Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 12 Sept 2021
Read my translation of the chapter: Then David said to himself, “Now I’m going to be wiped out in one day by the agency of Saul! There is no good course for me except that I apply all diligence to escape to the country of the Philistines so that Saul will loose hope concerning me as he looks for me {} in every precinct of Israel. Thus I will escape from his control.” So David got up and made the border-crossing, he and {400} men who were with him, to Akish, son of Maoch, king of Gath. And David resided with Akish in Gath, he and his men, each with his own household. {So} there was David with two of his wives: Ahinoam the Jezraelitess and Abigail the Carmelitess (who had been Nabal’s wife). When it was communicated to Saul that David had fled to Gath, he no longer continued to search for him. Then David said to Akish, “Please, if I have found favor in your eyes, let them1 give me a place in one of the agricultural towns that I may reside there, for why should your servant reside in the capitol city with you?” So Akish gave Ziqlag to him on that day. (Therefore Ziqlag has belonged to the kings of Judah up to this day.) And the accounting of the days that David resided in the agricultural-area of the Philistines {} was four months.
Let me pause to note that most English Bibles read “a year and four months,” however, as best I can tell, Hebrew Bibles started adding the word for “days” to this verse around the time of the Enlightenment, and from the year 1600 on, English Bibles, started translating that added Hebrew word for “days” instead with the English word for “year.” In other words, until the King James Bible, no Bible in world history has ever said “a year and four months.”
My guess is that Modern Bible copyists and translators started calculating the time that David was in the land of the Philistines and realizing that it had to have been longer than just 4 months, so they added a fudge word to protect the integrity of the Bible’s account of the time.
I would like to point out, however, that this could be, at least in part, due to some confusion over another word in the text, and that is the word “country.”
In English, the word “country” can mean either “an entire nation-state” or it can mean “a rural area.”
In Hebrew, there are two different words for these two different meanings of the English word “country,” and it is the latter that is being used here. It’s actually the word for a “field” where crops are grown.
So when David asks for a “country town,” he is asking for a rural place to live out in the country, among the fields where the farmers work, outside of the big, fortified capitol city.
And then, in v.7 when it calculates the time that David was “in the country of the Philistines,” it uses the same word, designating, not the time David was in the urban metropolis of Gath, but only the the time he was living out in the country in Ziqlag. My hypothesis is that David’s sojourn in Ziqlag could have been about 4 months and that this could be the original wording and intent of the text, but that if you include the time David was elsewhere in Philistia and in Gath, it could have added up to a year and 4 months, so, in a sense, both calculations can be correct, depending on how you interpret the word “country.”
By the way, the editor of 1 Samuel (whom John Gill suggested was Gad or the Prophet Nathan2), shows himself a little bit in v. 6 with the statement that “Ziqlag belongs to the kings of Judah to this day.” The phrase “kings of Judah” indicates that the editor was living during the divided monarchy after there had been at least a couple of kings in Judah, but the phrase “to this day” indicates that the editor was living before Ziqlag was removed from Israel by Egypt’s and Assyria’s campaigns in the area, so we’re looking at a publication date for 1 Samuel in the 10th century BC, perhaps during the reign of Rehoboam (Tsumura).
Sorry if that was too-long an explanation about dates. Let’s return to our text at v.8
Meanwhile, David went up with his men and made surprise-attacks on the Geshurites and the Girzites and the Amalekites, for, you see, they had resided in the land from of old, as you go from Shur as far as to the land of Egypt. And David would make a strike against the land and not leave a man or a woman alive, but would take the sheep and oxen and donkeys and camels and clothes. Then he would turn back and go to Akish. And Akish would say, “Against whom have y’all made a surprise-attack today? And David would say, “Against the southern-part of Judah,” or “Against the southern-part of the Jerechmeelites,” or “Against the southern-part of the Kenites.” And David did not leave a man or a woman alive to bring to Gath, saying, “Otherwise they will inform on us, saying, ‘David acted in this way.’”3 And thus was his [system of] justice all the days in which {David} resided in the agricultural-area of the Philistines. And Akish trusted in David, saying, “He has really caused a stink among his people in Israel, so he will belong to me as a long-term servant.”
Chapter 27 begins with a startling statement. David, the man after God’s own heart, the man who trusted God’s promises and waited patiently on the LORD, the man who testified that God was his rock and deliverer, this same David says to his heart, “Now I’m going to be wiped out in one day by the agency of Saul.”
What??? David, do you really believe you’re going to be killed by Saul? Do you really not believe any of God’s promises to you? But considering the circumstances he was in, it felt true to David that he would be killed by Saul, and when it feels true, we are tempted to allow our hearts and minds to accept it as true, we tell ourselves lies which are patently false, and that gets us into all kinds of trouble.
This seed of doubt in David’s heart led to a difficult time of exile among enemies in the neighboring country of Philistia. All the problems David is going to face in the next couple of chapters stem back to this one little statement in verse 1 that David told himself that he was going to perish by the hand of Saul and therefore he had to save himself.
So many of our problems in our lives today stem from lies that we have accepted as true without even realizing that they are not true. They stem from relying on our own perceptions - or the perceptions of other humans - to understand our circumstances, rather than relying upon God’s word to understand our circumstances. Most addictions, most relationship conflicts, and most depression comes from believing things which are not true, simply because they seem to be true, even though they conflict with God’s word, which is the standard of truth.
In my continuing education studies, I’ve been reading books on counseling husbands and wives in the context of spousal abuse, and here is a case in point for the problems of believing what is not true. A husband who is selfish and lazy and proud often resists accountability for his sin by accusing his wife of being selfish and lazy and insubmissive, shifting blame by saying that it’s her fault that he becomes so angry, lecturing her about all the things she must do better, and restricting her from interaction with friends in order to keep tighter control over her.
Many women in these situations begin to believe the lies that they are told, accepting that they are unloveable, hopelessly bad, and deserving of being grounded by their husband from using the phone or from driving the car anywhere, and they buy into the lie that if they just perform better as a housewife, things will be o.k.
Meanwhile, the husband buys into his own deception, thinking he really is entitled to a spotless home and perfectly-behaved children and that it really is his wife’s fault if he gets irritated and curses at her or hits her, and that harshness really is necessary to keep his world under control.
So much of it starts with ideas which are not true but which seem plausible to our hearts. It’s so easy to be deceived; that’s why we need to be taking in God’s word every day to feed our hearts with truth than can expose lies.
God’s last word to David, as far as we know, was in chapter 22, v.5, where the prophet Gad told David to go to Judea. Christian soldiers should keep following the last command they were given and not decide on their own to do something different. God had told David to sit tight in Judea, but David began to believe that his only hope was to move out of Judea.
Notice that here in chapter 27, David did NOT inquire of the LORD, even though he had a priest in his camp. David merely reasons with human reasoning and comes up with his own scheme of salvation.
Notice who is the center of his thinking at this moment: “David said to himself, “I am going to get wiped out one of these days by Saul... There is no good course of action for me except for fleeing the country; that’s the way I will escape from Saul and get him off my back.” David has a bad case of “I” disease (as in “me, myself, and I”).
John Gill commented, “This was a strange fit of unbelief he was sunk into, and very unaccountable and unreasonable it was, had he but considered his being anointed king by the Lord, the promise of God to him, which could not fail, and the providence of God that watched over him from time to time… These were the carnal reasonings of his mind, under the prevalence of unbelief; and shows what poor weak creatures the best of men are, and how low their graces may sink as to exercise, when left to themselves.”
“Now the reasons which shew the unlawfulness of David's flying [to the Philistines], are these: 1. He ... did contrarie to the law, which did forbid the Israelites to make any covenant with the heathen, which were about them (Ex. 23:32). 2. He in a manner runneth from his calling: who being appointed king of the Lord’s people to defend them, goeth to join with their enemies. 3. [And] his flight seemed to proceed from the weakness of his faith, as doubting of God's promises.” ~Andrew Willett
God had restrained Saul every time he had threatened David so far: in Gibeah, in Naioth of Ramah, in the field, at Keilah, in the wilderness of Ziph, in Maon, at En-Gedi... But David began thinking, “What about next time? Next time, God might not come through, so I’d better come up with my own plan.” Have you ever thought that lie to yourself? “I’m on my own this time.” Watch out for that one! Don’t meditate on what God might not do in the future, instead remember the great things God has already done in the past to give you faith for the future.
Now, don’t get me wrong; there is a place for escaping outside the control of an abusive leader.
The Hebrews, for instance, escaped from slavery in Egypt and became free once they crossed the border of the Red Sea.
Abigail left her husband and her house to intercept David, and her intervention saved the lives of all the men in her household.
And, in our own nation’s history, the Pilgrims did well to escape from religious persecution in England to settle in the Netherlands and ultimately in the New World.
But the important thing in making the decision of whether or not to escape is, “What is God’s calling on my life?” Have I asked God for wisdom and guidance? Is making a new start consistent with what God has had me doing recently? Is this the best way I can love God and love my neighbor? Does it promote the best interests of all who depend on me? Is this what godly counsellors are encouraging me to do? Have I given it due time and consideration? Has God given evidences that this is the best course?
The answers to those questions may well be a resounding “Yes!” But I don’t think David could have answered Yes to questions like that.
So, in v.2, David emigrates out of Israel into the land of the Philistines. The oldest known texts (including the Dead Sea Scroll, Septuagint, and Old Latin manuscripts) say that 400 of David’s 600 men went with him across the border, whereas other texts say it was all 600 men who went with him.
There are ways that could perhaps be reconciled, such as an initial group of 400, followed by the rest later, or perhaps only 400 actually crossing the border while the rest remained loyal to David in Israel. But there’s not enough known about it to say anything definitively.
What is clear is that David’s lapse of faith didn’t affect only himself, it affected hundreds of men who followed David. Just because someone is a great leader doesn’t mean they should be followed 100% of the time; sometimes they are not thinking straight and should not be followed.
So David defects to Akish, king of Gath, one of the five Philistine metropolises.
I don’t think we have enough information to know for sure whether or not this was the same Akish from chapter 21 before whom David had feigned insanity.
The title “Akish” appears (from inscriptions found by archaeologists) to simply be the title of the king of Gath, not a particular person’s proper name,
but it hasn’t been that long since the events of ch.21, so it’s possible it was the same guy4.
At any rate, things go a lot better this time between David and Akish in chapter 27.
Perhaps between chapters 21 and 27, the Philistines had figured out that David was out of favor with King Saul and was no longer in the Israelite army, so they felt more comfortable with David, thinking that they had a common enemy in Saul.
Perhaps they saw that this was no war-band. David and his men had their wives and children with them; they were actually immigrating, not making a raid.
The Philistines also realized the importance of keeping Israel divided and unstable politically, so they were willing to help a contender to the throne of Israel in order to foster the political destabilization of their neighbor country.
So David and his men were allowed to live in the royal capitol of Gath. We are told very little of this time of David’s life.
It’s hard to tell5 whether he started making raids against other people groups to the south at this point or if it was later after he moved out to Ziqlag, but something in the way David and his men conducted themselves won the respect of Akish.
Living together in the same town that wasn’t much larger than a single neighborhood nowadays, Akish got to see up-close and personal the kind of character that devotion to Yahweh brought to the Jews, and he seemed to like it.
David, on the other hand became uncomfortable with living in Gath.
Perhaps the rank idolatry of the Philistine pagan religion grated on him.
Perhaps he was overwhelmed with all the dishonesty, corruption, and oppression that inevitably are a part of a culture with a non-Biblical worldview.
Perhaps he realized this was not a good place to raise kids.
Perhaps he knew from experience to avoid too close a relationship with the king in order to avoid exciting the jealousies of the other noblemen and courtiers (Gill).
Perhaps he just wanted more freedom to do what he wanted.
At any rate, in v.5, David asks if he can move out of the capitol city to a more rural part of Philistia. He frames his request in such a way that:
the king would come off looking generous to give a land grant to David as a “favor,”
and he appeals to the king’s pride, calling himself a “servant” of Akish and suggesting that servants like himself were not worthy of living in the capitol with bigwigs like Akish,
and besides, he was merely asking for – not even a whole city, but just a “place within some podunk city” that no important nobleman would want anyway.
Akish was persuaded and gave him Ziqlag.
There is some debate on the location6 of Ziklag, but the most likely seems to be “Tell esh Sharia, about twenty miles SE of Gaza and about halfway between Gaza and Beersheba... [Buntig estimated it at 12 miles from Gath.] The summit of the tell is approximately four acres. The site was found [by archaeologists] to be inhabited from the seventeenth century BC… [by] Canaanites… [then] destroyed by the Philistines early in the twelfth century BC… [likely when the Philistines relocated from Greece to the coast of Israel. And then during] the tenth-ninth century BC… there were well-planned public and private structures that may date from the building activities of Solomon or Rehoboam.” ~The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary
“Typical Israelite four-room houses and impressive buildings of ashlar masonry have [also] been found [there].” ~Eerdman’s Encyclopedia of the Bible
“Ziklag had the advantage of being far from Saul’s territory and isolated enough from the Philistine pentapolis not to be under observation by them. Its disadvantage was that it [was a border area, so it] could become the target of attacks by desert bands such as the Amalekites [as we’ll] see [in chapter] 30…” ~David Tsumura, NICOT
By the same token, David’s presence in Ziqlag gave the Philistines protection from other nations to the south. Any aggressor would have to plough through David’s forces in Ziqlag before they could threaten the Philistines now, and therefore the Philistines could focus more of their efforts at expansion to the West – into Israel, as we’ll see in the next couple of chapters.
Now, David was a man of war – called to “fight the LORD’s battles,” as Abigail put it, and he got right back to work on God’s calling on his life by renewing the campaign commissioned by God through Moses and Joshua against the Canaanites (e.g. in Deut. 7:2).
These tribes that David attacked were among the peoples that the Jews under Joshua had failed to conquer (Josh. 13:2, 13). The three people groups mentioned in v.8 “were a remnant of the Canaanites: the Geshurites were those that dwelt in Geshur, in Gilead (Josh. 12:5), and the Gizrites in Gezer, which belonged unto Ephraim (Josh. 16:3)7, who at the coming of the Israelites [in Joshua’s time], left those places, and went [south] and dwelt among the Amalekites8.... [And Amalekites were the people that God had commanded Saul to utterly destroy back in chapter 15 – and that Saul had not utterly destroyed.] These Canaanites were ordained of God to destruction, and therefore David might safely invade them.” ~Andrew Willett
But the Philistine King Akish was deceived by David in at least two ways: first in his understanding of who David was fighting against and second in his understanding of David’s long-term plan.
David was proactive about being the first to get word to King Akish about where he conducted offensives; he would stop by the king’s palace on his way home from each raid, perhaps dropping off some of the spoils of war to share with Akish and his people in Gath before coming home to Ziqlag with the remainder to provide for his family’s needs. And when Akish would ask where David had been roving this time, David would give answers which misled Akish into believing that David had been killing Jews in Judea.
Akish believed that David would be his vassal “for ever/long-term.” Akish was deceived in this, for it was God’s will for David to become king of Israel, and David did not intend to be around Gath for ever.
The question arises whether David was actually lying to King Akish – and whether it was OK for him to lie.
There seems to be some wiggle-room for saying maybe David didn’t lie outright to Akish. Puritan commentator Andrew Willett explained9, “Some think that David dissembled not, but spake the truth: not that he put the Jerahmeelites (which were a familie of Judah 1 Chron. 2:9) to the sword, or the Kenites [the descendants of Moses’ wife’s relative, Jethro 15:6], but only smote the south [borders (Negev means “southern”)], which of right belonged unto the Israelites, but were possessed by other nations. But it appeareth, in that Achish was contented with David's answer, that he understood him to speak of the Israelites, whom he had invaded.”
Also, whether or not David made an actual long-term covenant of servitude with Akish, David’s actions of accepting a fief under Akish and moving his family there to Ziqlag certainly would have led anyone to believe that David was establishing a long-term residence.
David clearly approved of (and maintained) the deception that Akish was under, whether or not he told a lie with his words, so this is definitely a stain on David’s integrity.
This wasn't the only time David lied and murdered to cover up his sin – remember Bathsheba?
Rather than risk embarrassment and risk his livelihood and life, David chose to cover up for himself. He had to raid for provisions in this new location because the Philistines had no system of tithing and generosity to the poor like the Jews did. If he had remained in Israel, he might not have had to make raids to provide for his men.
Don’t cover up for yourself with dishonesty when you make a bad decision or sin, rather, openly confess your wrong, no matter how embarrassing or threatening it may be. Guard your tongue from lies, and keep trusting the Lord!
You can pray like David did later in Psalm 119d: “My soul clings to the dust; Revive me according to Your word... My soul melts from heaviness; Strengthen me according to Your word. Remove from me the way of lying, And grant me Your law graciously.” (Psalm 119:25-29, NKJV)
We have looked at a lot of good examples from David over the course of 1 Samuel, but this chapter honestly reveals bad examples in David’s life, to warn us from falling into the same predicaments he did. Let us take good heed to these warnings:
First against self-deceit in failing to remember God’s calling, running off and doing what feels right, and keeping your eyes on yourself rather than praying and gathering godly counsel and continuing to do the last thing God called you to do. Fill your mind with God’s word, remember the great things He has done in the past, keep your eyes on Jesus, and keep trusting Him!
And secondly there’s a warning against deceiving others – even indirectly – as David did to Akish – and covering up for your bad decisions or sins with dishonesty. Rather, openly confess your wrong, guard your tongue from lies, and keep trusting the Lord!
LXX |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
1
Καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ
ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ
αὐτοῦ [λέγων]
Νῦν προστεθήσομαιB
[ἐν]
ἡμέρᾳ μιᾷ εἰς
χεῖρ |
1 And David said in his heart, Now shall I be one day delivered for death into the hand[s] of Saul; [and] there is no good thing for me unless I should X escape into the land of the Philistines, and Saul should cease X X from seeking me X through every coast of Israel: so I shall escape out of his hand. |
1
And David said in his heart: I shall one day |
1 And David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul: there is nothing better for me than that I should speedily escape into the land of the Philistines; and Saul shall despair of me, to seek me any more in any coastD of Israel: so shall I escape out of his hand. |
1 Then David said to himself, “Now I’m going to be wiped out in one day by the agency of Saul! There is no good course for me except that I apply all diligence to escape to the country of the Philistines so that Saul will loose hope concerning me as he looks for me {} in every precinct of Israel. Thus I will escape from his control.” |
1 וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל-לִבּוֹ עַתָּה אֶסָּפֶה יוֹם-אֶחָד בְּיַד-שָׁאוּל אֵין-לִי טוֹב כִּי הִמָּלֵט אִמָּלֵט אֶל-אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים וְנוֹאַשׁE מִמֶּנִּי שָׁאוּל לְבַקְשֵׁנִי עוֹד בְּכָל-גְּבוּל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנִמְלַטְתִּי מִיָּדוֹ: |
2
καὶ ἀνέστη Δαυιδ
X
καὶ
οἱ |
2 So David arose, X and the sixF hundred men that were with him, and he went to Anchus, son of Ammach, king of Geth. |
2 And David arose, and went away, [both] he and the six hundred men that were with him, to Achis, the son of Maoch, king of Geth. |
2 And David arose, and he passed over X with the six hundred men that were with him unto Achish, the son of Maoch, king of Gath. |
2 So David got up and made the border-crossing, he and {400} men who were with him, to Akish, son of Maoch, king of Gath. |
2 וַיָּקָםG דָּוִד וַיַּעֲבֹר הוּא וְשֵׁשׁH-מֵאוֹת אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר עִמּוֹ אֶל-אָכִישׁI בֶּן- מָעוֹךְ מֶלֶךְ גַּת: |
3 καὶ ἐκάθισεν Δαυιδ μετὰ Αγχους ἐν Γεθ, αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες αὐτοῦ, ἕκαστος καὶ ὁ οἶκος αὐτοῦ, [καὶ] Δαυιδ καὶ ἀμφότεραι αἱ γυναῖκες αὐτοῦ Αχινααμ ἡ Ιεζραηλῖτις καὶ Αβιγαια ἡ γυνὴ Ναβαλ τοῦ Καρμηλίου. |
3 And David dwelt with Anchus, he and his men, each with his family; [and] David and both his wives, Achinaam, the Jezraelitess, and Abigaia the wife of Nabal the Carmelite. |
3 And David dwelt with Achis at Geth, he and his men; every man with his household, [and] David with his two wives, Achinoam, the Jezrahelitess, and Abigail, the wife of Nabal of Carmel. |
3 And David dwelt with Achish at Gath, he and his men, every man with his household, even David with his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the Carmelitess, Nabal's wifeJ. |
3 And David resided with Akish in Gath, he and his men, each with his own household. {So} there was David with two of his wives: Ahinoam the Jezraelitess and Abigail the Carmelitess (who had been Nabal’s wife). |
3 וַיֵּשֶׁב דָּוִד עִם-אָכִישׁ בְּגַת הוּא וַאֲנָשָׁיו אִישׁ וּבֵיתוֹ דָּוִד וּשְׁתֵּי נָשָׁיו אֲחִינֹעַם הַיִּזְרְעֵאלִית וַאֲבִיגַיִל אֵשֶׁת- נָבָל הַכַּרְמְלִית: |
4 καὶ ἀνηγγέλη τῷ Σαουλ ὅτι πέφευγεν Δαυιδ εἰς Γεθ, καὶ οὐ προσέθετο ἔτι ζητεῖν αὐτόν. |
4 And it was told Saul that David had fled to Geth; and he no longer sought after him X. |
4 And it was told Saul that David was fled to Geth, and he sought no more after him X. |
4 And it was told Saul that David was fled to Gath: and he sought no more again for him. |
4 When it was communicated to Saul that David had fled to Gath, he no longer continued to search for him. |
4 וַיֻּגַּד לְשָׁאוּל כִּי-בָרַח דָּוִד גַּת וְלֹא-יוֹסַףK עוֹד לְבַקְשׁוֹ: ס |
5 καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ πρὸς Αγχους Εἰ δὴ εὕρηκεν ὁ δοῦλός σου χάριν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς σου, δότωσαν [δή] μοι τόπον ἐν μιᾷ τῶν πόλεων τῶν κατ᾿ ἀγρὸν καὶ καθήσομαι ἐκεῖ· καὶ ἵνα τί κάθηται ὁ δοῦλός σου ἐν πόλει X βασιλευομένῃ μετὰ σοῦ; |
5
And David said to Anchus, If now thy servant has found grace in
thine eyes, let them give me, [I
pray thee,]
a place in one of the cities in the country,
and I will dwell there: for why does thy servant dwell with thee
in |
5 And David said to Achis: If I have found favour in thy sightX, let a place be given me in one of the cities of this country, that I may dwell there: for why should thy servant dwell in the royal city with thee? |
5 And David said unto Achish, If I have now found graceL in thine eyes, let them give me a place in some townX in the country, that I may dwell there: for why should thy servant dwell in the royal city with thee? |
5 Then David said to Akish, “Please, if I have found favor in your eyes, let them give me a place in one of the agricultural towns that I may reside there, for why should your servant reside in the capitol city with you?” |
5 וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל-אָכִישׁ אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ יִתְּנוּ-לִי מָקוֹם בְּאַחַת עָרֵי הַשָּׂדֶה וְאֵשְׁבָה שָּׁם וְלָמָּה יֵשֵׁב עַבְדְּךָ בְּעִיר הַמַּמְלָכָה עִמָּךְ: |
6 καὶ X ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ τὴν Σεκελακ· διὰ τοῦτο ἐγενήθη Σεκελακ τῷ βασιλεῖX τῆς Ιουδαίας ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης. |
6 And X he gave him Sekelac in that day: therefore Sekelac came into possession of the kingX of Judea to this day. |
6 Then Achis gave him Siceleg that day: for which reason Siceleg belongeth to the kings of Juda unto this day. |
6 Then Achish gave him Ziklag that day: wherefore Ziklag pertainethM unto the kings of Judah unto this day. |
6 So Akish gave Ziqlag to him on that day. (Therefore Ziqlag has belonged to the kings of Judah up to this day.) |
6 וַיִּתֶּן-לוֹ אָכִישׁ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא אֶת-צִקְלָג לָכֵן הָיְתָה צִקְלַג לְמַלְכֵי יְהוּדָה עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה: פ |
7 καὶ ἐγενήθη ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν ἡμερῶν, ὧν ἐκάθισεν Δαυιδ ἐν ἀγρῷ τῶν ἀλλοφύλων, X X τέσσαρας μῆνας. |
7 And the number of the days that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines was X X four months. |
7 And the X X time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines, was X X four months. |
7 And the X X time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines was a full year and four months. |
7 And the accounting of the days that David resided in the agricultural-area of the Philistines {} was four months. |
7 וַיְהִי מִסְפַּר הַיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר- יָשַׁב דָּוִד בִּשְׂדֵה פְלִשְׁתִּים יָמִיםN וְאַרְבָּעָה חֳדָשִׁים: |
8
καὶ ἀνέβαινεν
Δαυιδ καὶ οἱ
ἄνδρες αὐτοῦ
καὶ ἐπετίθεντοO
ἐπὶ |
8
And David and his men went up, and made
an attack
on |
8
And David and his men went up, and pillaged
X
Gessuri,
and Gerzi, and the Amalecites: for X
these
were of old the inhabitants of the countr |
8 And David and his men went up, and invadedQ X the Geshurites, and the GezritesR, and the Amalekites: for X those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt. |
8 Meanwhile, David went up with his men and made surprise-attacks on the Geshurites and the Girzites and the Amalekites, for, you see, they had resided in the land from of old, as you go from Shur as far as to the land of Egypt. |
8 וַיַּעַל דָּוִד וַאֲנָשָׁיו וַיִּפְשְׁטוּ אֶל-הַגְּשׁוּרִי וְהַגִּרְזִיS וְהָעֲמָלֵקִי כִּי הֵנָּה יֹשְׁבוֹת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּרָה וְעַד-אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: |
9
καὶ X
ἔτυπτε
τὴν γῆν καὶ οὐκ
ἐζωογόνει
ἄνδρα καὶ γυναῖκα
καὶ ἐλάμβανεν
ποίμνια καὶ
βουκόλια καὶ
ὄνους καὶ
καμήλους καὶ
ἱματισμόν, καὶ
ἀνέστρεψαν καὶ
ἤρχ |
9
And X
he
smote
the land, and saved neither man nor woman alive; and |
9 And David wasted [all] the land, and left neither man nor woman alive: and took away the sheep, and the oxen, and the asses, and the camels, and the apparel, and returned and came to Achis. |
9 And David smoteT the land, and left neither man nor woman alive, and took away the sheep, and the oxen, and the assesU, and the camels, and the apparel, and returned, and came to Achish. |
9 And David would make a strike against the land and not leave a man or a woman alive, but would take the sheep and oxen and donkeys and camels and clothes. Then he would turn back and go to Akish. |
9 וְהִכָּה דָוִד אֶת-הָאָרֶץ וְלֹא יְחַיֶּה אִישׁ וְאִשָּׁה וְלָקַח צֹאן וּבָקָר וַחֲמֹרִים וּגְמַלִּים וּבְגָדִים וַיָּשָׁבV וַיָּבֹא אֶל-אָכִישׁ: |
10
καὶ εἶπεν Αγχους
[πρὸς
Δαυιδ]
|
10
And Anchus said [to
David,]
|
10
And Achis said to [him]:
|
10
And Achish said, Whither have ye made
a |
10 And Akish would say, “Against whom have y’all made a surprise-attack today? And David would say, “Against the south of Judah,” or “Against the south of the Jerechmeelites,” or “Against the south of the Kenites.” |
10 וַיֹּאמֶר אָכִישׁ אַלZ- פְּשַׁטְתֶּם הַיּוֹם וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד עַל-נֶגֶב יְהוּדָה וְעַלAA-נֶגֶב הַיַּרְחְמְאֵלִיAB וְאֶלAC-נֶגֶב הַקֵּינִיAD: |
11 καὶ ἄνδρα καὶ γυναῖκα οὐκ ἐζωογόνησεν X τοῦ εἰσαγαγεῖν εἰς Γεθ λέγων Μὴ ἀναγγείλωσιν [εἰς Γεθ] καθ᾿ ἡμῶν λέγοντες Τάδε Δαυιδ ποιεῖ. καὶ τόδε τὸ δικαίωμα αὐτοῦ πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας, ἃς ἐκάθητο [Δαυιδ] ἐν ἀγρῷ τῶν ἀλλοφύλων. |
11
And X
|
11 And David saved X neither man nor woman, [neither] brought he [any of them] to Geth, saying: Lest they should speak against us X. So did David, and such was his proceeding all the days that he dwelt in the country of the Philistines. |
11 And David savedAE neither man nor woman alive, to bring tidingsAF to Gath, saying, Lest they should tell on us, saying, So did David, and so will be his mannerAG all the whileAH he dwelleth in the country of the Philistines. |
11 And David did not leave a man or a woman alive to bring to Gath, saying, “Otherwise they will inform on us, saying, ‘David acted in this way.’ And thus was his [system of] justice all the days in which {David} resided in the agricultural-area of the Philistines. |
11 וְאִישׁ וְאִשָּׁה לֹא-יְחַיֶּה דָוִד לְהָבִיא גַתAI לֵאמֹר פֶּן-יַגִּדוּ עָלֵינוּ לֵאמֹר כֹּה-עָשָׂה דָוִד AJוְכֹה מִשְׁפָּטוֹ כָּל-הַיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר יָשַׁבAK בִּשְׂדֵה פְלִשְׁתִּים: |
12
καὶ ἐπιστεύ |
12
So |
12 And Achis believed David, saying: He hath done much harm to his people X Israel: Therefore he shall be my servant for ever. |
12 And Achish believed David, saying, He hath made X his people X Israel utterly to abhor [him]AL; therefore he shall be my servant for ever. |
12 And Akish trusted in David, saying, “He has really caused a stink among his people in Israel, so he will belong to me as a long-term servant.” |
12 וַיַּאֲמֵן אָכִישׁ בְּדָוִד לֵאמֹר הַבְאֵשׁ הִבְאִישׁAM בְּעַמּוֹ ANבְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיָה לִי לְעֶבֶד עוֹלָם: פ |
1The plural subject may refer to some sort of council of Philistine nobles.
2Gill noted that some Jewish commentators suggested a later prophet such as Jeremiah or even Ezra, but Tsumura and K&D noted that by the time of those prophets, the kings of Judah had lost possession of Ziqlag to foreign armies.
3See footnote AK on the debate over whether to place the end of the quote here or at the end of the verse.
4Keil & Delitzsch were confident as always in their opinion: “Achish, the son of Maoch, is in all probability the same person not only as the king Achish mentioned in 1Sam. 21:11, but also as Achish the son of Maachah (1Ki_2:39), since Maoch and Maachah are certainly only different forms of the same name; and a fifty years' reign, which we should have in that case to ascribe to Achish, it not impossible.”
5Whether the endquote in v.11 is placed in the middle or at the end of the verse makes a difference in this regard.
6cf. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “Conder proposed Zucheilika, a ruin 11 miles South-Southeast of Gaza, and 4 miles North of Wady es-Sheri'a, which may be the "Brook Besor" (1 Sam 30:9,10,21); Rowland (1842) proposed `Asluj, a heap of ruins South of Beersheba and 7 miles to the East of Bered. Neither site is entirely satisfactory”
7John Gill agreed, commenting, “Geshurites; some of the old inhabitants of the land of Canaan, the remains of the Amorites, whose land was given to the half tribe of Manasseh, but could never be expelled… and the Gezrites; the inhabitants of Gezer, which place fell to the tribe of Ephraim; but that tribe could not drive out the inhabitants of it...” But Keil & Delitzsch took issue with other commentators, asserting that the Geshuri and the Gerzites weren’t the peoples mentioned Joshua 12, but were different groups mentioned in Joshua 13:2 and perhaps 2 Maccabees 13:24, that had always resided south of Palestine.
8“Probably the Geshurites and Gezrites were branches of Amalek.” ~M. Henry
9Keil & Delitsch seemed to agree: “Geshurites, Gerzites, and Amalekites dwelt close to the southern boundary of Judah, so that David was able to represent the march against these tribes to Achish as a march against the south of Judah, to make him believe that he had been making an attack upon the southern territory of Judah and its dependencies.”
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 27 is 4Q51Samuela,
which contains fragments of vs. 1-2 & 8-12, and which has been
dated between 50-25 B.C. Where the DSS is legible and where its
letters are the same as the MT, I have colored the MT purple. 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}.
BSymmachus rendered a Greek word similar to the Vulgate “fall.”
Ccf. later Greek versions: Aq. apognwseai, (“away from being known”), S. aposchtai (“get away”)
DNASB = “territory,” ESV = “border” (The latter seems the best translation to me.)
EThis is the first occurrence of this root in the OT. It only occurs a few more times afterwards, often translated “hopeless” Job 6:26; Eccl. 2:20; Isa. 57:10; Jer. 2:25; 18:12.
FThe DSS and the Rahlf edition of the Septuagint read 400, but the Vaticanus reads 600, and that is what Brenton used.
GTsumura suggested that this was an inchoative: “David began crossing over...”
HThe DSS starts this word with an aleph, but the rest of the word is illegible. The only numerals in Hebrew that start with aleph are 1 & 4, and 1 is too short a word for the space in the DSS, so the DSS supports the Septuagint and old Latin versions which also read 400.
Icf.
21:10ff, when David unsuccessfully sought asylum with Akish. This
name, however, may simply be the title of the king of Gath (hence
the “son of Maoch” to distinguish him from other
Akishes), so it’s possible that this is a different King than
the one in chapter 21, although no one seems to be certain.
NICOT:
“An inscription found in Ekron refers to the king as
‘Akhayus,’ the same word as ‘Achish,’ and
Naveh has recently argued that in Iron Age Philistine cities
“Achish’ may be ‘the official name’ or
appellation for the Philistine kings.”
JNASB, NIV, and ESV render this Hebrew word which literally means “woman,” as “widow,” but there is a different word for “widow” in Hebrew (אלמנה).
KThe Qere (Masoretic margin note) suggests a change of spelling of this verb from a participle to a perfect (יָסַף), but it doesn’t really make a difference in meaning.
LNASB, NIV, ESV = “favor”
MNASB, NIV, ESV = “has belonged to”
NThis Hebrew word literally means “days,” and this is the way most Jewish commentators understood it. (There is a different word in Hebrew for “year” שנה.) But it is translated “[full] year” in most English versions. However, this word is not found in the oldest-known manuscripts, notably the Vaticanus or any Septuagint or even in the later Jewish corrections of the Septuagint, and it’s not in the Syriac or the Latin Vulgate either. (Josephus [Ant. 6:13, 10] gives this as “four months and twenty-days.” I found one source quoting Kimchi at “7 months” and another at “4 months and some days” along with Rashi.) Unfortunately, there is no known Dead Sea Scroll that contains this verse, so we don’t have that for comparison. It seems worthy of mention that the time calculated in this verse is only for when David was in the “field/country/boondocks/agricultural area of the Philistines.” The word “field/country” is the same one used to describe the rural/agricultural town of Ziqlag which David asked for. Could it be that scholars, wishing to account for the entire exile in Philistia, had to add “a year” to the total, whereas the sojourn in Ziklag was only 4 months? This should be reconciled also with Achish’s statement in 29:3 that David “has been with me these days or these years [זֶה יָמִים אוֹ־זֶה שָׁנִים]” - the word “or” is a contrast word, contrasting yomim vs. sanim, which could be a reason not to translate yomim here as “a year.” (It also raises the question of whether Akish is exaggerating when he says “years” if neither of the two textual traditions of this verse in chapter 27 amount to two or more years, which makes me wonder if “days” might be closer to the mark.) Also note that the same word is translated “days/time/while” (not “a year”) in the previous occurrence of this word earlier in this verse as well as in the subsequent occurrence of this word when it occurs in v.11. Matthew Henry and John Gill opted for “4 months and/that is some days,” whereas Willett, K&D, and Tsumura opted for “a year and 4 months.”
OAquila rendered paretacqhsan (“mobilized”)
PHere the LXX rendered the Hebrew words twice, first translated into Greek (with questionable accuracy), then repeated, spelling the Hebrew words olam (“of old”) and “Shur” as Greek letters in one run-on word, omitting the Hebrew word boak (“you go”) which is in the MT between these two words. The Lucian Rescription of the Septuagint of this verse apparently corrects to the MT reading.
QNASB, NIV = “raided” cf. the same word in 23:27 describing the Philistines making a surprise attack, and in 27:10, where the NASB & NIV are consistent, but the KJV reads strangely “made a road,” and the Geneva “bene a rouing” (“been roving”).
RMT, Vulg, NASB, NIV, and ESV spell this “Girzites” (with the “r” and “z” switched). The LXX and KJV followed the Qere spelling found in some Hebrew manuscripts. Slight variations in spelling of proper names is normal, so it may not actually be a different word. On the other hand, McCarter argued against “Gezrites” because he identified them as a people group which lived too far north to fit with this account.
SThe Vulgate, old Latin, and Targums support this spelling, but the LXX (and KJV) followed the spelling in the Masorite marginal notes, transposing the Z and the R [וְהַגִּזְרִי].
TNASB & NIV = “attacked”
UNASB & NIV = “cattle and donkeys”
VThe DSS is obliterated here, but it has room for a word or two more than the MT has. It has been suggested that “David” might have been added as an explicit subject, but his name doesn’t appear in the Vulgate or Septuagint, and it would already be assumed that he is the subject, so it wouldn’t make any difference in meaning.
WSymmachus rendered instead meshmbrian (“south”).
XAquila and Theodotian render closer to the spelling of the MT without the “Z” at the end: Κιναιου
YAll three instances of the word “south” are the Hebrew word negev, which can mean “south,” but the NASB, NIV, and ESV interpreted as a particular place called “the Negev,” which is the wilderness south of Judah.
ZDSS reads ym lu (“against whom”), which is how the LXX reads, and the Vulgate supports them over against the MT.
AATsumura,
citing G. Galil, suggested that the “waw
before toward the Negeb of the Jerahmeelites
is a waw explicative
and should be translated ‘namely.’”
DSS
reads אל
(“at”),
but this is practically a synonym.
ABDSS does not have the definite article prefix that the MT has (which doesn’t make a difference in translation since a proper noun is definite no matter what) or the yod suffix (“-ites?”).
ACDSS reads על (“over”), but this is practically a synonym.
ADOn Kenites, see 15:6 and 30:29
AEKJV translated this same verb “left alive” a couple verses previous.
AFThe word “tidings/news” found in the KJV, NKJV, and ESV (and M. Henry’s commentary) is not even implied in the Hebrew or Greek word. The LXX, Vulgate, Geneva, ASV/NASB, AJV, NIV, RV, NET, CEV, and NLT, as well as the French and Spanish versions I have, and commentaries by Gill, K&D, Goldman, and Tsumura all avoid adding this word, implying that it is the persons, not merely the “tidings” which David wanted to prevent from getting to Gath.
AGNASB & NIV = “practice,” ESV = “custom,” cf. 2:13 “regulation of the priests,” and 8:9-11 “justice-system of the king”
AHLiterally “days,” NASB = “time,” NIV = “as long as,” ESV = “while” cf. this word in v.7, where it is translated “year”
AIDSS spelled “Gath” with a directional he on the end here: htg, denoting “bring to/in the direction of Gath,” and the LXX supports this with the standalone preposition εις (“into”), for there is no such preposition in the MT.
AJScholars are split over whether this is the end of the quote (NIV, NKJV, ESV, NET, CEV, NLT) or whether the quote should go to the end of the verse (Geneva, KJV, Matthew Henry, Gill, RV, NASB, AJV, Tsumura). Keil & Delitzsch weighed in with the former, writing with their typical confidence, “‘Thus hath David done.’ There ought to be a major point under דָּוִד עָשָׂה, as the following clause does not contain the words of the slaughtered enemies, but is a clause appended by the historian himself, to the effect that David continued to act in that manner as long as he dwelt in the land of the Philistines.”
AKThe LXX, Syriac, and some Hebrew manuscripts add “David” explicitly as the subject. The DSS is obliterated at this point, but it has too much space for the wording of the MT, so that would support there being the extra word there.
ALNASB = “surely made himself odious,” NIV = “become so odious,” ESV = “made himself an utter stench”
AMcf. the use of this same verb in 1 Samuel 13:4 “And all Israel heard it saying that Saul had made a strike against the garrison of the Philistines and also that Israel had made itself obnoxious to the Philistines. When these things were announced, the people got behind Saul at Gilgal.” (NAW)
ANKJV, NASB, NIV, and ESV follow the Latin and Syriac which omit the preposition “in” before Israel, but the preposition is there in the Greek and Hebrew.