Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 06 Nov. 2022
Catching up to this point, King David’s son Absalom staged a coup and lost his life in the attempt. Now David is returning from exile to reclaim his throne in Jerusalem.
But the political stability of the country has become very fragile.
There already were rivalries among the different family tribes of Israel, such as showed up in the tribe of Benjamin’s hesitance to accept David, who was of the tribe of Judah, as the successor to King Saul, who was of the tribe of Benjamin.
There is also a tension between the tribes located to the north of Jerusalem vs. those to the south of Jerusalem. The traditional number is 10 tribes to the North, and 2 tribes to the South, although the way the Israelites counted these numbers is a little indefiniteA.
Furthermore, there is bad blood between the army generals,
and there are people still seething over crimes committed in the war that had just ended,
and the ways of God have been largely forgotten.
So, at the time that David needs to bring the country back together, there is a perfect storm brewing to blow the country apart.
As we look at all these sources of division in David’s time, I want to consider the ways in which the same sorts of problems exist in our own culture and what we can do to counteract then in order to bring the blessings of God’s peace to our communities.
Read
text in my translation, starting with chapter 19,
verse 40:
and the king went on toward Gilgal (and
Kimha{m} went on with him). Thus all the people of Judah and also
half of the people of Israel {} brought the king over. But all the
men of Israel were there, coming to the king, and they said to the
king, “Why did our brothers – each of Judah –
steal you away and bring the king and his household over the Jordan,
along with all the men of David with him?” And each man of
Judah answered to a man of Israel, “Because the king is near
to me! And why is this that there is friction for you over this
thing? Have we eaten gluttonously off of the king? Or has something
been carried off thievishly for ourselves?” Then the man of
Israel answered the man of Judah and said, “Ten votes for the
king belong to me, and so I have more for David than you, so why did
you make light of me? And didn’t I say it first that I should
bring back my king?” Then the statement of each man from Judah
became harsher than the statement of each man from Israel. And it
was there that he was called upon by an ungodly man whose name was
Sheba, son of Bikri, a man of Benjamin. And he blew into his horn
and said, “We do not have a share in David; indeed there is no
inheritance for us in the son of Jesse! Each Israelite to his own
tents!” Then every Israelite man went up after Sheba son of
Bikri after following David, but each of Judah stuck with their king
from the Jordan all the way to Jerusalem. Presently, David entered
into his palace at Jerusalem. Then the king took his 10
concubine-wives, whom he had retired to the keeping of the palace,
and he gave them a secure house and provided for them, but he did
not go in to them, and they were off-limits until the day of their
death, living as widows. Then the king said to Amasa, “Put the
call out for me to each in Judah for three days, then assume your
position here.” So Amasa went to put the call out in Judah,
but he was too late after the meeting-time upon which he had agreed
with him. So David said to Abishai, “Now Sheba son of Bikri
will be worse for us than Absalom! You, take your master’s
servants, and pursue after him, lest he find for himself fortified
cities and escape our surveillance.” So Joab’s men went
out, following him, along with the Kerethites and the Pelethites and
all the mighty men, and they went out from Jerusalem to pursue after
Sheba, son of Bikri. While they were at the big rock that is in
Gibeon, Amasa came into their presence. Now Joab was dressed in his
uniform as his clothing, and over that was a belt with a sword in
its sheath attached to his thigh. And as he went forth, {the sword}
fell out. Then Joab said to Amasa, “Is peace with you, my
brother?” and the right hand of Joab grabbed onto the beard of
Amasa as though to kiss him. And Amasa was not on-guard against the
sword which was in the hand of Joab, so he stabbed him with it
through the abdomen such that his internal organs poured out to the
ground, and he did not follow-up on it, and so he died. Then Joab
and his brother Abishai pursued after Sheba, son of Bikri. But, one
of Joab’s guys stood over {Amasa} and said, “Whoever has
liked Joab, and whoever is for David, follow Joab!” Meanwhile,
Amasa was rolling around in his blood in the middle of the highway.
Now, the man saw that everyone of the people was standing still, so
he brought Amasa around off the highway to the field, and he threw a
garment over him, because he saw that everyone who was coming upon
him was just standing there.
Chapter 19 closes with David leaving his place of exile, crossing the Jordan River with his followers, and heading up to Jerusalem to reclaim his throne. But along the way, a quarrel breaks out, and we read a transcription of an argument between a northern Israelite and a southern Judean.
The Hebrew grammar seems to indicate that, even though we are reading an argument between two individuals, it represents widespread hard feelings and suspicions being expressed by all the people1.
Notice in verse 40 that there are men of Judah and there are men of Israel escorting David back to Jerusalem.
Already there is a division between the north and south.
It says that “all” the Judeans escorted David back to Jerusalem, but verse 40 says only “half” the Israelites did. Why is that? I think we have a summary statement in verse 40, and that the following verses explain to us why half the northerners who turned out for the event ended up abandoning David.
We know that there was a large group of soldiers and family with David, from Jerusalem, who went into exile with him and came out with him; these might be mostly men of Judah.
We also know that Shimei is there with a thousand Benjamites who might be considered from Israel rather than Judah.
And we know that David has communicated with the Judeans through the priests, so there are other Judeans there who had just came down from Jerusalem – like Mephibosheth.
And there may also have been other Israelites who decided to support David after the support campaign following the civil war.
Clearly there is rivalry between the northern Israelites and southern Judeans, and that rivalry generates worries that their rivals are trying to use the king to take advantage of them.
The Israelites are worrying that David is going to tilt the political balances toward the Judeans and give them more funding and more powerful positions, since more of them turned out earlier to welcome him back to the throne. So the Israelites accuse the Judeans of “stealing” the king. Notice how they assume bad motives behind the deeds of their rivals.
The Judeans then have to defend their motives, saying they merely showed up because they were the king’s relatives; they had no ulterior motive to brown-nose David.
And besides, whereas Saul had favored his own tribe of Benjamin with grants and political appointments (1 Sam. 22:7), David had been careful to appoint leaders such as Abner and Amasa from the northern tribes and not show favoritism to his tribe of Judah.
It made the Judeans angry to be accused by the Israelites of trying to butter up David in order to get political favors, so they express indignance toward them.
Well, the touchiness of the Judeans just proved, in the minds of the Israelites, that those Judeans were trying to cheat the political system, so they argued back that ten tribes of Israel should control the country, not the Judeans, because they outnumber the Judeans 5 to 1. They work themselves up about it to believe that this is some sort of insult being perpetrated upon the northern tribes.
To which the Judeans retort with an even sharper argument, and the quarrel increases the distrust and anger and division between them.
Thankfully, we are way past those primitive, Iron-Age ways of shouting at one another across political divides and assuming the worst of each others’ motives.
Of course, I am being facetious to make the point that now, as much as ever, we need to confront the problem of political rivalry.
But how ever can we confront such a huge problem? It’s not possible to make differences go away. Does the Bible give us any council?
Prov. 17:14 “The beginning of strife is like releasing water; Therefore stop contention before a quarrel starts.” Prov. 15:1 “A soft answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.” (NKJV)
Responding early with grace is a key Biblical concept.
It has become customary in social media to “fight fire with fire,” as it were, and compete for who can say the most inflamatory thing to make the deepest impact with their words, but God’s word tells us to nip quarreling in the bud by answering “softly” the first time.
The Israelites could have voiced their concerns with a more-gracious question like, “O king, It looks like you have a lot more supporters here from Judah than from Israel, but we want to assure you that, given the opportunity, we from Israel will be just as supportive of your return to power. We hope that you will involve us in your administration just as much as the Judeans are involved.”
And the Judeans could have answered, “I can see your point; the demographics of this parade do look kind-of imbalanced now, but please believe me that it’s just because we Judeans are just so happy to have our relative back from exile. You are still an important part of our nation and we are so glad you are here.”
With a national election coming up in two days, we may well have opportunity to nip a few quarrels in the bud with quick, gracious words. This also applies at home and in the church.
2 Timothy 2:23-26 “But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth...” (NKJV)
Quarrelling out of a sense of rivalry is destructive to the unity of any organization, but an attitude of rebellion against authority is perhaps even more destructive, and we see this seed of division show up in the first two verses of chapter 20:
Sheba, son of Bikri blew a horn to draw attention away from David toward himself and started a rebellion against David.
His statements that the 10 tribes of Israel have no “share” or “inheritance” with David could be interpreted in at least two ways:
He could be saying, “We do not want to invest in David; we do not want to care about him. He is a Judean. Let us Israelites do our own thing.”
Or he could be saying, “None of us has gotten any money or power from David. That proves he is not the king for us Israelites. Follow me and I will form a government where the wealth and power flow to the 10 northern tribes!”
In support of the latter, the word “share” is the same word used when David was splitting up the loot from his victory over the Amalekites back in in 1 Sam. 30:24b “...according to the share of the one who went down into the battle so also shall be the share of the one who sat tight at the baggage; they shall share it out equally." Notably, none of that Amalekite loot was given to northern tribes, but then again, it’s probably because it was loot which the Amalekites had plundered from southern, not northern tribes.
Fast forward to 2 Samuel 20, and, once again, David is coming back from a battle. Usually when kings come back from a war, they bring plunder to share with their people, but David has no plunder to share from this battle because this battle was against the nation of Israel itself, and it does not appear that David’s soldiers had looted the Israelites in the process of that battle; instead David’s army had let Absalom’s army reconnoiter at its war camp after the battle, recover their own comrades’ loot, and then go home (18:16, 19:8b). David’s men could have killed off all the rest of Absalom’s army while they had the advantage, and then they could have looted all the dead bodies, but they didn’t. David’s soldiers fought for their lives and for David’s honor, and they didn’t get any plunder out of it.
Sheba may have been adding insult to injury by complaining that David didn’t have any plunder from this battle to share with the northern tribes.
Sheba seems to be advocating a belief that the central government had wealth that it should share like an “inheritance” with all its people, but that is the opposite of God’s design for an economy. Each man was to “work with his own hands” (Eph. 4:28), “under his own vine and under his own fig tree” (1 Ki. 4:25; Micah 4:4; Zech. 3:10), tend his own flocks and provide for his own family and share his abundance with the needy.
It is my observation (not only in others but also in myself) that a rebellious spirit tends to announce its separation from an authority with parting complaints against that authority which it does not intend to try to reconcile.
At any rate, Sheba says, “If you’re an Israelite, stop following David and go home.” And v.2 says that “every Israelite man” who had been following David instead “went up after Sheba.”
Now this could be the explanation for why chapter 19 verse 40 says that “all” the Judeans went up to Jerusalem but only only “half” or “a fraction” of the Israelites did.
Obviously it is a bit of overstatement in v.2 that “every Israelite man followed Sheba,” because Shimei and Amasa and Mephibosheth, and other Israelites did end up in Jerusalem with David,
but it felt like a huge loss at the moment to David, and “all” who were of that rebellious attitude did leave.
Can you imagine how David’s heart must have sunk over this rebellion? It’s a nightmare for any leader, and rebellion continues to be a plague which divides nations, churches, businesses, and families. Can anything be done about it?
The Bible tells us that the first thing is to fight against rebellion in our own hearts by honoring the authorities which God has placed over us:
Matt. 15:4a “...God issued commands saying, 'Honor your father and your mother'” (NAW) That’s honoring authority in the home.
1 Peter 2:13-17 “SUBMIT to every human institution on account of the Lord, whether to a KING AS unto him who is a superior, or whether to GOVERNORS AS unto those who are sent by Him for vengeance against evildoers and praise for good-doers… 17 HONOR all of them: Love the BROTHERHOOD, keep being respectful toward GOD; keep honoring the KING.” (NAW) That’s honoring authority in the civil government.
1 Tim. 5:17 “Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.” (NKJV) That’s honoring church authority.
We need to cultivate an attitude of seeking to honor those in legitimate authority over you at home, work, church, and state.
They aren’t going to be perfect, but if you live with proper submission in good faith toward them, God will probably give you opportunities to bring up with those authorities areas where they can improve.
And when rebellious men like Sheba say, “Break away from those old authorities and be free with me!” be very careful and wise. Titus 3:9-11 “But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.” (NKJV)
Rebels should (and will) find themselves in trouble in time to come.
Verse 3 of Chapter 20 seems a little out-of-place in this narrative2, but the securing of David’s concubines does fit as a sub-plot within the story here, because:
the releasing of these 10 women to stay behind and care for the palace was David’s last official act before leaving office,
then the violation of these women was Absalom’s first act in office,
so now it is fitting that a conclusion to the storyline of these women be David’s first act when he returns to office.
One question this raises is whether David was being harsh and unkind. I would like to argue that what he did was actually very kind and charitable:
The Hebrew word describing the kind of house he gave them could be interpreted one of two ways, either: “kept safe by guards,” or it could mean “responsibility to keep charge,” and both would be important components of helping trauma victims.
The home and the bodies of these women had been invaded by a hostile man, Absalom, and as a result, they probably struggled with memories of that trauma and with fear of it happening again. Their need to feel safe was higher than average, so David made sure they had a “house” that was “safe.”
Also, their former roles as concubines and keepers of David’s palace was taken away from them, due to circumstances beyond their control, so now they needed some new “responsibility” to make the rest of their life meaningful. Thus David gives them a new house over which they could take responsibility.
Finally, while the Hebrew verb translated “shut up” could denote actual “confinement” of the women, I don’t think that fits David’s character. This verb could just as legitimately denote boundaries around them, not to prevent them from going out, but to prevent other people from coming in. That’s how I prefer to interpret it - in terms of keeping them off-limits from further invasive behavior, out of a desire to protect them and make them feel safe3.
In doing this, David maintained their economic and social status:
They had agreed to enter into dependency on him as part of his household, so he continued to provide for all their needs.
As concubines, their marital relationship with David did not include an obligation for David to try to provide children for them, so, even in this respect, David did not break the terms of his covenant with them when he moved them out of his house4.
Maybe it’s a little bit of a stretch in application, but when we look at the seeds of division, the contrast between David’s thoughtful, unselfish provision for these concubines, after Absalom’s abuse of them, highlights another seed of division, and that is selfishness and lust.
James 4:1-7 “Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members? You lust and do not have. You murder and covet and cannot obtain. You fight and war. Yet you do not have because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures. Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you think that the Scripture says in vain, "The Spirit who dwells in us yearns jealously"? But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: "GOD RESISTS THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE." Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” (NKJV)
When we get fixated on our rights, we end up hurting weaker people.
It is staggering how one selfish act can do so much harm to another person.
And when we allow our desires for more things, more experiences, and more power to control us, we make ourselves “enemies of God” and of His people!
So what is God’s answer to this problem? Interestingly, it is not, “Stop being selfish and be nice to each other,” but rather, “[Humbly] submit to God,” then He “will give you more grace” to be kind to others.
When you find yourself wishing you had someone/something that God hasn’t given you, will you humble your heart before God and say, “God I confess I have resented your providence in my life. I’ve been feeling like You haven’t given me what I needed or deserved, but I was so wrong to proudly think I knew better than you. I once again submit myself to You, trusting You to provide all that I really need today, and I trust that You will continue to save me and be my good shepherd all the days of my life and into eternity. Please give me grace to do Your will instead of my will today!”
So far we’ve looked at how rivalry, rebellion, and lust create harmful divisions. I want to catch two more. The next is illustrated by Amasa’s failure to make good on his agreement with David:
Amasa, you may remember, was the general of Absalom’s revolutionary army that tried to overthrow and kill David.
Now he has accepted an appointment as general over David’s army, so David commissions him for his first task: spend three days announcing a call-to-arms throughout Judah, then report back to Jerusalem for his installation as general of the army that will put down Sheba’s rebellion.
The king’s command is clear: “Spend 3 days mobilizing Judah, then take your stand back here in the palace.”
Quite a few Judeans were already mobilized to escort the King back to Jerusalem, so perhaps there weren’t that many more bushes to beat.
But, when Amasa does not prove good on his word to be back in three days, David’s trust in him is shaken. It leaves David wondering if there is anything he can trust Amasa to do.
Amasa has already led an army against David in the past, so the potential for treachery is a reality David has to beware of.
The Hebrew manuscripts are ambivalent as to whether Amasa “tarried/delayed/took too long” on purpose to sabotage David’s kingdom, or whether his failure to meet the 3-day deadline was an honest mistake5,
but the fact that the next time we Amasa, he is not in Judah mobilizing troops (like David had told him to do), but is rather up North in King Saul’s old capitol of Gibea, certainly looks suspicious6.
Dealing with Sheba is mission-critical, though, for David, so the moment Amasa becomes untrustworthy, David’s mind moves to consider who else he can trust to lead the army right away against Sheba.
Joab has the experience, but he has also broken faith with David by assassinating the previous general David had appointed, and by killing Absalom – against David’s express orders, so David does not want to entrust the army to Joab’s generalship.
Thus, David turns to Joab’s brother Abishai.
Abishai
has proven himself a capable commander in three recent battles:
1)
the war against the Ammonites in chapter 10,
2) the battle
against the 18,000 Edomites in 1 Chron. 18:12,
3) and recent
civil war in Israel against Absalom (18:2-5),
And Abishai has been zealously loyal (16:9, 19:21),
so David puts the Kerethite & Pelethite soldiers (which had been under his personal command) under Abishai, and he also puts the soldiers which had been under Joab’s command under Abishai, and he commissions Abishai to hunt down Sheba and bring him to justice.
Failure to keep your word destroys trust and breaks relationships.
It may not seem like a big deal to commit to doing something and then forget it, but to a leader who is looking for people he can trust, it is a big problem.
And David reminds us in Psalm 15, that it’s not just human leaders who are bothered by unfaithfulness, it’s a deal-breaker for God as well: Psalm 15:1 Yahweh, who will be a guest in Your tent? Who will settle down on the mountain of Your holiness, Walking perfectly, and working righteousness, and speaking truth in his heart? He has not been a busybody with his tongue; he has not done evil to his neighbor; and he has not raised a reproach against his close [friend]... He vowed, and despite his loss he will not make a retraction.” (NAW)
Part of walking with God is keeping your word, making good on promises, and honoring your business contracts.
The last seed of division that I see is Joab’s bitter hatred, which leads to revenge-killing and further erosion of order in Israel.
Why did Joab kill his cousin Amasa? Didn’t he realize how unstable it would make the country for him to kill this popular army general? Joab was angry that David had appointed Amasa to be in authority over him in the army, even though Amasa had been an enemy of David and Joab had been faithful to David. Joab allowed bitter jealousy to fester in his heart, and so the whole nation was destabilized.
Most of the commentaries I read7 suggested that Joab dropped his sword onto the ground on purpose, making it look like an accident, in order to get it unsheathed without it looking like an aggressive move. He then picked his fallen sword up with his left hand, presumably to stick it back in its sheath (since people didn’t normally wield a sword with their left hand), and then he greeted Amasa like a friend. (In their culture, it was a friendly gesture for one guy to grab another by the beard.) Thus Amasa did not see a threat in Joab, even though Joab was actually approaching him with an unsheathed sword.
One stab was all it took, and Joab and Abishai were off like a shot after Sheba, leaving Amasa to die in the middle of the road.
It seems that before Joab took off, he appointed8 one of his soldiers to stay there over the dying body of Amasa and yell to the passing troops, “If you’re for David, then follow Joab now!”
This was incredibly disrespectful toward Amasa, but this disrespect for the dying Amasa was part of Joab’s anger-problem, and it further disrupted the mission of the army.
In the Jewish culture, when a Jew died, you were to stop whatever you were doing and bury the body,
so, when the troops further down the line came abreast of Amasa in his death throes in the middle of the road, they were so shocked that they just froze in their tracks.
After a while, the announcer realized that his perpetuating Joab’s vendetta was putting the entire army’s mission in danger. He had to switch gears! It wasn’t until Amasa’s body was respectfully covered out-of-sight that the troops continued on the king’s mission.
James 3:16-18 “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, unwavering, without hypocrisy. And the seed whose fruit is righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.” (NASB)
What is the antidote to this bitter seed of jealousy and hatred? It is to receive wisdom from heaven and to love as children of God.
Jesus, the “Wisdom from heaven” personified, said in Matt. 5:21 “Y'all heard that it was declared to the men of old, ‘Do not murder,’ and, ‘Whoever murders will be guilty in the judgment.’ Yet I myself am saying to you, every one who is enraged toward his brother will be guilty in the judgment…” He went on to say positively in v.44, “Love your enemies, [bless the ones who curse you, do good to the ones who hate you] and pray for the ones who [are threatening you and] persecuting you, So that y'all might be sons of your Father in heaven…” (NAW)
1 John 4:7” Loved ones, let us love one another, because love is out of God, and every one who loves has been born out of God and is knowing God… 10 In this is love, not that we ourselves loved God, but rather that HE loved us and commissioned His Son [to be] appeasement concerning our sins. 11 Loved ones, if God loved us like that, we ourselves also ought to love each other… 20 If someone should say, ‘I am loving God,’ yet he is hating his brother, he is a liar, for the one who is not loving his brother whom he has seen, how is he able to love God, whom he has not seen? 21 And we have this command from Him in order that the one who is loving God might also love his brother.” (NAW)
Notice that we do not muster love out of ourselves in order to become God’s children, rather love comes from God – it is His fundamental character trait (1 John 4:8), and it is God who gives birth to us spiritually, through applying the sacrificial death of Jesus to atone for our sins which we committed against Him, making us His children, and giving us His Spirit to be able to love, and motivating us to love, such that when we do love our enemies, the proof is visible that we actually are God’s beloved children.
In a world where it seems like everybody is eagerly trying to rip relationships apart at the seams, we need to heed the warnings from God’s word against these seeds of division.
Instead of Rivalry → Let us respond quickly with grace,
Instead of Rebellion → Let us Honor authorities & reject divisive persons,
Instead of Lust → Let us Submit to God & receive more grace,
Instead of Unfaithfulness → Let us Make good on promises & keep your word, and
Instead of Hatred → Let us Receive God’s wisdom & love as children of God.
LXX |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
41) καὶ διέβη ὁ βασιλεὺς εἰς Γαλγαλα, καὶ Χαμααμ διέβη μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ, καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς Ιουδα X διαβαίνοντες μετὰ τοῦ βασιλέως καί γε τὸ ἥμισυ τοῦ λαοῦ Ισραηλ. -- |
40 And the king went over to Galgala, and Chamaam went over with him: and all the men of Juda X went over with the king, and also half the people of Israel. |
40 So the king went on to Galgal, and Chamaam X with him. Now all the people of Juda X had brought the king over, and only half of the people of Israel [were there]. |
40 Then the king went on to Gilgal, and Chimham went on with him: and all the people of Judah X conducted the king, and also half the people of Israel. |
40 and the king went on toward Gilgal (and Kimha{m} went on with him). Thus all the people of Judah and also half of the people of Israel {} brought the king over. |
41 וַיַּעֲבֹר הַמֶּלֶךְ הַגִּלְגָּלָה וְכִמְהָןC עָבַר עִמּוֹ וְכָל-עַם יְהוּדָה וַיְעֱבִרוּD אֶת-הַמֶּלֶךְ וְגַם חֲצִיE עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל: |
42) καὶ ἰδοὺ πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ισραηλ παρεγένοντο πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα καὶ εἶπον πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα Τί ὅτι ἔκλεψάν σε οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν ἀνὴρ Ιουδα καὶ διεβίβασαν τὸν βασιλέα καὶ τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ τὸν Ιορδάνην καὶ πάντες ἄνδρες Δαυιδ μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ; |
41
And
behold,
all the men of Israel came to the king, and said to the king, Why
have our brethren the m |
41
Therefore
all the men of Israel |
41
And,
behold,
all the men of Israel came to the king, and said unto the king,
Why have our brethren the m |
41 But all the men of Israel were there, coming to the king, and they said to the king, “Why did our brothers – each of Judah – steal you away and bring the king and his household over the Jordan, along with all the men of David with him?” |
42 וְהִנֵּה כָּל-אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאִים אֶל-הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל-הַמֶּלֶךְ מַדּוּעַ גְּנָבוּךָ אַחֵינוּ אִישׁ יְהוּדָה וַיַּעֲבִרוּ אֶת-הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאֶת- בֵּיתוֹ אֶת-הַיַּרְדֵּן וְכָל-אַנְשֵׁי דָוִד עִמּוֹ: ס |
43) καὶ ἀπεκρίθη πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ιουδα πρὸς ἄνδρα Ισραηλ καὶ εἶπαν Διότι ἐγγίζει πρός με ὁ βασιλεύς· καὶ ἵνα τί οὕτως ἐθυμώθης περὶ τοῦ λόγου τούτου; μὴ βρώσει ἐφάγαμεν ἐκ τοῦ βασιλέως, [ἢ δόμα ἔδωκεν] ἢ ἄρσιν ἦρεν ἡμῖν; |
42
And all the m |
42
And all the m |
42
And all the m |
42 And each man of Judah answered to a man of Israel, “Because the king is near to me! And why is this that there is friction for you over this thing? Have we eaten gluttonously off of the king? Or has something been carried off thievishly for ourselves?” |
43 וַיַּעַןF כָּל-אִישׁ יְהוּדָה עַל-אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי-קָרוֹב הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵלַי וְלָמָּה זֶּה חָרָהG לְךָ עַל-הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה הֶאָכוֹל אָכַלְנוּ מִן-הַמֶּלֶךְ אִם-נִשֵּׂאת נִשָּׂא לָנוּ: ס |
44)
καὶ ἀπεκρίθη
ἀνὴρ Ισραηλ τῷ
ἀνδρὶ Ιουδα
καὶ εἶπεν Δέκα
χεῖρές μοι ἐν
τῷ βασιλεῖ,
[καὶ
πρωτότοκος
ἐγὼ ἢ σύ,]
καί γε ἐν τῷ
Δαυιδ εἰμὶ
ὑπὲρ σέ· καὶ
ἵνα τί [τοῦτο]
ὕβρισάς
με καὶ οὐκ
|
43
And the m |
43
And the m |
43
And the m |
43 Then the man of Israel answered the man of Judah and said, “Ten votes for the king belong to me, and so I have more for David than you, so why did you make light of me? And didn’t I say it first that I should bring back my king?” Then the statement of each man from Judah became harsher than the statement of each man from Israel. |
44 וַיַּעַן אִישׁ- יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת-אִישׁ יְהוּדָה וַיֹּאמֶר עֶשֶׂר-יָדוֹת לִי בַמֶּלֶךְ וְגַם-בְּדָוִד אֲנִי מִמְּךָ וּמַדּוּעַ הֱקִלֹּתַנִי וְלֹא-הָיָה דְבָרִי רִאשׁוֹן לִי לְהָשִׁיב אֶת-מַלְכִּי וַיִּקֶשׁ דְּבַר-אִישׁ יְהוּדָה מִדְּבַר אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל: ס |
LXX |
Brenton |
DRB |
KJV |
NAW |
MT |
1
Καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐπικαλούμενος
|
1 And there was a transgressor so called there, and his name was Sabee, a Benjamite, the son of Bochori: and he blew X the trumpet, and said, We have no portion in David, neither have we [any] inheritance in the son of Jessae: to thy tents, O Israel, [every] one. |
1
And there |
1
And there |
1 And it was there that he was called upon by an ungodly man whose name was Sheba, son of Bikri, a man of Benjamin. And he blew into his horn and said, “We do not have a share in David; indeed there is no inheritance for us in the son of Jesse! Each Israelite to his own tents!” |
1 וְשָׁם נִקְרָא אִישׁI בְּלִיַּעַל וּשְׁמוֹ שֶׁבַע בֶּן־בִּכְרִי אִישׁ יְמִינִי וַיִּתְקַע בַּשֹּׁפָר וַיֹּאמֶר אֵין־לָנוּ חֵלֶקJ בְּדָוִד וְלֹא נַחֲלָה־לָנוּK בְּבֶן־יִשַׁי אִישׁ לְאֹהָלָיו יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ |
2 καὶ ἀνέβη πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ισραηλ ἀπὸ ὄπισθεν Δαυιδ ὀπίσω Σαβεε υἱοῦ Βοχορι, καὶ ἀνὴρ Ιουδα ἐκολλήθη τῷ βασιλεῖ αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ Ιορδάνου καὶ ἕως Ιερουσαλημ. |
2
And all the m |
2
And all X Israel
|
2
So every man of Israel went
up
from after David, and
followed Sheba the son of Bichri: but the m |
2 Then every Israelite man went up after Sheba son of Bikri after following David, but each of Judah stuck with their king from the Jordan all the way to Jerusalem. |
2 וַיַּעַל כָּל־אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאַחֲרֵי דָוִד אַחֲרֵי שֶׁבַע בֶּן־בִּכְרִי וְאִישׁ יְהוּדָה דָּבְקוּ בְמַלְכָּם מִן־ הַיַּרְדֵּן וְעַד־ יְרוּשָׁלִָם׃ |
3 καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Δαυιδ εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ εἰς Ιερουσαλημ, καὶ ἔλαβεν ὁ βασιλεὺς τὰς δέκα γυναῖκας τὰς παλλακὰς αὐτοῦ, ἃς ἀφῆκεν φυλάσσειν τὸν οἶκον, καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτὰς ἐν οἴκῳ φυλακῆς καὶ διέθρεψεν αὐτὰς καὶ πρὸς αὐτὰς οὐκ εἰσῆλθεν, καὶ ἦσαν συνεχόμεναι ἕως ἡμέρας θανάτου αὐτῶν, χῆραι ζῶσαι. -- |
3
And David went into his house at Jerusalem: and the king took the
ten women his concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and
he put them in a |
3
And when the king was come into his house at Jerusalem, he took
the ten women his concubines, whom he had left to keep the house,
and put them |
3
And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the
ten women his
concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them |
3 Presently, David entered into his palace at Jerusalem. Then the king took his 10 concubine-wives, whom he had retired to the keeping of the palace, and he gave them a secure house and provided for them, but he did not go in to them, and they were off-limits until the day of their death, living as widows. |
3 וַיָּבֹא דָוִד אֶל־ בֵּיתוֹ יְרוּשָׁלִַם וַיִּקַּח הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵת עֶשֶׂר־נָשִׁים פִּלַגְשִׁים אֲשֶׁר הִנִּיחַ לִשְׁמֹר הַבַּיִת וַיִּתְּנֵם בֵּית־מִשְׁמֶרֶתL וַיְכַלְכְּלֵם וַאֲלֵיהֶםM לֹא־ בָא וַתִּהְיֶינָה צְרֻרוֹתN עַד־ יוֹם מֻתָן אַלְמְנוּת חַיּוּתO׃ ס |
4 καὶ εἶπεν ὁ βασιλεὺς πρὸς Αμεσσαϊ Βόησόν μοι τὸν ἄνδρα Ιουδα τρεῖς ἡμέρας, σὺ δὲ αὐτοῦ στῆθι. |
4 And the king said to Amessai, Call to me the men of Juda [for] three days, and do thou be present here. |
4
And the king said to Amasa: Assemble
to me all the men of Juda [against
the] th |
4 Then said the king to Amasa, Assemble me the men of Judah [within] three days, and be thou here present. |
4 Then the king said to Amasa, “Put the call out for me to each in Judah for three days, then assume your position here.’” |
4 וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶל־עֲמָשָׂאP הַזְעֶק־לִי אֶת־ אִישׁ־יְהוּדָה שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים וְאַתָּה פֹּה עֲמֹדQ׃ |
5 καὶ ἐπορεύθη Αμεσσαϊ τοῦ βοῆσαι τὸν Ιουδαν καὶ ἐχρόνισεν ἀπὸ τοῦ καιροῦ, οὗ ἐτάξατο αὐτῷ [Δαυιδ]. |
5 And Amessai went to call Juda, and delayed beyond the time which [David] appointed him. |
5 So Amasa went to assemble the men of Juda, but he tarried beyond the set time which [the kingR] had appointed him. |
5 So Amasa went to assemble the men of Judah: but he tarried longer than the set time which he had appointed him. |
5 So Amasa went to put the call out in Judah, but he was too late after the meeting-time upon which he had agreed with him. |
5 וַיֵּלֶךְ עֲמָשָׂא לְהַזְעִיק אֶת־ יְהוּדָה וַיֵּיחַרS מִן־הַמּוֹעֵד אֲשֶׁר יְעָדוֹ׃ ס |
6
καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ
πρὸς Αβεσσα
Νῦν κακοποιήσει
ἡμᾶς Σαβεε
υἱὸς Βοχορι
ὑπὲρ Αβεσσαλωμ,
[καὶ
νῦν]
σὺ λαβὲ [μετὰ
σεαυτοῦ] τοὺς
παῖδας τοῦ
κυρίου σου
καὶ καταδίωξον
ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ,
μήποτε ἑαυτῷ
εὕρῃ πόλεις
ὀχυρὰς
καὶ |
6
And David said to Amessai, Now shall Sabee the son of Bochori do
us more harm than Abessalom: [now
then]
take thou [with
thee] the
servants of thy lord, and follow after him, lest he find for
himself strong
cities, so will he |
6 And David said to Abisai: Now will Seba the son of Bochri do us more harm than [did] Absalom: take thou [thereforeT] the servants of thy lord, and pursue after him, lest he find X X fenced cities, and escape X us. |
6
And David said to Abishai, Now shall Sheba the son of Bichri do us
more harm than did
Absalom: take thou thy lord's servants, and pursue after him, lest
he |
6 So David said to Abishai, “Now Sheba son of Bikri will be worse for us than Absalom! You, take your master’s servants, and pursue after him, lest he find for himself fortified cities and escape our surveillance.” |
6 וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל־אֲבִישַׁי עַתָּה יֵרַע לָנוּ שֶׁבַע בֶּן־בִּכְרִי מִן־אַבְשָׁלוֹם אַתָּהU קַח אֶת־ עַבְדֵי אֲדֹנֶיךָ וּרְדֹף אַחֲרָיו פֶּן־מָצָאV לוֹ עָרִים בְּצֻרוֹת וְהִצִּילW עֵינֵנוּX׃ |
7 καὶ ἐξῆλθον ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ οἱ ἄνδρες Ιωαβ καὶ ὁ χερεθθι καὶ ὁ φελεθθι καὶ πάντες οἱ δυνατοὶ καὶ ἐξῆλθαν ἐξ Ιερουσαλημ διῶξαι ὀπίσω Σαβεε υἱοῦ Βοχορι. -- |
7 And there went out after him [Amessai andY] the men of Joab, and the Cherethites, and the Phelethites, and all the mighty men: and they went out from Jerusalem to pursue after Sabee the son of Bochori. |
7
So Joab's men went out |
7 And there went out after him Joab's men, and the Cherethites, and the Pelethites, and all the mighty men: and they went out of Jerusalem, to pursue after Sheba the son of Bichri. |
7 So Joab’s men went out, following him, along with the Kerethites and the Pelethites and all the mighty men, and they went out from Jerusalem to pursue after Sheba, son of Bikri. |
7 וַיֵּצְאוּ אַחֲרָיו אַנְשֵׁי יוֹאָב וְהַכְּרֵתִי וְהַפְּלֵתִי וְכָל־ הַגִּבֹּרִים וַיֵּצְאוּ מִירוּשָׁלִַם לִרְדֹּף אַחֲרֵי שֶׁבַע בֶּן־בִּכְרִי׃ |
8 [καὶ] αὐτοὶ παρὰ τῷ λίθῳ τῷ μεγάλῳ τῷ ἐν Γαβαων, καὶ Αμεσσαϊ εἰσῆλθεν ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν. καὶ Ιωαβ περιεζωσμένος μανδύανZ τὸ ἔνδυμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ περιεζωσμένοςAA μάχαιραν ἐζευγμένην ἐπὶ τῆς ὀσφύος αὐτοῦ ἐν κολεῷ αὐτῆς, καὶ [ἡ μάχαιρα] ἐξῆλθεν καὶ ἔπεσεν. |
8 [And] they were by the great stone that is in Gabaon: and Amessai went in before them: and Joab had upon him a military cloak over his apparel, and over it he was girded with a dagger fastened upon his loins in its scabbard: and [the dagger came outAB,] it even came out and fell. |
8
[And]
when they were at the great stone which is in Gabaon, Amasa coming
|
8 When they were at the great stone which is in Gibeon, Amasa went before them. And Joab's garment [that he had] put on was girded unto him, and upon it a girdle with a sword fastened upon his loins in the sheath thereof; and as he went forth it fell out. |
8 While they were at the big rock that is in Gibeon, Amasa came into their presence. Now Joab was dressed in his uniform as his clothing, and over that was a belt with a sword in its sheath attached to his thigh. And as he went forth, {the sword} fell out. |
8 הֵם עִם־ הָאֶבֶן הַגְּדוֹלָה אֲשֶׁר בְּגִבְעוֹןAC וַעֲמָשָׂא בָּא לִפְנֵיהֶם וְיוֹאָב חָגוּר ADמִדּוֹ לְבֻשׁוּ וְעָלָוAE חֲגוֹר חֶרֶב מְצֻמֶּדֶתAF עַל־מָתְנָיו בְּתַעְרָהּ AGוְהוּא יָצָא וַתִּפֹּל׃ ס |
9 καὶ εἶπεν Ιωαβ τῷ Αμεσσαϊ Εἰ ὑγιαίνεις σύ, ἀδελφέ; καὶ ἐκράτησεν ἡ χεὶρ ἡ δεξιὰ Ιωαβ τοῦ πώγωνος Αμεσσαϊ τοῦ καταφιλῆσαι αὐτόν· |
9 And Joab said to Amessai, Art thou in health, my brother? and the right hand of Joab took hold of the beard of Amessai to kiss him. |
9
And Joab said to Amasa: [God]
save
thee, my brother. And |
9 And Joab said to Amasa, Art thou in health, my brother? And X X X Joab took Amasa by the beard [with the right hand] to kiss him. |
9 Then Joab said to Amasa, “Is peace with you, my brother?” and the right hand of Joab grabbed onto the beard of Amasa as though to kiss him. |
9 וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹאָב לַעֲמָשָׂא הֲשָׁלוֹם אַתָּה אָחִי וַתֹּחֶזAH יַד־יְמִיןAI יוֹאָב בִּזְקַן עֲמָשָׂא לִנְשָׁק־לוֹ׃ |
10 καὶ Αμεσσαϊ οὐκ ἐφυλάξατο τὴν μάχαιραν τὴν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ Ιωαβ, καὶ ἔπαισεν αὐτὸν ἐν αὐτῇ [Ιωαβ] εἰς τὴν ψόαν, καὶ ἐξεχύθη ἡ κοιλία αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν γῆν, καὶ οὐκ ἐδευτέρωσεν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἀπέθανεν. καὶ Ιωαβ καὶ Αβεσσα ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ ἐδίωξεν ὀπίσω Σαβεε υἱοῦ Βοχορι· |
10
And Amessai |
10 But Amasa did not take notice of the sword, which Joab [had] X X X, and he struck him X X in the side, and shed out his bowels to the ground, and gave him not a second [wound], and he died. And Joab, and Abisai his brother pursued after Seba the son of Bochri. |
10 But Amasa took no heed to the sword that was in Joab's hand: so he smote him therewith in the fifth rib, and shed out his bowels to the ground, and [struck him] not again; and he died. So Joab and Abishai his brother pursued after Sheba the son of Bichri. |
10 And Amasa was not on-guard against the sword which was in the hand of Joab, so he stabbed him with it through the abdomen such that his internal organs poured out to the ground, and he did not follow-up on it, and so he died. Then Joab and his brother Abishai pursued after Sheba, son of Bikri. |
10 וַעֲמָשָׂא לֹא־נִשְׁמַר בַּחֶרֶב אֲשֶׁר בְּיַד־יוֹאָב וַיַּכֵּהוּ בָהּ AJאֶל־הַחֹמֶשׁ וַיִּשְׁפֹּךְ מֵעָיו אַרְצָה וְלֹא־שָׁנָה לוֹAK וַיָּמֹת ס וְיוֹאָב וַאֲבִישַׁי אָחִיו רָדַףAL אַחֲרֵי שֶׁבַע בֶּן־בִּכְרִי׃ |
11 καὶ ἀνὴρ ἔστη ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν τῶν παιδαρίων Ιωαβ καὶ εἶπεν Τίς ὁ βουλόμενος Ιωαβ καὶ τίς τοῦ Δαυιδ, ὀπίσω Ιωαβ· |
11
And there stood over him one of the servants of Joab, and said,
Who is he that is |
11
In the mean time some men of Joab's company
stopping at [the
dead body of]
|
11
And one of Joab's men stood by him, and said, He that favoureth
Joab, and |
11 But, one of Joab’s guys stood over {Amasa} and said, “Whoever has liked Joab, and whoever is for David, follow Joab!” |
11 וְאִישׁ עָמַד עָלָיוAM מִנַּעֲרֵי יוֹאָב וַיֹּאמֶר מִי אֲשֶׁר חָפֵץ בְּיוֹאָב וּמִי ANאֲשֶׁר־לְדָוִד אַחֲרֵי יוֹאָב׃ |
12 καὶ Αμεσσαϊ πεφυρμένος ἐν τῷ αἵματι ἐν μέσῳ τῆς τρίβου, καὶ εἶδεν ὁ ἀνὴρ ὅτι εἱστήκει πᾶς ὁ λαός, καὶ ἀπέστρεψεν τὸν Αμεσσαϊ ἐκ τῆς τρίβου εἰς X ἀγρὸν καὶ ἐπέρριψεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν ἱμάτιον, καθότι εἶδεν πάντα τὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν X ἑστηκότα· |
12
And Amessai was
weltering in X
blood in the midst of the way. And |
12
And Amasa imbrued
with X blood,
[lay]
in the midst of the way. X A
certain man saw [this]
that all the people stood still [to
look upon him],
so he removed
Amasa out of the highway into the field, and |
12 And Amasa wallowed in X blood in the midst of the highway. And when the man saw that all the people stood still, he removed Amasa out of the highway into the field, and cast a cloth upon him, when he saw that every one that came by him X stood still. |
12 Meanwhile, Amasa was rolling around in his blood in the middle of the highway. Now, the man saw that everyone of the people was standing still, so he brought Amasa around off the highway to the field, and he threw a garment over him, because he saw that everyone who was coming upon him was just standing there. |
12 וַעֲמָשָׂא מִתְגֹּלֵל בַּדָּםAO בְּתוֹךְ הַמְסִּלָּה וַיַּרְא הָאִישׁ כִּי־עָמַד כָּל־הָעָם וַיַּסֵּב APאֶת־עֲמָשָׂא מִן־הַמְסִלָּה הַשָּׂדֶה וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ עָלָיו בֶּגֶד כַּאֲשֶׁר רָאָה כָּל־הַבָּא עָלָיו וְעָמָדAQ׃ |
1“The singular first- and second-person pronouns in vv. 42-43 suggest the acrimony of the debate.” ~David Tsumura, New International Commentary on the Old Testament, in. loc.
2and indeed it is omitted from the oldest-known manuscript (but only from that one)
3Most of the commentators I read, however, believed that this was punishment and confinement, including Andrew Willett (who cited Pellican, Borrh, and others), Matthew Henry (who pictured David as doing so reluctantly), and John Gill. On the other hand, Robert Jamieson and Keil & Delitzsch took a position close to mine.
4Willett wrote an interesting article at this point in his commentary on the conditions for forbidding a woman to remarry.
5Matthew Henry and Keil & Delitzsch were of this opinion, suggesting that the Judeans were reluctant to commit to military duty or to Amasa’s leadership. Robert Jamieson suggested that David had miscalculated the time necessary. But most of the commentators I read were ambivalent or silent on this point.
6Matthew Henry, Robert Jamieson, and Goldman (Soncino) suggested that maybe Amasa had been faithfully mustering troops in Judah and just ran them up North to catch up with Abishai’s troops in order to make up for being late. Tsumura (NICOT) suggested that the “large stone” was either the high place at Gibeon where Solomon offered sacrifices in 1 K. 3:4, or the altar set up by Saul after the battle of Michmash (1 Sam. 14:33).
7Josephus, Matthew Henry, John Gill, Robert Jamieson, and Keil & Delitzsch. The Geneva notes oddly seem to indicate that Joab had a problem with his sword often falling out. Willett seems to indicate that Joab hung his scabbard upside-down so that it would slide out surreptitiously into his hand (not onto the ground) when released.
8Most of the commentators I read agreed with this sentiment.
AAlthough Jacob had 12 sons who fathered the 12 tribes of Israel, Jacob’s son Joseph sometimes was counted as one tribe, but usually as two tribes named after Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, although sometimes those two tribes got categorized as more, counting the portion of those tribes which settled on the opposite side of the Jordan River from the rest as a separate half-tribe. Then there’s the tribe of Simeon, which could be counted as zero, one, or two tribes, seeing as they were allotted land in the north, then part of them relocated south of Judah, and then, after a while, the tribe of Simeon ceased to exist seemingly. And, of course, there was also the tribe of Levi, which was dispersed throughout the whole country, and so, at least in political speech, was not counted as a separate tribe. The tribe of Benjamin seems to sometimes be considered together with the northern tribes and sometimes seems to be considered together with Judah as southern.
BMy
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 &
20 are 4Q51 Samuela containing parts of verses 5-15,
24-26, & 38-37 of chapter 19, and verses 1-2, 4, 9-14, 19, &
21-25 of chapter 20, dated between 50-25 B.C. Dead Sea Scroll 1Q7
also contains parts of verses 6-10 of chapter 20, dated before 68AD.
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}.
CKimham’s name is spelled with a slightly different ending “Kimhan” here in the MT and Targums, but the “m” ending is preserved in the older LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate. Either way, it appears to be the same person.
DMultiple Hebrew manuscripts omit the conjunction and change the verb to perfect tense to keep same same meaning as the imperfect verb with the vav consecutive in the MT - just minus the conjunction (הֶעֱבִירוּ). The Qere notes this, and the LXX, Syriac, Targums and Latin all support this, although the Greek (with the exception of the Lucian Rescription) switches to present tense.
EMost of the commentators I read noted that the word “half” may not be intended to mean exactly 50% but rather some fraction of that approximate amount.
FIt should be noted that in the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin (and perhaps the Syriac too), the word “man” is singular, and the verb “answered” has a singular subject. Also the object of “near” is singular (“me”). It is the same in the next verse.
GThe Hebrew and Aramaic verb is 3rd singular (“it burns”), followed by a prepositional phrase, “for you,” but the Latin and Greek translate the verb 2nd singular (“you burn”) and omit the prepositional phrase which is in the Hebrew. This is just a difference in the grammatical formation of an idiom across different languages, however, not a difference in meaning.
HOld Latin actually supports the Septuagint with et primogenitus ego sum quam tu, but it didn’t carry over into the Vulgate.
IIn the 4 instances of this word “Belial” in 1 Samuel, the were all preceded by “son of” or “daughter of,” (1 Sam. 1:16; 2:12; 10:27; 25:17), but here is is preceded by “man of,” and the only other instance in 2 Sam. (22:5) is preceded by “torrents of.”
Jcf. 1 Sam. 30:24bff “...according to the share of the one who went down into the battle so also shall be the share of the one who sat tight at the baggage; they shall share it out equally." (NAW)
KDSS is obliterated here, but spacing indicates it matches the MT. However, Lucian Rescription, Syriac, Vulgate, and some Targums (and thus the NIV) omit this prepositional phrase “for us,” but it doesn’t change the meaning, since the grammar already implies it through the earlier instance of that prepositional phrase.
LThis Hebrew word could mean “kept safe by guards” (NICOT), or it could mean “responsibility to keep charge.” Both would be important components of helping traumatized women.
MOddly, the word “them” is masculine in the three Hebrew phrases “gave them… provided them… and did not go into them.” Perhaps this could be explained by the fact that the Hebrew words for “women” and “concubines” are irregular nouns which are feminine but which take the plural suffix which is typically used for masculine plural nouns. Or perhaps it indicates that there were male attendants along with these women who together as a mixed-gender group got tagged masculine as the grammatical default. Kittel noted that several Hebrew manuscripts gave this word a feminine ending (הן-) rather than the MT’s masculine ending. But this is merely an exercise in grammar and spelling technique; there is no confusion as to the meaning.
NThis Hebrew word could denote actual “confinement” of the women, or even “distress” experienced by the women, or it could denote “boundaries” around them that other people would experience. The latter seems the most charitable.
ODSS appears to skip v.3 and go straight from v.2 to v.5. The topic of v.3 does seem out of place, but it’s in all the other manuscripts.
PJosephus wrote “Joab,” and the Syriac also reads “Joab.” Obviously both went.
QLiterally “You stand here.” This “stand” probably means assuming the position of general of the army which David had promised him. First Amasa was to spend three days causing the announcement of a muster to arms to be made throughout Judah. According to the accents, the “three days” is connected to “calling out the troops” rather than to “standing here.” The king’s command is clear: “Spend 3 days at it, then take your stand back here in the palace.”
RThe Vulgate does not insert “the king” here; this must have been an interpretive gloss by Douay.
SQere reads with the Hiphil-causative form (וַיּוֹחֶר), following several Hebrew manuscripts, instead of the MT’s simple Qal form. Kittel listed other manuscripts with the alternate spellings ויחר (“he burned”) and ויאחר (Piel form which doesn’t really have a different meaning, or perhaps a spelling confused with the Aramaic translation of this word found in the Targums: וְאוֹחַר). With the one noted exception, these are just stem variations and not essential differences in meaning. The Hiphil form of the Qere could indicate that he intentionally caused the delay whereas the Qal form of the Kethib could be interpreted as him experiencing a delay unintentionally, but either way, he delayed. “No one can deny that these spellings with the omission of aleph are for phonetic reasons rather than the result of a scribal error.” ~Tsumura, NICOT
TThis word is not in the Vulgate, so it may have been added by Douay for this English translation.
ULXX inserts “and now.” 3 Hebrew manuscripts support the added “and,” and several Hebrew manuscripts (and some Targums) support “now” (עתה, but this could easily be the result of a scribe mis-hearing the MT word אתה). The Syriac and Vulgate don’t support either addition. The LXX insertion could well be the result of uncertainty as to whether the original was אתה or עתה, so they may have put both interpretations in, as they did elsewhere with disputable words.
V“[U]sually the particle pen is followed by an imperfect verb; the only exceptions are 2 K. 2:16 and here. The imperfect of ms’ never appears after this particle.” ~Tsumura, NICOT
WThe LXX translation is based on a Hebrew verb צלל – shade, which looks similar to נצל – escape, and identical when the weak letters disappear, leaving צל for both words! The Greek Lucian Rescription went with a slightly-different verb (σκεπαζω) meaning “take cover.” The Targums appear to have gone in another direction with their translation עיק – trouble, and I wonder if the Syriac went that same direction with נחטט. The Vulgate effugiat agrees with the Hebrew root being from נצל, and all the English versions follow that. The practical difference between “escaping our view” and “shading himself from us” is not significant. Keil & Delitzsch took things a little too far in a different direction, following Bottcher, who translated it “tear out the [apple of] our eye.”
XLatin & Targums (followed by KJV, NIV, and ESV) omit the word “eye,” but it is in the MT, Syriac, and LXX (and thus in the NASB).
YThis insertion is in the Vaticanus, but not in Rohlfs’ edition of the Septuagint or in any other ancient manuscript.
ZThis is a transcription of the Hebrew word rather than a translation of it, so the 3ms pronoun suffix is also not translated.
AAThe Hebrew word without vowels could be translated as a noun (“belt”) or as a verb (“girded”).
ABThe Vaticanus repeats the verb “went forward,” which only occurs once in the other manuscripts.
ACDSS 1Q7 skips from here to the last word in the verse, omitting the MT’s text (and that of the LXX, Vulgate, Targums, and Syriac) about Amassa’s advance and Joab’s attire. Perhaps this was a lapse on the part of the 1Q7 copyist.
ADThis is the only occurrence in 2 Sam, but it occurred 4x in 1 Samuel (4:12; 17:38-39; and 18:4). Tsumura (NICOT) suggested that middo lebuso (which Driver called a “strange combination”) is probably a hendiadys, and that’s the way the contemporary English versions render it: “soldier’s garment.”
AEQere suggests adding a yod as the next-to-last letter (וְעָלָיו), and the BHS indicates that multiple Hebrew manuscripts spell it that way too, but this doesn’t change the meaning. The next word in Hebrew is translated as a verb by the Vulgate and Septuagint, but as a noun by the Targums and Westminster morphology.
AFThis word only occurs 4 other places in scripture, three of them also in passive stems, indicating religious membership: Num. 25:3, 5; Ps. 106:28, and Psalm 50:19, which denotes the proclivity of the tongue of the wicked towards deceit.
AGAlmost every ancient manuscript, except for the Targums and DSS1Q7, has more words than the MT, so perhaps the MT is a terse edition of the original. The Greek and Old Latin manuscripts insert the word for “sword” here, the Vulgate Latin inserts the word for “made” here and the word for “motion” later, and the Syriac adds “from its sheath” at the end of the verse.
AHSome Hebrew manuscripts (including both of the oldest-known, DSS 1Q7 and DSS 4Q51) spell this verb with the weak aleph left-in (ותאחז) to make it easier to identify the root of this verb as אחז ("grab”). Tsumura explained that this was a “phonetic spelling” rather than a grammatical spelling, and therefore not an error.
AIThe vivid detail in this account, from the dropped sword, the right-handed beard grab, the bowels spilling out, to the man standing over the body yelling, “Whoever is for David, follow Joab,” is characteristic of an eye-witness account.
AJDSS
4Q51 reads the synonym על,
as does the Syriac, but DSS 1Q7 matches the the MT. The Targums
read בִסטַר
(“beside”). These don’t
change the meaning, however. The other times this phrase occurs in 2
Samuel, the MT also uses אל:
2
Samuel 2:23 “...Abner stabbed him with the back of his
spear through his abdomen, such that the spear protruded from
his back, and he fell down there and died under him. And when every
man who came to the place where Asahel had fallen and died happened
upon it, they just stood there.”
2 Samuel 4:6 “...they
stabbed him through the abdomen, and Rechab and his brother
Baanah made their escape.
cf. 2 Samuel 3:27 (which employs
שמ
instead
of אל
or
על)
“Now when Abner had returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside in
the gate to speak with him privately, and there stabbed him in
the stomach, so that he died for the blood of Asahel his
brother.”(NAW)
AKThis phrase occurred in first person earlier in 1 Samuel 26:8 Then Abishai said to David, "God has closed up your enemy in your hand{s} today, so now please let me strike him with the spear – all the way into the ground – one stroke, and I will not repeat it on him." (NAW)
ALDSS reads with the addition of a final sureq, indicating a plural rather than a singular subject, and the Syriac, Targums, and Vulgate also render this verb plural. The LXX and MT, however, read singular (“he pursued”). This is not a problem, however, for, often in the books of Samuel, the Hebrew author attributes the main action to the leader, using a singular verb, then lists others who followed their leader in his action.
AMThe Vulgate appears to be the only ancient document which contains the name “Amasa” instead of the pronoun “him.” The DSS is obliterated at this point, and the nearby line break makes it hard to judge for certain based on spacing, but there is definitely space for the two extra Hebrew letters required for the name Amasa. The explicit mention of the name does make the meaning more clear, but doesn’t change the meaning.
ANDSS and Vulgate omit this relative pronoun. It doesn’t change the meaning, though.
AOcf. Isaiah 9:5 “For every boot that is muddied in the rushing and the garments that are rolled in blood will be for burning - fuel for fire.” (NAW)
APThis part of the verse in the DSS is obliterated, but there is space for a couple more letters than the MT has.
AQcf. 2 Sam. 2:23