in Ex. 4:25, Isa. 62:5, Jer. 7:34 etc, and Joel 2:16, “father-in-law” in Ex. 18:5, and “son-in-law” in Judges 15:6, so it seems to denote “being related by marriage.” The verbal forms also bear this out, as Gen. 34:9 and Deut. 7:3 refer to both daughters and sons being given in marriage and therefore relating the two families. Willett translated “contract affinitie”
KNASB, ESV = “for,” NIV = “in marriage”
LThe Syriac and several Hebrew manuscripts support the Greek with a (visually-similar) zayin instead of a daleth for the third letter (luyrzul). (There are multiple English letters which could have been chosen to represent the sound of the first Hebrew letter, so Brenton’s choice of the English letter “I” instead of “A” to transliterate the opening vowel does not actually reflect a lexical difference.) However, that spelling occurs nowhere else in the Bible, and it wouldn’t make meaningful sense, anyway (“upon is my help”). With the zayin substitution, one would expect an aleph instead of an ayin in the penultimate syllable (“God is my help”), which is a name mentioned twice among the chiefs of Manasseh and Zebulun in 1Ch 5:24 & 27:19. Tsumura suggested that Adriel could just be the Aramaic form of the Hebrew name Azriel. However, it being a proper name, the spelling is not terribly important, except to make identification of the person consistent. The only other place he is mentioned is 2 Samuel 21:8, where the LXX has the same variation in spelling as it does here. There, the additional information is given that Adriel was “the son of Barzillai.” There is a Barzillai mentioned in 2 Sam. 19:33, an 80-year-old man from Gilead who escorted David across the Jordan when he returned after Absolom’s coup. Later, this Barzillai married his daughters to some Levites and then adopted them as his sons, so they lost their priestly status in Ezra’s reconstruction genealogies (Ezra 2:61). But this Barzillai and Adriel were Mehulites, and the closest place name to that in the Bible is Abel-Mehula, which is on the opposite side of the Jordan River from Gilead, so this must be a different Barzillai, kept distinct as being from Mehula (that is, Abel-Mehula - Goldman) rather than the Barzillai from Gilead. This guy was nowhere near as significant to Biblical history as was David, and his five sons were hanged for violating a treaty.
MThe LXX word has to do with “cheering up” whereas the MT word has more to do with “being right” Symmachus offered the translation hdu egeneto (“became pleasant”).
NNASB = “was agreeable” (NIV omitted “the thing” following the ancient Greek and Latin manuscripts)
OTwo Hebrew manuscripts omit “the thing,” as did the Greek, Latin, & NIV. This doesn’t change the sense of the verse, though. In v.26, David reaches agreement, and the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew manuscripts are agreed that “the thing” is present in the wording there.
Pcf. Aquila: numfeuseiV en emoi shmeron (“you shall be a bridegroom for me today”). Theodotian: epi taiV dusin epigambreuseiV moi (agreeing with the LXX in omitting “today”).
QNASB, NIV, and ESV read “thought,” but “said” is the more central meaning of this Hebrew word; there is a different Hebrew word which would more directly denote “thought.”
RThe Hebrew is literally “today,” NIV & ESV = “now,” NICOT = “this time”
SNASB, NIV, ESV = “[a] second [time],” AJV = “through one of the twain”
T“[B]y
‘two,’ is here meant the second, the cardinal number,
taken for the ordinal: as 2 Ki. 15.32... Saul meaneth that by the
twaine, that is, the second of his daughters” ~Andrew Willett
(Gordon concurred, and Goldman seemed to agree). Gill: “by
marrying one of his two daughters”
Keil & Delitzsch:
“‘In a second way’ (בִּשְׁתַּיִם,
as in Job 33:14)”
Tsumura (NICOT):
“for the second time”
UThe Hebrew word could be translated “wants” as the LXX did, or “is pleased” as Symmachus did (eudokei).
VThe Hebrew word translated “now/therefore” (עתה) looks a lot like the Hebrew word for “you” (אתה).
WThe Hebrew word is the standard one for “speak,” thus NASB, NIV, ESV.
XNIV/ESV = “privately/in private”
YThe ancient consonantal spelling of this word requires a singular interpretation (“his servant”), but the LXX (“all those belonging to him”) and Vulgate (servis suis) read plural, and the Masorites pointed the consonants with the vowels that would go with a plural, making a note that it should be edited by adding a yod before the last letter to spell it properly as a plural, as it is spelled later in the verse. At the beginning of the next verse, it is a plurality of servants who obey the command.
ZSymmachus chose a synonym (elafron) with a range of meaning closer to the Hebrew word.
AAcf. A.S. aporoV (“uncertain”), Q. penhV (“poor”), compared to the LXX which denotes “lowly” and the MT “poor”
AB A. eutelhV (“not well-ended”), S. atimoV (“dishonorable”)
ACDavid uses the same Hebrew word to describe himself and to describe what the servants thought of him marrying royalty, The KJV brings this over into English commendably, but most English translations use two different words: NASB = “trivial… lightly esteemed,” NIV = “small matter… little known," ESV = “little thing… no reputation” (The ESV followed the LXX rather than the MT in this.)
ADThe MT pointing (from manuscripts in the late 900’s AD) is for a Niphal participle; the Cairo Geniza manuscripts from the 800’s AD pointed it as a Niphal perfect (hl#q~nh), but that doesn’t really change the meaning. Such inconsequential vowel variants are typical in comparing the MT with the Cairo manuscripts.
AENASB rendered more literally “according to these words,” NIV omitted the phrase, and the ESV rendered very paraphrastically “thus and so.”
AFNIV = “price for the bride,” ESV = “bride-price”
AGIn the first few centuries AD, translators included the final phrase in their versions: A.Q. kai ouk eplhrwqhsan ai hmerai (“and the days were not fulfilled”), S. kai mh dielqouswn (twn) hmerwn (“and the days had not gone by”).
AHThis phrase is used of reaching term in pregnancy, fulfilling a vow by doing the action for the promised amount of time, reaching the end of one’s life, reaching the end of God’s mercy and being punished, but in two cases which seem most appropriate, it refers to preparation for marriage: Genesis 29:21 Then Jacob said to Laban, "Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in to her." and Esther 2:12 “Each young woman's turn came to go in to King Ahasuerus after she had completed twelve months' preparation, according to the regulations for the women, for thus were the days of their preparation apportioned: six months with oil of myrrh, and six months with perfumes and preparations for beautifying women.” (NKJV)
AIMost other Greek translations read diakosiouV (“200”) conforming to the MT. If David slew 200, then he did slay 100. It’s curious that he doubled the dowry. In 2 Sam. 3:14, he says he bought her for 100, so perhaps the other hundred was technically not part of the dowry, since 100 was the agreement.
AJAquila and Theodotian filled in the words from the Hebrew which are missing in the LXX: kai eplhrwsen autaV (“and made fulfillment with them”)
AKThe other Greek versions supply the subject Saoul here, in conformance with the MT.
ALBrenton apparently forgot to translate the phrase “to the king,” which is in the Greek versions.
AMNKJV = “full count,” NASB = “full number,” NIV = “presented the full number,” but the ESV solved the problem of it being a plural verb by ignoring the MT active Piel pointing and interpreting it as passive Niphal “which were given in full number.” The original consonants (before the Masorite scribes added vowel pointings in the 800’s AD or so) could be interpreted Qal, Piel, or Niphal.
ANDavid’s name is not in any mss of the LXX or Vulgate, nor, as best I can tell, was it suggested by any later Greek versionist such as Aquila or Symmachus. NIV followed this tradition. This might suggest that it was added later for clarity by Hebrew editors, but the subject is the same whether stated or unstated, so this does not change the verse at all. Unfortunately there is no legible copy of this verse among the Dead Sea Scrolls for comparison.
AOThe word for “foreskin,” oddly enough, is feminine, but the pronominal object of this verb is masculine. Most commentators chose to ignore this difficulty. In the New International Commentary on the Old Testament, David Tsumura suggested that the masculine word “days” should instead be supplied by ellipsis from three sentences previous at the end of v.26, rendering it, “[the days] were fulfilled to the king to become the king’s son-in-law,” which works, but I think is an unlikely grammar construction considering the style of the author of 1 Samuel. Tsumura admitted that it would “not” be “impossible” for a masculine pronoun (“them”) in Hebrew to refer to a feminine antecedent (“foreskins”), which presents another possible solution to the difficulty, but I think there is a simpler solution which uses a nearer antecedent which matches in number and gender, and that is the phrase “men of the Philistines,” to which the previous pronoun also referred. Saul wasn’t as interested in the foreskins as he was interested in eradicating enemies. Each foreskin represented one man who had been killed (for each man has only one), so my solution to the difficulty is synecdoche: 200 men were presented before the king as dead by the presentation of 200 foreskins.
APThe other Greek versions supply the second verb “and knew” (kai egnw), which is in the MT.
AQThe MT בת-שרול is only somewhat similar to what the LXX would have had to read (כל-ישראל) to get the translation it did. The Lucian rescension corrected closer to the MT with kai Melcol h qugathr autou (“and Melchol his daughter” – changing “Saul’s” to “his”). Another explanation could be that the phrase from v.16 was supplied by memory to the LXX scribe.
AR Cairo Geniza manuscript reads pointed as a participle ([s)ay@w) instead of the MT Hiphil Imperfect, but that doesn’t really change anything. Some other Hebrew manuscripts removed the aleph to make clear that the root was not אסף (“gathering”) but יסף (“adding”) e.g. [swyw or [syw.
ASNASB, NIV = “commanders”
ATNASB, NIV, and ESV add the explanatory phrase “to battle,” but it is not in the Hebrew or Greek or Latin.
AUNASB, NIV, and ESV = “as often as” - the Hebrew word has to do with periodicity
AVNIV, ESV = “more success”
AWNASB & ESV = “highly esteemed,” NIV = “well known”
AXcf.
this word in Psa 101:2a “I will behave wisely in a
perfect way. Oh, when will You come to me?”
Some
commentators make much of the Mosaic law that a man should not go to
war in his first year of marriage, suggesting that the Philistines
must have invaded during the first year of David’s marriage in
order to take advantage of Israel while David was out-of-commission,
but the Biblical account says nothing of this, and it is an
assumption that the Philistines knew of this law, and it is an
assumption that the invasions referred-to in this verse happened
during David’s first year of marriage, and it is an assumption
that David broke that law, which makes it a tenuous proposition.