Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 23 Oct. 2022
Omitting greyed-out text should bring delivery time down to 40 minutes.
As we pick back up on the story of David returning to his throne in Jerusalem after Absalom’s revolt, we find Shimei and the Tsiba1-Mephibosheth duo, the same Israelites who had made parting shots at David on his way out of Israel, now waiting for him at the Jordan River, hats in-hand, as it were, as he comes back into Israel.
Read
text in my translation, starting at v.15:
Then
the king began the return and came up to the Jordan, and Judah went
toward Gilgal to go call on the king in order to bring the king over
the Jordan. And Shimei, the son of Gera the Benjamite from Bahurim,
hurried and came down with the men of Judah to call upon David the
King. And a thousand men from Benjamin were with him, including
Tsiba the man-servant of the house of Saul (with his 15 sons and his
20 servants with him), and they advanced across the Jordan in front
of the King. And when the ferry began crossing over to bring the
King’s household over (and to do whatever was good in his
eyes), Shimei, son of Gera, dropped down in front of the king while
he was crossing over in the Jordan, and he said to the king, “Don’t
reckon iniquity to me, my master, and don’t remember how your
servant produced iniquity on that day when my master the King went
out from Jerusalem, for the king to harbor in his heart, for I, your
servant, know that I have sinned. Now see, today I have come, the
first of all the household of Joseph, to come down in order to call
upon my master the king.” Then Abishai, son of Tseruiah
responded and said, “Shouldn’t Shimei be put to death
over this? For he made light of Yahweh’s anointed one!”
But David said, “What do I have in common with y’all,
sons of Tseruiah, that y’all should become prosecutorial for
me today? Shall a man be put to death in Israel today? Indeed, don’t
I know that I am King over Israel today?” Then the king said
to Shimei, “You shall not die,” thus the king swore to
him. Mephibosheth, {grand-}son of Saul also came down to call upon
the king. Now he had not tended to his feet nor had he tended to his
facial hair, and he had not washed his clothes from the day of the
king’s going until the day when he arrived in peace. And it
happened when Jerusalem went to call upon the king, that the king
said to him, “Why didn’t you go with me, Mephibosheth?”
And he said, “My master the king, my own servant deceived me,
for your servant said {to him}, ‘Let me saddle the donkey for
myself, then I will ride on it and go with the king,’ (for
your servant is crippled). So, he went under false pretenses against
your servant to my master the king. Nevertheless, my master the king
is like an angel of God, so do what is good in your eyes. For the
entire household of my father would not exist except as dead men
before my master the king, yet you placed your servant with those
who ate at your table! And so, why should there be for me any more
of a right to cry out any more to the king?” Then the king
said to him, “Why should you speak of your matters any more?
Y’all – you and Tsiba – shall share the estate. I
have spoken.” So Mephibosheth said to the king, “Better
yet, let him take the entirety, after such time as my master the
king has come in peace to his palace.”
This passage naturally divides into two sections,
one profiling Shimei’s attempt to reconcile his previous offense against David by means of a humble confession and restitution,
and the other profiling Mephibosheth’s attempt to reconcile with David by means of passive trust in David’s mercy.
There is no consensus among Bible scholars as to whether Shimei and Mephobosheth did the right thing,
but I think we can learn good lessons from Shimei about how to resolve conflicts with fellow human beings,
and I think we can learn a lot about how to get right with God through Mephibosheth’s example. Let’s start with...
When we studied chapter 16, we read the story of Shimei cursing and insulting King David and his followers (and throwing rocks at them) as they fled from Absalom out of Jerusalem through the town of Bahurim, in the hill country of Benjamin, where Shimei lived.
At that time, David was struggling with despair, entertaining the thought that Absalom was legitimately the new king, and entertaining the possibility that God had inspired Shimei to curse him after his overthrow. So David had meekly endured Shimei’s insults then.
But now, it has become clear that Absalom’s coup was NOT under God’s blessing. Instead, Absalom was dead, and God was turning the hearts of the nation to reinstate David as king.
This left Shimei in a very dangerous situation politically:
David was about to cross the Jordan River from his place of exile and march his soldiers right through Shimei’s hometown on his way back into Jerusalem to reclaim his throne.
And David could be a hothead! In First Samuel 25, David had vowed to kill every male resident in Nabal’s compound over an insult that was less serious than Shimei’s.
And even if David could keep his own head cool, his army officers were another matter entirely! Chances were, Joab or Abishai (who had already wanted to kill Shimei back in chapter 16) would conveniently avenge David on their way back through Bahurim by assassinating Shimei for his insolence, whether or not David approved.
v.16 tells us that Shimei had to “hurry” and act “quickly” to save his skin. Acting quickly to resolve a problem that you created is important.
In the case of Nabal’s insult back in 1 Samuel, the scriptures tell us that Nabal’s wife’s quick action to smooth things over with David was strategic. In 1 Samuel 25:34, David told Abigail, “...indeed if you had not hurried and come to me to call me off, then by the light of the morning, there would not have been left to Nabal even one…” (NAW)
Jesus also spoke of the value of acting quickly to resolve a dispute in Matthew 5:25, “Get to be on good terms with your accuser quickly, even while you are with him on the road, lest it happen to be you that the accuser delivers over to the judge... and you be thrown into prison!” Agree with your adversary quickly. Letting an offense fester un-dealt-with will only make it worse.
In addition to acting quickly, Shimei also did something tangible to prove his change of heart2. He did not come down from his hometown in the hills to meet David at the Jordan River with nothing but empty words; he brought thousands of men with him to support David’s return.
I imagine it was no small feat to get a thousand men to quit their work for a day and run 40 miles round-trip down to the Jordan River and back with him,
and I imagine that someone as volatile as Shimei was not the sort of person that a lot of men would want to follow, but perhaps what he lacked in wisdom and trustworthiness, he made up for in zeal, and he worked as feverishly to recruit this welcoming party as he had been earlier so zealous to pelt David’s company with rocks. Channeling your zeal in a wise direction can be a good thing!
How did Shimei find out that David was on his way back? Bahurim seems to have been a rest stop for folks traveling between the Jordan River and Jerusalem, so it’s possible that the messengers whom David had sent, in verse 11, to the priests in Jerusalem, stopped in Bahurim on the way and shared the news with David’s supporters there. And I imagine that the news would have gotten around to Shimei pretty quickly from there, because everybody in Bahurim would have known how he had insulted David.
This crowd of Benjamites began setting up a system to get David and all his people safely back across the Jordan River, and to do it with as much honor toward David as possible, giving him first-class treatment. Meanwhile, Shimei makes a beeline across the river toward David to ask for pardon.
The Hebrew wording here3 could be interpreted to mean that Shimei bowed down “in” the muddy shallows of the river in front of David, before David was carried across. Shimei spared himself no dignity in his desperation.
When we have offended someone else, we need to humble ourselves in order to ask forgiveness, even if it means getting some mud on our face.
“[H]e did it publicly before all David's servants, and his friends the men of Judah, yea, and before his own thousand. The offence was public, therefore the submission ought to be so.”~Matthew Henry
Three times, Shimei calls David his “master/lord,” and twice Shimei calls himself David’s “servant,” and twice Shimei calls David “King.” Shimei wanted to quickly establish where he was in relationship to David. He was no longer a rebel who was doing his own thing and refusing to acknowledge David’s kingship; he was now David’s servant, committed to honoring David as his lord and king.
Shimei also acknowledges that the thing he did was wrong. He says, “I sinned.”
It’s very important, if you have done wrong, to confess it as sin rather than make excuses for it, or minimize it, or ignore it. The person you sinned against – whether it is God or somebody else – they know that you did them wrong, and if you act like you didn’t do anything wrong, that makes the offense even worse.
Then Shimei asks David three times to no longer consider him an offender, “Don’t reckon iniquity to me... don’t remember how your servant committed iniquity that day... [don’t] harbor [a grudge] in [your] heart.”
Asking forgiveness is part of making an offense right. The other person might not be ready to forgive you, but you need to give them the opportunity to forgive you by asking. And what a burden it is, off of both of your minds, if they do forgive you!
Finally, Shimei offers a form of restitution to restore the damage of dishonor which he had done to his king. He rushes to be the first to welcome David back to Israel as king, and he mobilizes a thousand Benjamites to form a welcoming party and to give David royal treatment in crossing the river.
If Shimei had waited until David had marched into Bahurim and arrested him at his house, and then he had offered an apology, there would have been reason to question his sincerity, but since Shimei had already taken actions with a thousand men to honor David before begging pardon, it seemed much more plausible that he had truly had a change of heart and was no longer a rebel.
But David’s nephew Abishai wasn’t convinced. He had already reached the point of wanting to kill Shimei a few chapters ago, when he said, "Why should this dead dog curse my master the king? Please let me go over and remove his head!" (16:9, NAW) So now, for a second time, he suggests to David that it’s time to put Shimei to death, although Abishai is a little more restrained in his words this time: “Shouldn’t Shimei be put to death over this? For he has made light of Yahweh’s anointed one!”
Abishai is quoting David’s own words, for he had heard David say at least 8 times4 that it was forbidden to “raise a hand against the anointed one of Yahweh.” But Abishai is stretching the application a bit, for in each case, David had been talking about killing the LORD’s anointed, whereas Shimei had only cursed and thrown rocks at the LORD’s anointed.
In doing do, Abishai was taking up the role of “accuser” against Shimei, turning the scene into a court case with David as the judge.
So, what would David do?
Would he honor Shimei’s request for mercy, and take the risk of allowing a loose cannon like Shimei to remain in his kingdom, thus signaling tolerance toward everyone who had foolishly opposed him in the recent war?
Or would he honor Abishai’s request for justice, and put to death the man who had so grievously insulted him, thus making an example of him for all who would dare to speak against his authority as king?
David decides in favor of mercy.
He tells Abishai that just because he is his nephew, doesn’t mean he has to prosecute everybody who insults him.
Further, David reasons that enough blood has been spilled in the recent civil war, and that this day5 needs to be of an opposite character. Nobody should be put to death on David’s first day back in office. It should be a day of rejoicing, a day of peace, a time of healing.
In doing so, however, David looses none of his royal authority. His oath, “You shall not die,” is spoken with the knowledge that he could just as well have said, “You shall die,” and Shimei would have been executed. David knows he is king, and he knows that, as king, he has the power to judge capital crimes.
David chose to forgive when he could have pursued punishment against his offender, and I think it is in large part due to the wise way in which Shimei sought resolution through his quickness to reconcile, tangible restitution, humbling himself, confession of sin, and plea for forgiveness.
The second person in this account who approaches David is Mephibosheth.
Unlike Shimei, Mephibosheth decides to deny his sin and take a passive approach which simply expects mercy. Let’s see how that works.
In 9:13 and 16:3, we read that Mephibosheth lived in Jerusalem. Jerusalem was located on a high hill, so when anyone in the Bible travels from Jerusalem to anywhere else, they literally “go down,”
and that is the verb we encounter in v.24 – Mephibosheth “went down to meet” David. (These are the same verbs, incidentally, that we encountered in v.16 about Shimei “coming down” to the Jordan River to “call on” David as well.)
Then in v.25 we have a different Hebrew verb which simply means to “go” rather than to “go down” – it is the same verb used in v.23 describing David “going in” to Jerusalem. However, in v.25, the Hebrew text doesn’t have a preposition next to Jerusalem; rather it puts the noun for “Jerusalem” in the position of the subject, literally, “When Jerusalem went to meet the king.” That’s the way the Hebrew reads6, and that’s the way the ancient Latin reads too7.
However, the ancient Syriac, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts add a preposition meaning “to” before “Jerusalem,” turning “Jerusalem” into the destination rather than the subject, “When he [Mephibosheth] came in to Jerusalem to meet the king,” and that is what most English versions follow,
although the ancient Arabic version instead of the preposition “to” adds the preposition “from” before the word “Jerusalem,” and that is what the NASB and NIV followed.
(The NLT omits the first half of verse 25 altogether.)
The way the Hebrew and Latin and Arabic read (and the NASB, NIV and NLT edited it), verses 24 and 25 could both refer to a single trip which Mephibosheth made from Jerusalem down to the Jordan River to meet David8, and that is the way I interpret it.
However, the way the Septuagint, Targums, Syriac, King James, and ESV edited it, the trip “to Jerusalem” to meet the King in v.25 seems to indicate a different trip in a different direction than the one Mephibosheth took when he “went down” from Jerusalem in v.24 to meet the king.
This difference can be reconciled, however, if Mephibosheth’s audience with David happened during the journey back up into the hills from the river toward Jerusalem or even after David’s return to Jerusalem9, in which case this part of the story would be a kind of fast-forward to a future event, but continuing the same topic of dubious characters trying to reconcile with King David10.
At any rate, Mephibosheth presented himself in a startling condition when he met up with the king, for he hadn’t washed his clothes or brushed his hair the whole time David had been gone from Jerusalem.11 We don’t have enough timestamps in this history to calculate exactly how long that had been, but it had been many days, at the least, and enough time for Mephibosheth to start looking and smelling bad.
19th Century commentator Robert Jamieson explained, “The Hebrews cut off the hair on the upper lip (Lev. 13:45), and cheeks, but carefully cherished it on the chin from ear to ear. Besides dyeing it black... there are various modes of trimming it: they train it into a massy, bushy form, swelling and round; or they terminate it like a pyramid, in a sharp point. Whatever the mode, it is always trimmed with the greatest care; and they usually carry a small comb for the purpose. The neglect of this attention to his beard was an undoubted proof of the depth of Mephibosheth’s grief.”
Also, since he had not washed, this probably meant that he was unclean and therefore unable to attend worship services, which meant that he had not had interaction with the priests, and therefore, he might not have heard much news about David.
When David sees Mephibosheth, he gives him the opportunity to defend himself, although David’s question has an accusing tone to it: “Why didn’t you go with me, Mephibosheth12?”
On that fateful day in chapter 15, when David had fled from Jerusalem, he had gathered all of his followers, including women and children, and they had all gone out together, so why wasn’t Mephibosheth among them?
Mephibosheth’s answer shifts all the blame upon his servant, and it focuses on his own pitiful dependence upon David’s favor.
Mephibosheth calls himself “your servant” – that is, David’s servant, and he claims that he had spoken to his own servant Tsiba (whom David himself had assigned to serve Mephibosheth), and Mephibosheth had commanded Tsiba to let him strap a saddle around a donkey for himself so that he could follow David out of Jerusalem on that donkey.
The implication is that when Tsiba instead gave those donkeys as a gift to David on his way out of Jerusalem, one of those donkeys was Mephibosheth’s donkey, and since Tsiba had taken Mephibosheth’s donkey and given it to David, Mephibosheth had not been physically able to follow David out of Jerusalem, since he was lame in both feet. Mephibosheth paints himself as a helpless victim.
Mephibosheth then claims that Tsiba played the part of an enemy spy13 by slandering him and telling David that Mephibosheth had remained in Jerusalem hoping to become king after David.
According to v.17, Tsiba was there, potentially hearing what Mephibosheth was saying now to David, but no howls of protest from Tsiba at this point are recorded, so that might also lend believability to Mephibosheth’s account.
Although there is some plausibility to Mephibosheth’s explanation, there are also problems with it:
Everybody in David’s palace (except for the ten concubines assigned to stay behind) were ready and waiting to go with David, according to the palace manager’s statement in 2 Samuel 15:15. And, presumably, Mephibosheth was in the palace that day. He had been given time to get ready, and there were servants who could have carried him. So why didn’t he go with them?
Secondly, the nature of the master-slave relationship in the Biblical system of slavery was such that, if the servant did not obey his master, it was the master’s own problem. The master was responsible for the behavior of his servants. If they didn’t obey him, he had the authority to discipline them in the same way that a father could discipline his children and to train them to do what is right. And if the master did not treat his servants kindly, it was his own fault if they didn’t like him or if they tried to escape from him. Mephibosheth probably was frustrated with Tsiba, but Mephibosheth wasn’t a helpless victim. He was the master. For a prince among the king’s sons to place all the blame for his failure to support David upon one action of disobedience done by one servant, was simply not reasonable.
In addition to shifting the blame and not admitting fault, Mephibosheth, without having done anything to show support for David (except to go along with the crowd when they welcomed David back), appeals to his dependence upon David to continue to show him favor.
He reminds David that he is crippled (as though David couldn’t see that!)
He also recalls that David had spared his life, even though he was part of the family of the former King Saul.
Instead of killing all of Saul’s heirs, despite their uprising against David in Ishbosheth’s brief stand in Machanaim, David had spared Mephibosheth’s life,
and, what’s more, David had offered to provide for all his needs like a son, for the rest of his life!
Mephibosheth claims to be a “servant” of David, and calls David his “master” and “king,” yet he has nothing but words to back that up.
Now, there is plausibility to his words, because, if he is totally dependent upon David, it wouldn’t make sense for him to “bite the hand that feeds him,” as it were, and rebel against David.
Mephibosheth also claims that he has no “right” to “cry out” to the king, when in fact, he has just done that very thing. The Hebrew word in v.28 translated “cry out/appeal/complain/ask” means to object to an injustice or to plead with an authority to right a wrong, and that is exactly what Mephibosheth has just done by complaining to the king about being double-crossed by his servant.
Then Mephibosheth passively waits for David to decide whether or not to show any more kindness to him, hoping that David will take pity on him. “You are an angel of God, therefore do what is good in your eyes.”
So, was Mephibosheth telling the truth? It’s not entirely clear:
Back in chapter 16, Tsiba had told David that his master Mephibosheth was staying on in Jerusalem, waiting to welcome Absalom as he overthrew David’s administration, expecting that the northern tribes would crown him king of Israel when Absalom made his move to become king over the southern tribes in Jerusalem14.
Mephibosheth’s character does not seem to be particularly respectable. He seems to be a bit of a freeloader who does nothing, perhaps out of self-pity over his lame feet and perhaps out of a sense of the tragedy of being the lone surviving heir of Saul’s house with no chance of recovering Saul’s throne. So Tsiba’s accusation seems plausible, considering Mephibosheth’s character.
However, Mephibosheth’s unkempt appearance seems to support his claim. If Mephibosheth had been thinking he would be crowned king, he must have been disabused of that notion pretty quickly and, in regret, gone into mourning over David’s overthrow.
Although it is not clear whether either of them were telling the whole truth, what is clear is that there was a power struggle between Tsiba and Mephibosheth, for they were mighty quick to cast aspersions on one another.
I don’t think David trusted Mephibosheth or Tsiba15. I think David could tell that they were both fudging on the truth in order to convince him to give one or the other of them the edge over the other, and David doesn’t want to play their game.
That explains to me why David seems so cavalier toward Mephibosheth now.
David answers Mephibosheth’s closing question with a question, as if to say, “Well, if you say you have no right to cry out against this injustice, why should I consider your complaint? I’ll give you one last ruling, and no more.”
In chapter 9, David had given to Mephibosheth all that had belonged to Saul16.
Then in chapter 16, David had given to Tsiba all that had belonged to Mephibosheth17.
Now, David says, “Share Saul’s estate between the two of you.”
Bible scholars debate whether this was a new ruling where each were to own half, or whether this was a return to the first ruling, since, under the first arrangement in chapter 9, both Mephibosheth and Tsiba were to provide for themselves off of Saul’s estate18.
But after ruling on it this third time, I get the impression that David has lost patience with Mephibosheth and Tsiba. He’s not going to mediate their squabbles any more. From here on out, they’ll just have to work it out for themselves!
The picture I get in my mind is from the end of the Disney cartoon, Robin Hood (perhaps inspired by the old Punch and Judy show?), where the greedy Prince John and his reptilian sidekick Hiss spend their last scene blaming each other for their downfall and chasing each other with a stick while their castle burns down around them. That’s the mental image I get of what would have happened if Mephibosheth and Tsiba had tried to split Saul’s estate.
And I think Mephibosheth saw that outcome too, so he did some quick figuring:
if he were to give full ownership of the estate to Tsiba, that would satisfy Tsiba (because all he wants is the wealth), and Tsiba would settle down in Gibeon to manage it all.
Meanwhile, if Mephibosheth could live in the palace in Jerusalem with all his needs met under David’s provision, like David had previously offered him in chapter 9, he would be a safe distance away from Tsiba and could live in peace.
So Mephibosheth counter-proposes that Tsiba take it all, once David has settled back in as king in Jerusalem.
The Bible doesn’t mention Mephibosheth again after this, except for a flashback in 21:7, so presumably, Mephibosheth resumed residence at David’s table and didn’t make any more trouble.
Mephibosheth’s passive, mercy-centered approach was risky; it might not work with a lot of people to bring reconciliation, but I submit to you that it worked in this case:
because of the nature of his covenant relationship with David,
and because of who David was, as the LORD’s anointed.
When we offend a fellow human being, especially when there is little relationship between you, such as might be the case if you were to cause a wreck on the highway, we would do well to follow the example of Shimei with David by:
Acting quickly,
Making tangible restitution,
Humbling yourself,
Confessing your sin, and
Asking for forgiveness.
But what if your offense is against God?
He says, “You shall have no other gods before me19,” and “the soul that sins, it shall die20.”
And yet, in our self-centeredness, we forget that He even exists, and we selfishly do things for our own pleasure and reputation. And our hearts are like idol-factories, coveting things and coveting relationships and coveting experiences for ourselves.
And then we catch ourselves and realize, “Uh oh. How am I going to smooth this over with God?
I can’t fool Him and say it wasn’t my fault.
I can’t change myself and become good enough to be acceptable to Him for the rest of eternity.
And I can’t give Him anything to appease Him for these offenses, because He owns everything, since He created it all.” (Offering Him something would be like if I were to wreck somebody else’s car, then rip the door handle off of his wrecked car and hand it to him and say, “Here is a gift to make up for me wrecking your car!”)
All we can do is what Mephibosheth did: Come to Jesus, the LORD’s anointed (successor to David) and say, “Lord, I am your servant, and your servant is lame. I can’t make this right. Me and my family are worthy of eternal death, and yet, you have told me that I could eat at your table with your children. I place myself at Your mercy again and ask you to do what You think is good.”
Do you see how, once again, David is a type of Christ,
who chooses to have mercy on those He wants to show mercy to (Rom. 9:15),
who turns rebellious enemies into sons,
who feeds them at His table,
and who receives them back in love when they cast themselves upon His mercy?
Whether or not Mephibosheth himself had any integrity, we can still adopt Mephibosheth’s strategy with David, when we come before Jesus the Messiah, because of who Jesus is, and because of the nature of His covenant with us.
As we grasp the magnitude of Christ’s mercy and our inability to earn it,
let us be like the man who found the treasure in the field and sold all he had to get it.
Let us say with Mephibosheth, “Let them have all the property, just let me live in the presence of Jesus.”
“The presence and favour of the king shall be to me instead of all else!” ~Matthew Henry
LXX |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
16) καὶ ἐπέστρεψεν ὁ βασιλεὺς καὶ ἦλθεν ἕως τοῦ Ιορδάνου, καὶ [ἄνδρες] Ιουδα ἦλθαν εἰς Γαλγαλα τοῦ πορεύεσθαι εἰς ἀπαντὴν τοῦ βασιλέως διαβιβάσαι τὸν βασιλέα τὸν Ιορδάνην. -- |
15 And the king returned, and came as far as X Jordan. And [the men of] Juda came to Galgala on their way to meet the king, to cause the king to pass over Jordan. |
15
And the king returned and came as far as the Jordan, and [all]
Juda came |
15 So the king returned, and came to X Jordan. And Judah came to Gilgal, to go to meet the king, to conduct the king over X Jordan. |
15 Then the king began the return and came up to the Jordan, and Judah went toward Gilgal to go call on the king in order to bring the king over the Jordan. |
16 וַיָּשָׁב הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיָּבֹא עַד-הַיַּרְדֵּן וִBיהוּדָה בָּא הַגִּלְגָּלָה לָלֶכֶת לִקְרַאת הַמֶּלֶךְ לְהַעֲבִיר אֶת-הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת-הַיַּרְדֵּן: |
17) καὶ ἐτάχυνεν Σεμεϊ υἱὸς Γηρα υἱοῦ τοῦ Ιεμενι X ἐκ Βαουριμ καὶ κατέβη μετὰ ἀνδρὸς Ιουδα εἰς ἀπαντὴν τοῦ βασιλέως Δαυιδ |
16 And Semei the son of Gera, the Benjamite, X of Baurim, hasted and went down with the men of Juda to meet king David. |
16 And Semei the son of Gera the son of Jemini X of Bahurim, made haste and went down with the men of Juda to meet king David, |
16 And Shimei the son of Gera, a Benjamite, which was of Bahurim, hasted and came down with the men of Judah to meet king David. |
16 And Shimei, the son of Gera the Benjamite {} from Bahurim, hurried and came down with the men of Judah to call upon David the King. |
17 וַיְמַהֵרC שִׁמְעִי בֶן-גֵּרָא בֶּן-הַיְמִינִי אֲשֶׁרD מִבַּחוּרִים וַיֵּרֶד עִם-אִישׁ יְהוּדָה לִקְרַאת הַמֶּלֶךְ דָּוִד: |
18) καὶ χίλιοι ἄνδρες μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐκ τοῦ Βενιαμιν καὶ Σιβα τὸ παιδάριον τοῦ οἴκου Σαουλ καὶ δέκα πέντε υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ [μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ] καὶ εἴκοσι δοῦλοι αὐτοῦ μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ κατεύθυναν τὸν Ιορδάνην ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ βασιλέως |
17 And a thousand men of Benjamin were with him, and Siba the servant of the house of Saul, and his fifteen sons [with him], and his twenty servants with him: and they went directly down to Jordan before the king, |
17 X With X a thousand men of Benjamin, and Siba the servant of the house of Saul: and his fifteen sons, and X twenty servants were with him: and going over the Jordan, 18 ... before the king, |
17 And there were a thousand men of Benjamin with him, and Ziba the servant of the house of Saul, and his fifteen sons and his twenty servants with him; and they went over Jordan before the king. |
17 And a thousand men from Benjamin were with him, including Tsiba the man-servant of the house of Saul (with his 15 sons and his 20 servants with him), and they advanced across the Jordan in front of the King. |
18 וְאֶלֶף אִישׁ עִמּוֹ מִבִּנְיָמִן וְצִיבָא נַעַר בֵּית שָׁאוּל וַחֲמֵשֶׁת עָשָׂר בָּנָיו וְעֶשְׂרִים עֲבָדָיו אִתּוֹ וְצָלְחוּE הַיַּרְדֵּן לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ: |
19) [καὶ ἐλειτούργησαν τὴν λειτουργίαν τοῦ διαβιβάσαι τὸν βασιλέα,] καὶ διέβη ἡ διάβασις ἐξεγεῖραι τὸν οἶκον τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ εὐθὲς ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐτοῦ. καὶ Σεμεϊ υἱὸς Γηρα ἔπεσεν [ἐπὶ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ] ἐνώπιον τοῦ βασιλέως διαβαίνοντος αὐτοῦ X τὸν Ιορδάνην |
18 [Fand they performed the service of bringing the king over;] and there went over a ferry-boat to remove the household of the king, and to do that which was right in his eyes. And Semei the son of Gera fell [on his face] before the king, as he went over X X Jordan; |
18
X
|
18
And there went over a ferry
[boat]
to carry over the king's household, and to do what X
|
18 And when the ferry began crossing over to bring the King’s household over (and to do whatever was good in his eyes), Shimei, son of Gera, dropped down in front of the king while he was crossing over in the Jordan, |
19 וְעָבְרָהG הָעֲבָרָהH לַעֲבִיר אֶת-בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ וְלַעֲשׂוֹת הַטּוֹב בְּעַיְנוֹI וְשִׁמְעִי בֶן-גֵּרָא נָפַל לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ בְּעָבְרוֹ בַּיַּרְדֵּן: |
20) καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα Μὴ διαλογισάσθω ὁ κύριός μου ἀνομίαν καὶ μὴ μνησθῇς ὅσα ἠδίκησεν ὁ παῖς σου ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, ᾗ ὁ κύριός μου ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐξεπορεύετο ἐξ Ιερουσαλημ, τοῦ θέσθαι τὸν βασιλέα εἰς τὴν καρδίαν αὐτοῦ, |
19
and said to the king, Let not my lord [nowJ]
impute
iniquity, and remember not |
19
Said to him X:
Impute
not to me, my lord, [the]
iniquity, nor remember X
|
19 And said unto the king, Let not my lord impute iniquity unto me, neither do thou remember that which thy servant did perversely X the day that my lord the king went out of Jerusalem, that the king should take it to his heart. |
19 and he said to the king, “Don’t reckon iniquity to me, my master, and don’t remember how your servant produced iniquity on that day when my master the King went out from Jerusalem, for the king to harbor in his heart, |
20 וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל-הַמֶּלֶךְ אַל- יַחֲשָׁב-לִי אֲדֹנִי עָוֹן וְאַל-תִּזְכֹּר אֵת אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱוָה עַבְדְּךָ בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר-יָצָא אֲדֹנִי-הַמֶּלֶךְ מִירוּשָׁלִָם לָשׂוּם הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶל-לִבּוֹ: |
21) ὅτι ἔγνω ὁ δοῦλός σου ὅτι ἐγὼ ἥμαρτον, καὶ ἰδοὺ [ἐγὼ] ἦλθον σήμερον πρότερος παντὸς οἴκου Ιωσηφ τοῦ καταβῆναι εἰς ἀπαντὴν τοῦ κυρίου μου τοῦ βασιλέως. |
20
For thy servant knows that I have sinned: and, behold, I am come
to-day |
20
For I thy servant acknowledge X
|
20 For thy servant doth know that I have sinned: therefore, behold, I am come the first this day of all the house of Joseph to go down to meet my lord the king. |
20 for I, your servant, know that I have sinned. Now see, today I have come, the first of all the household of Joseph, to come down in order to call upon my master the king.” |
21 כִּי יָדַע עַבְדְּךָ כִּי אֲנִי חָטָאתִי וְהִנֵּה- בָאתִי הַיּוֹם רִאשׁוֹן לְכָל-בֵּית יוֹסֵףO לָרֶדֶת לִקְרַאת אֲדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ: ס |
22) καὶ ἀπεκρίθη Αβεσσα υἱὸς Σαρουιας καὶ εἶπεν Μὴ ἀντὶ τούτου οὐ θανατωθήσεται Σεμεϊ, ὅτι κατηράσατο τὸν χριστὸν κυρίου; |
21 And Abessai the son of Saruia answered and said, Shall not Semei therefore be put to death, because he cursed the Lord's anointed? |
21
But Abisai the son of Sarvia answering, X
said: Shall Semei for th |
21 But Abishai the son of Zeruiah answered and said, Shall not Shimei be put to death for this, because he cursed the LORD'S anointed? |
21 Then Abishai, son of Tseruiah responded and said, “Shouldn’t Shimei be put to death over this? For he made light of Yahweh’s anointed one!” |
22 וַיַּעַן אֲבִישַׁי בֶּן-צְרוּיָה וַיֹּאמֶר הֲתַחַת זֹאת לֹא יוּמַת שִׁמְעִי כִּי קִלֵּל אֶת-מְשִׁיחַ יְהוָה: ס |
23)
καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ
Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ
ὑμῖν, υἱοὶ Σαρουιας,
ὅτι γίνεσθέ
μοι σήμερον
εἰς
ἐπίβουλον;
σήμερον [οὐ]
θανατωθήσεταί
[τιςP]
ἀνὴρ ἐξ Ισραηλ,
ὅτι οὐκ οἶδα
εἰ σήμερον
βασιλεύ |
22
And David said, What have I to do with you, [ye]
sons of Saruia, that ye as it were lie
in wait
against me this day? to-day [no]
man in Israel shall be put to death, for I know not if I this day
|
22
And David said: What have I to do with you, [ye]
sons of Sarvia? |
22
And David said, What have I to do with you, [ye]
sons of Zeruiah, that ye should this day be X
adversar |
22 But David said, “What do I have in common with y’all, sons of Tseruiah, that y’all should become prosecutorial for me today? Shall a man be put to death in Israel today? Indeed, don’t I know that I am King over Israel today?” |
23 וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד מַה-לִּי וְלָכֶם בְּנֵי צְרוּיָהR כִּי- תִהְיוּ-לִי הַיּוֹם לְשָׂטָן הַיּוֹםS יוּמַת אִישׁ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי הֲלוֹא יָדַעְתִּי כִּי הַיּוֹם אֲנִי-מֶלֶךְ עַל-יִשְׂרָאֵל: |
24) καὶ εἶπεν ὁ βασιλεὺς πρὸς Σεμεϊ Οὐ μὴ ἀποθάνῃς· καὶ ὤμοσεν αὐτῷ ὁ βασιλεύς. -- |
23 And the king said to Semei, Thou shalt not die: and the king swore to him. |
23 And the king said to Semei: Thou shalt not die. And he swore unto him. |
23 Therefore the king said unto Shimei, Thou shalt not die. And the king sware unto him. |
23 Then the king said to Shimei, “You shall not die,” thus the king swore to him. |
24 וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶל-שִׁמְעִי לֹא תָמוּת וַיִּשָּׁבַע לוֹ הַמֶּלֶךְ: ס |
25)
καὶ Μεμφιβοσθε
υἱὸς [Ιωναθαν
υἱοῦ]
Σαουλ κατέβη
εἰς ἀπαντὴν
τοῦ βασιλέως·
καὶ οὐκ |
24
And Memphibosthe the son of Saul['s
sonT]
went down to meet the king, and had not dressed
his feet, [nor
pared
his nails,]
nor |
24
And Miphiboseth the son of Saul came down to meet the king, and he
had neither |
24
And Mephibosheth the son of Saul came down to meet the king, and
had neither dressed
his feet, nor |
24 Mephibosheth, {grand-}son of Saul also came down to call upon the king. Now he had not tended to his feet nor had he tended to his facial hair, and he had not washed his clothes from the day of the king’s going until the day when he arrived in peace. |
25 וּמְפִבֹשֶׁת בֶּן-שָׁאוּל יָרַד לִקְרַאת הַמֶּלֶךְ וְלֹא-עָשָׂה רַגְלָיו וְלֹא-עָשָׂה שְׂפָמוֹV וְאֶת-בְּגָדָיו לֹא כִבֵּס לְמִן-הַיּוֹם לֶכֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ עַד-הַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר-בָּא בְשָׁלוֹם: |
26) καὶ ἐγένετο ὅτε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς Ιερουσαλημ εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ βασιλέως, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ βασιλεύς Τί ὅτι οὐκ ἐπορεύθης μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ, Μεμφιβοσθε; |
25 And it came to pass when he went into Jerusalem to meet the king, that the king said to him, Why didst thou not go with me, Memphibosthe? |
25 And when he X X met the king at Jerusalem, the king said to him: Why camest thou not with me, Miphiboseth? |
25 And it came to pass, when he was come to Jerusalem to meet the king, that the king said unto him, Wherefore wentest not thou with me, Mephibosheth? |
25 And it happened when Jerusalem went to call upon the king, that the king said to him, “Why didn’t you go with me, Mephibosheth?” |
26 וַיְהִי כִּי-בָא Wיְרוּשָׁלִַם לִקְרַאת הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ הַמֶּלֶךְ לָמָּה לֹא-הָלַכְתָּ עִמִּי מְפִיבֹשֶׁת: |
27)
καὶ εἶπεν [πρὸς
αὐτὸν Μεμφιβοσθε]
Κύριέ μου βασιλεῦ,
ὁ δοῦλός μου
παρελογίσατό
με,
ὅτι εἶπεν ὁ παῖς
σου [αὐτῷ]
Ἐπίσαξ |
26 And [Memphibosthe] said [to him], My lord, O king, my servant deceived me; for thy servant said [to him], X Saddle me the ass, and I will ride upon it, and go with the king; for thy servant is lame. |
26
And he [answering,]
said: My lord, O king, my servant |
26 And he answered, My lord, O king, my servant deceived me: for thy servant said, I will saddle me an ass, that I may ride thereon, and go to the king; because thy servant is lame. |
26 And he said, “My master the king, my own servant deceived me, for your servant said {to him}, ‘Let me saddle the donkey for myself, then I will ride on it and go with the king,’ (for your servant is crippled). |
27 וַיֹּאמַרX אֲדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ עַבְדִּי רִמָּנִי כִּי-אָמַר עַבְדְּךָY אֶחְבְּשָׁהZ-לִּי הַחֲמוֹר וְאֶרְכַּב עָלֶיהָ וְאֵלֵךְ AAאֶת-ABהַמֶּלֶךְ כִּי פִסֵּחַ עַבְדֶּךָ: |
28) καὶ μεθώδευσεν ἐν τῷ δούλῳ σου πρὸς τὸν κύριόν μου τὸν βασιλέα, καὶ ὁ κύριός μου ὁ βασιλεὺς ὡς ἄγγελος τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ ποίησον τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς σου· |
27 And he has dealt deceitfully with thy servant to my lord the king: but my lord the king is as an angel of God, and do thou that which is good in thine eyes. |
27 Moreover he hath [also] accused [me] thy servant to [thee], my lord the king: but thou my lord the king art as an angel of God, do what pleaseth X X thee. |
27 And he hath slandered thy servant unto my lord the king; but my lord the king is as an angel of God: do therefore what is good in thine eyes. |
27 So, he went under false pretenses against your servant to my master the king. Nevertheless, my master the king is like an angel of God, so do what is good in your eyes. |
28 וַיְרַגֵּל בְּעַבְדְּךָ אֶל-אֲדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ וַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ כְּמַלְאַךְ הָאֱלֹהִים וַעֲשֵׂה הַטּוֹב בְּעֵינֶיךָAC: |
29) ὅτι οὐκ ἦν πᾶς ὁ οἶκος τοῦ πατρός μου ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ὅτι ἄνδρες θανάτου τῷ κυρίῳ μου τῷ βασιλεῖ, καὶ ἔθηκας τὸν δοῦλόν σου ἐν τοῖς ἐσθίουσιν τὴν τράπεζάν σου· καὶ τί ἐστίν μοι ἔτι δικαίωμα καὶ τοῦ κεκραγέναι με ἔτι πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα; |
28 For all the house of my father were X X but as dead men before my lord the king; yet thou hast set thy servant among them that eat at thy table: and what right have I any longer even to cry X to the king? |
28
For all of my father's house w |
28 For all of my father's house were X X but dead men before my lord the king: yet didst thou set thy servant among them that did eat at thine [own] table. What right therefore have I yet X to cry any more unto the king? |
28 For the entire household of my father would not exist except as dead men before my master the king, yet you placed your servant with those who ate at your table! And so, why should there be for me any more of a right to cry out any more to the king?” |
29 כִּי לֹא הָיָה כָּל-בֵּית אָבִי כִּי אִם-אַנְשֵׁי-מָוֶת לַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ וַתָּשֶׁת אֶת-עַבְדְּךָ בְּאֹכְלֵי שֻׁלְחָנֶךָ וּמַה-יֶּשׁ-לִי עוֹד צְדָקָה וְלִזְעֹקAD עוֹד אֶל-הַמֶּלֶךְ: פ |
30) καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ βασιλεύς Ἵνα τί λαλεῖς ἔτι τοὺς λόγους σου; εἶπον Σὺ καὶ Σιβα διελεῖσθε τὸν ἀγρόν. |
29 And the king said to him, Why speakest thou any longer of thy matters? I have said, Thou and Siba shall divide the land. |
29
Then the king said to him: Why speakest thou any more? |
29 And the king said unto him, Why speakest thou any more of thy matters? I have said, Thou and Ziba divide the land. |
29 Then the king said to him, “Why should you speak of your matters any more? Y’all – you and Tsiba – shall share the estate. I have spoken.” |
30 וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ הַמֶּלֶךְ לָמָּה תְּדַבֵּר עוֹד דְּבָרֶיךָ אָמַרְתִּי אַתָּה וְצִיבָא תַּחְלְקוּAE אֶת-הַשָּׂדֶה: |
31)
καὶ εἶπεν Μεμφιβοσθε
πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα
Καί
γε
τὰ πάντα λαβέτω
μετὰ |
30 And Memphibosthe said to the king, Yea, let him take X all, since X my lord the king has come in peace to his house. |
30
And Miphiboseth answered X
the
king: Yea,
let him take X
all,
forasmuch as my lord the king is |
30 And Mephibosheth said unto the king, Yea, let him take X all, forasmuch as my lord the king is come [again] in peace unto his [own] house. |
30 So Mephibosheth said to the king, “Better yet, let him take the entirety, after such time as my master the king has come in peace to his palace. |
31 וַיֹּאמֶר מְפִיבֹשֶׁת אֶל- הַמֶּלֶךְ גַּם אֶת- הַכֹּל יִקָּח אַחֲרֵי אֲשֶׁר-בָּא אֲדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ בְּשָׁלוֹם אֶל-בֵּיתוֹ: ס |
1By Tsiba, I mean the same person traditionally spelled Ziba. In Hebrew, his name starts with the letter tsade (pronounced “ts”), not with the letter zayin (pronounced “z”). The Greek Septuagint also does not start Tsiba’s name with a zeta (equivalent to our “z”), but rather with the letter sigma, pronounced “s,” since the Greek alphabet does not have a letter for “ts.”
2This is another parallel with Abigail, who brought food to back up her words of support for David and his troops.
3 נָפַל לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ בְּעָבְרוֹ בַּיַּרְדֵּן literally: "he fell before the face of the king in his crossing-over in the Jordan”
41
Samuel 24:6, 10; 26:9, 11, 16, 23; 2 Samuel 1:14, 16
5Note the emphasis on the word “day” in v.22 (Eng.) with threefold repitition.
6Keil & Delitzsch commented with their usual dogmatism, “[T]he rendering... ‘when Mephibosheth came to Jerusalem to meet the king,’ is altogether wrong, and has been very properly given up by modern expositors...”
7“cumque Hierusalem occurrisset regi”
8The New International Commentary on the Old Testament supports this position, but commentator David Tsumura attempts to prove it with the dubious claim that the noun “Jerusalem” is “used adverbially.”
9cf. Matthew Henry, “When the king came to Jerusalem (since he could not sooner have an opportunity) he made his appearance before him…” (Willett’s attempt to reconcile the problem by making David the subject of “came to Jerusalem to meet the king” makes no sense.) Or perhaps it could be reconciled if Mephobosheth had relocated from Jerusalem to a higher altitude (such as Gibeah of Saul) to escape Absalom, although that seems to require more conjecture to maintain (cf. John Gill “Not down to Jordan, but Jerusalem… Perhaps from the place where his estate was... he departed from Jerusalem, being obliged to flee from thence because of Absalom…” This was also Goldman’s position).
10This was the position of the Soncino commentary by Goldman.
11cf. Leviticus 14:8 Then the one who is being purified shall wash his clothes and shave all his hair and bathe in the water, and he will be purified. Then afterward he shall go into the camp...” (NAW)
12The vocative use of a proper name like this seems unusual in court dialogue, which is usually more indirect.
13The Hebrew word that opens v.27 (in the English verse numbering) is the same verb that is translated “spy” in Joshua 2, 2 Sam 10:3, and 15:10.
142 Sam. 16:3 Then the king said, "And where is your master's son?" And Tsiba said to the king, "Indeed he is staying in Jerusalem, for he said,`Today the house of Israel will restore the kingdom of my father to me.'" (NAW)
15Matthew Henry, John Gill, Robert Jamieson, Keil & Delitzsch, and McCarter sided with Mephibosheth, but Goldman agreed with me that neither Mephibosheth nor Tsiba could be trusted, and Tsumura seemed to lean that direction. Jamieson, Keil & Delitzsch, and Tsumura agreed, at least, that David didn’t trust either of them.
16 2 Sam. 9:9 And the king called Tsiba the servant of Saul and said to him, "All that had belonged to Saul and to all his house, I hereby give to the son of your master. (NAW)
172 Sam. 16:4a Then the king said to Tsiba, "All that belonged to Mephibosheth now belongs to you!" (NAW)
18cf. Willett: Dauid doth not here make an equall diuision of the land as vnto two owners: but his meaning is, that Ziba should occupie the land to halues to Miphibosheth’s vse, as he had appointed at the first, c. 9.10. and therefore Dauid expressely saith, I haue said, hauing relation to his first order, which he had made. And in this sense Dauid is to be vnderstood, why speakest thou any more thy words, or of thy matters: not that hee cut him short, as Borrh. but in a manner he saith, I accept of thine excuse, thou needest say no more: Iun.” Matthew Henry & John Gill were of the same opinion, but Goldman disagreed, writing, “It is an impatient question, as if to say, ‘Why wilt thou go on talking?’ … His decision that they should divide the estate, is a compromise.” Keil & Delitzsch were of the same opinion as Goldman.
19Ex. 20:3
20Ezek. 18:4
AMy
original chart includes the NASB, NIV, and ESV, but their copyright
restrictions have forced me to remove them from the
publicly-available edition of this chart. (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 Scrolls containing 2 Samuel 19
are 4Q51 Samuela containing parts of verses 5-15, 24-26,
& 38-37, dated between 50-25 B.C. Where the DSS is legible and
in agreement with the MT, the MT is colored purple.
Where the DSS supports the LXX (or Vulgate) 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}.
BTargums insert “house of,” LXX inserts “men of,” and Vulgate inserts “all of,” but DSS and Syriac support the MT.
COf the 13 instances of this verb in the books of Samuel, only once does it stand alone as a verb (1 Sam. 19:12). In every other case it was followed by a vav and another verb (the one exception being 2 Sam. 15:14 where it is followed by a lamed and an infinitive verb), suggesting that is was a customary adverbial form of enacting the second verb “quickly/hurriedly” (1 Sam. 4:14; 17:48; 23:27; 25:18, 23, 34, 42; 28:20, 24; 2 Sam. 15:14-2x.)
DLXX, Vulgate, and Syriac omit this relative pronoun. DSS is too obliterated for reference. It’s in the Targums though. Syriac also omits “Bahurim.”
ECuriously, the only other uses of this verb in Samuel describe the coming of a spirit upon a person (1 Sam. 10:6, 10; 11:6; 16:13; 18:10). The intended connotation of this Hebrew verb is elusive: Hurrying? Parading? Successfulness? The LXX connotation of “leading” and the Vulgate connotation of “breaking in” (inrumpentes) only widen the possibilities. The Syriac עברו and Targums גַזֻו agree on the meaning of “crossing over,” which fits this context well and suggests an interesting picture of the motion of a spirit “crossing over” into flesh.
FThe LXX might have come up with this extra phrase if the translators weren’t sure whether the root in the Hebrew manuscript was עבד (“she served the service”) or עבר (“she crossed over the crossing”), and therefore they put it down both ways, as the LXX often did with ambiguities. One can see how similar the two roots look in Hebrew.
GThe verb root in the MT and Targums is עבר (although the Vulgate and Targums, followed by all the modern English versions, change it from “she [the ferry] crossed” to “they crossed”), while the Syriac reads ועבדו (“and they served”). Since the “ferrying” of the king across the river was an act of “service” by these men of Benjamin, and since every manuscript and version does use the verb “cross/pass over” later in this verse, this variant doesn’t essentially change the meaning.
HMatthew Henry advocated for “ferry-boat” (as did John Gill, Keil & Delitzsch, the AJV, Robert Jamieson – who called it a “raft”), citing unnamed others with approval who had translated it “fleet of boats” or “bridge of boats.” Goldman noted, “With the change of the last letter of the verb, modern scholars read… ‘ford…’” Abarbinel interpreted it as the company of men carrying people over on their shoulders, and Tsumura wrote of it as a man-made “crossing.”
IMasoretic scribes suggested adding a yod in the ending (בְּעֵינָיו) to make it more clear that “eyes” was plural (technically dual), but it doesn’t change the meaning.
JVaticanus adds the Greek particle of entreaty (δη), even though no particle of respectful entreaty is in the MT. It does seem odd that Shimei is not more respectful, but he has been in a hurry and just swam across the Jordan.
KThe Greek indefinite relative pronoun here in both the Vaticanus and LXX followed by a Greek verb for “commit iniquity” is closer to the MT’s asher (“that which”) followed by the Hebrew verb for “commit iniquity” than Brenton’s translation “all the iniquity.”
LVaticanus omits the phrase “the king” which is in the majority of LXX manuscripts, according to Rohlfs, but it doesn’t change the meaning at all, since Shimei has already called David “king” in his speech.
MThe Vaticanus matches Rohlfs’ edition of the LXX here; Brenton was just uncharacteristically periphrastic here.
NThese words in the Vaticanus are not in Rahlfs’ edition of the LXX or in any other manuscript I know of in any language, but it does make more clear the meaning of the phrase “house of Joseph.” (See next endnote.)
OWillett passed over Osiander’s explanation that it means the first in the nation, and over Pellican’s explanation that it means the first in Benjamin, and passed over Kimchi’s explanation that it meant the tribes of Benjamin, Ephraim and Manassah, favoring Junius’ explanation that it meant “before” rather than “first” “...though his tribe of Beniamin was situate further off from Iordan, then the tribes of Ioseph, as the king now came from Mahanaim to Iordan, yet he to expresse his dutie and ioy, came first and before them.” However, I prefer Matthew Henry’s explanation: “that is, [the Northern tribes] of Israel, who in the beginning of David's reign had distinguished themselves from Judah by their adherence to Ishbosheth…” Keil & Delitzsch agreed, and so did Tsumura (NICOT), and Goldman (Soncino), who cited Ezek 37:16 and Psalm 78:67 as proof texts of the “house of Joseph” meaning the northern tribes of Israel.
PNeither the Syriac, Targums, nor Vulgate added an extra word (“anyone”) to the MT like the LXX did.
QThis is a transliteration of the Hebrew word.
RSame as David’s words in 2 Sam. 16:10.
SThe Syriac and Septuagint insert a negative before “be put to death,” but the Targums and Vulgate follow the MT.
TThis is the reading of the Vaticanus, but the LXX reads “the son of Jonathan the son of Saul,” as does the Syriac and Arabic. Targums and Vulgate follow the shorter reading of the MT.
UThe Greek of the LXX & Vaticanus actually reads “his mustache” here.
VRare word only here and Leviticus 13:45, Ezekiel 24:17,22, and Micah 3:7.
WLXX, Syriac, and Targums add the preposition “into.” The Vulgate and MT have no preposition.
XSyriac and Septuagint insert “Mephibosheth to him” but Targums and Vulgate follow the shorter reading of the MT. The DSS is too obliterated for comparison here.
YLXX, Vulgate, and Syriac all insert “to him,” which makes more clear that “your servant” = Mephibosheth, whereas “my servant” = Tsiba.
ZLXX & Syriac spell this verb in the imperative, Vulgate in the infinitive, and Targums and MT as imperfect/cohortative.
AAKJV followed some Hebrew manuscripts which read אל (“to”). The Targums and Syriac עמ, the Vulgate cum, and the LXX meta are all closer to the MT word which means “with.”
ABMuch of the DSS is obliterated, but between legible words in this verse and the next two verses, there is enough extra space for an additional word here not in the MT, and less space in the middle of the next verse than the MT has. It seems most likely that in the MT, the phrase “my lord the king” occurs once in v.27 and twice in v.28, whereas it occurs twice in v.27 and once in v.28. This could explain the difference in spacing, and would make no difference in meaning.
ACThe DSS is unreadable at this point, but, judging from the space between legible part of this verse, it seems to have about nine letters (including spaces) less than the MT does. However, no other ancient manuscript, as far as I can tell, drops a word out of the MT at the end of this verse.
ADThese two Hebrew words for “right” and “cry out” do not occur together in any other verse in the O.T. The latter is consistently used to express outrage over an injustice and a plea for the authority to make it right. e.g. 1 Samuel 7:8 And the children of Israel said to Samuel, "Don't let there be silence from us; you keep crying out to Yahweh our God so He will save us from the control of the Philistines!" (NAW)
AEOf the 5 instances of this root word in the books of Samuel, the first was used to denote the “smoothness” of the stones David launched against Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), the next with David’s men “divvying up” the spoils of a war (1 Sam. 30:24), then David “portioning out” food to everybody at a religious celebration (2 Sam. 6:19), and finally Sheba’s shout “We have no portion/share/part in David” (2 Sam. 20:1).