¹ tn Heb “and David and his men came to the city, and look, it was burned with fire.”

¹ tn Heb “of David.” In the translation the proper name has been replaced by the pronoun for stylistic reasons.

² tn Verse 50 is a summary statement; v. 51 gives a more detailed account of how David killed the Philistine.

¹ sn Nahshon was an ancestor of Boaz and David, and therefore of Christ (Luke 3:32-33).

² sn Ps 95 in the Hebrew does not mention David either in the text or the superscription. The writer of Hebrews might attribute Psalms as a whole to David, though some psalms are specifically attributed to other individuals or groups. Yet the Greek inscription for Ps 95 in the LXX credits the psalm to David, and the author of Hebrews frequently uses the LXX.

¹ sn On that day (referring to the day of the Lord) the Davidic monarchy will be restored and the Lord’s people will recognize once more the legitimacy and divine sanction of David’s dynasty. But there will also be a democratizing that will not give Jerusalem and its rulers undue priority over the people of the countryside (v. 7).

³ sn According to the superscription, David wrote this psalm during the period when Saul was seeking his life. On one occasion Doeg the Edomite, Saul’s head shepherd (1 Sam 21:7), informed Saul of David’s whereabouts (see 1 Sam 21-22).

⁶ sn If David is the author of the psalm (see the superscription), then he here anticipates that God will continue to demonstrate loyalty to his descendants who succeed him. If the author is a later Davidic king, then he views the divine favor he has experienced as the outworking of God’s faithful promises to David his ancestor.

¹ sn It is not clear whether Hosea was predicting a restoration of Davidic kingship over Israel and Judah (e.g. Jer 17:25; 22:2) or referring to the ultimate Davidic king, namely, the Messiah, who will fulfill the conditions of the Davidic covenant and inaugurate/fulfill the blessings of the Davidic covenant for Israel. The Messiah is frequently pictured as the “new David” because he will fulfill the ideals of the Davidic covenant and be everything that David and his descendants were commissioned to be (e.g., Isa 9:7 [6]; 16:5; Jer 23:5-6; 30:9; 33:15-16; Ezek 34:23-24; 37:24-25).

¹ tc The translation follows 4QSam^a in reading רוּחַ הַמֶּלֶךְ (ruakh hammelekh, “the spirit of the king”) rather than the MT דָּוִד הַמֶּלֶךְ (david hammelekh, “David the king”). The understanding reflected in the translation above is that David, though alienated during this time from his son Absalom, still had an abiding love and concern for him. He longed for reconciliation with him. A rather different interpretation of the verse supposes that David’s interest in taking military action against Absalom grew slack with the passing of time, and this in turn enabled David’s advisers to encourage him toward reconciliation with Absalom. For the latter view, see P. K. McCarter, II Samuel (AB), 344, and cf. CEV.

³ tn Heb “the reliable expressions of loyalty of David.” The syntactical relationship of חַסְדֵי (khasde, “expressions of loyalty”) to the preceding line is unclear. If the term is appositional to בְּרִית (b^erit, “covenant”), then the Lord here transfers the promises of the Davidic covenant to the entire nation. Another option is to take חַסְדֵי (khasde) as an adverbial accusative and to translate “according to the reliable covenantal promises.” In this case the new covenantal arrangement proposed here is viewed as an extension or perhaps fulfillment of the Davidic promises. A third option, the one reflected in the above translation, is to take the last line as comparative. In this case the new covenant being proposed is analogous to the Davidic covenant. Verses 4-5, which compare David’s international prominence to what Israel will experience, favors this view. In all three of these interpretations, “David” is an objective genitive; he is the recipient of covenantal promises. A fourth option would be to take David as a subjective genitive and understand the line as giving the basis for the preceding promise: “Then I will make an unconditional covenantal promise to you because of David’s faithful acts of covenantal loyalty.”

⁵ sn In riddle-like fashion this verse alludes to David, as the references to Bethlehem and to his ancient origins/activities indicate. The passage anticipates the second coming of the great king to usher in a new era of national glory for Israel. Other prophets are more direct and name this coming ideal ruler “David” (Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Hos 3:5). Of course, this prophecy of “David’s” second coming is actually fulfilled through his descendant, the Messiah, who will rule in the spirit and power of his famous ancestor and bring to realization the Davidic royal ideal in an even greater way than the historical David (see Isa 11:1, 10; Jer 33:15).

⁴ sn There was a tradition in Judaism that the Son of David (Solomon) had great powers of healing (Josephus, Ant. 8.2.5 [8.42-49]). By extension this would apply to the ultimate royal Davidic descendant, the Messiah, as well. At this point in his narrative Matthew picks up again the theme of Jesus as Davidic descendant which had appeared in chaps. 1–2, but had not been developed further until now.

¹ sn The priest here in the immediate context is Joshua but the fuller and more distant allusion is to the Messiah, a ruling priest. The notion of the ruler as a priest-king was already apparent in David and his successors (Pss 2:2, 6-8; 110:2, 4), and it finds mature expression in David’s greater Son, Jesus Christ, who will combine both offices in his kingship (Heb 5:1-10; 7:1-25).

¹ tn The phrase translated “collapsing hut” refers to a temporary shelter (cf. NASB, NRSV “booth”) in disrepair and emphasizes the relatively weakened condition of the once powerful Davidic dynasty. Others have suggested that the term refers to Jerusalem, while still others argue that it should be repointed to read “Sukkoth,” a garrison town in Transjordan. Its reconstruction would symbolize the rebirth of the Davidic empire and its return to power (e.g., M. E. Polley, Amos and the Davidic Empire, 71-74).

¹ tn Heb “to bless his house.” Elsewhere when “house” is the object of “bless,” it refers to a household or family. See, for example, 1 Chr 13:14; 17:27. However, since בֵּית (bet, “house”) refers to a literal house or home earlier in the verse and to David’s palace in 17:1, one might translate here, “David went to pronounce a blessing on [i.e., dedicate] his house [i.e., palace].”

¹ tc The translation follows 4QSam^a, part of the Greek tradition, the Syriac Peshitta, Targum, and Vulgate in reading “and to David,” rather than MT וְדָוִד (v^edavid, “and David”). As Driver points out, the Hebrew verb הִגִּיד (higgid, “he related”) never uses the accusative for the person to whom something is told (S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel, 316).

¹ tn This probably refers to the righteous rule of David and others. But it could be more general and mean “did what was righteous.”

¹ sn This promise refers to the promise of a Savior through the seed (descendants) of David that is proclaimed as fulfilled (Rom 1:1-7).

³ tn Or “town.” The translation “city” is used here because of its collocation with “of David,” suggesting its importance, though not its size.