Discovery Box| (0.17) | (2Sa 24:23) | 1 tc The Hebrew text is difficult here. The translation reads עֶבֶד אֲדֹנִי (ʿeved ʾadoni, “the servant of my lord”) rather than the MT’s אֲרַוְנָה (ʾAravnah). In normal court etiquette a subject would not use his own name in this way, but would more likely refer to himself in the third person. The MT probably first sustained loss of עֶבֶד (ʿeved, “servant”), leading to confusion of the word for “my lord” with the name of the Jebusite referred to here. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 20:1) | 4 tc The MT reads לְאֹהָלָיו (leʾohalayv, “to his tents”). For a similar idiom, see 19:9. An ancient scribal tradition understands the reading to be לֵאלֹהָיו (leʾlohav, “to his gods”). The word is a tiqqun sopherim, and the scribes indicate that they changed the word from “gods” to “tents” so as to soften its theological implications. In a consonantal Hebrew text the change involved only the metathesis of two letters. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 17:3) | 1 tc Heb “like the returning of all, the man whom you are seeking.” The LXX reads differently: “And I will return all the people to you the way a bride returns to her husband, except for the life of the one man whom you are seeking.” The other early versions also struggled with this verse. Modern translations are divided as well: the NAB, NRSV, REB, and NLT follow the LXX, while the NASB and NIV follow the Hebrew text. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 15:27) | 1 tn The Greek tradition understands the Hebrew word as an imperative (“see”). Most Greek mss have ἴδετε (idete); the Lucianic recension has βλέπε (blepe). It could just as well be taken as a question: “Don’t you see what is happening?” The present translation takes the word as a question, with the implication that Zadok is a priest and not a prophet (i.e., “seer”) and therefore unable to know what the future holds. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 13:5) | 1 tn This verb is used in the Hitpael stem only in this chapter of the Hebrew Bible. With the exception of v. 2 it describes not a real sickness but one pretended in order to entrap Tamar. The Hitpael sometimes, as here, describes the subject making oneself appear to be of a certain character. On this use of the stem, see GKC 149-50 §54.e. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 7:11) | 2 tn In the Hebrew text the verb is apparently perfect with vav consecutive, which would normally suggest a future sense (“he will declare”; so the LXX, ἀπαγγελεῖ [apangelei]). But the context seems instead to call for a present or past nuance (“he declares” or “he has declared”). The synoptic passage in 1 Chr 17:10 has וָאַגִּד (vaʾaggid, “and I declared”). The construction used in 2 Sam 7:11 highlights this important statement. |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 6:19) | 2 tn The Hebrew word used here אֶשְׁפָּר (ʾespar) is found in the OT only here and in the parallel passage found in 1 Chr 16:3. Its exact meaning is uncertain, although the context indicates that it was a food of some sort (cf. KJV “a good piece of flesh”; NRSV “a portion of meat”). The translation adopted here (“date cake”) follows the lead of the Greek translations of the LXX, Aquila, and Symmachus (cf. NASB, NIV, NLT). |
| (0.17) | (2Sa 2:9) | 1 tc The MT here reads “the Ashurite,” but this is problematic if it is taken to mean “the Assyrian.” Ish Bosheth’s kingdom obviously was not of such proportions as to extend to Assyria. The Syriac Peshitta and the Vulgate render the word as “the Geshurite,” while the Targum has “of the house of Ashur.” We should probably emend the Hebrew text to read “the Geshurite.” The Geshurites lived in the northeastern part of the land of Palestine. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 23:29) | 1 sn Beginning with 23:29, the verse numbers through 24:22 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 23:29 ET = 24:1 HT, 24:1 ET = 24:2 HT, 24:2 ET = 24:3 HT, etc., through 24:22 ET = 24:23 HT. With 25:1 the verse numbers in the ET and HT are again the same. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 20:42) | 1 sn Beginning with 20:42b, the verse numbers through 21:15 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 20:42b ET = 21:1 HT, 21:1 ET = 21:2 HT, 21:2 ET = 21:3 HT, etc., through 21:15 ET = 21:16 HT. With 22:1 the verse numbers in the ET and HT are again the same. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 20:16) | 2 tn The word order is different in the Hebrew text, which reads “and Jonathan cut with the house of David, and the Lord will seek from the hand of the enemies of David.” The translation assumes that the main clauses of the verse have been accidentally transposed in the course of transmission. The first part of the verse (as it stands in MT) belongs with v. 17, while the second part of the verse actually continues v. 15. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 10:27) | 2 tc In place of the MT (“and it was like one being silent”) the LXX has “after about a month,” taking the expression with the first part of the following chapter rather than with 10:27. Some Hebrew support for this reading appears in the corrected hand of a Qumran ms of Samuel, which has here “about a month.” However, it seems best to stay with the MT here even though it is difficult. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 3:21) | 1 tc The LXX has a lengthy addition here: “And Samuel was acknowledged to be a prophet of the Lord in all Israel, from one end to the other. Eli was very old and, as for his sons, their way kept getting worse and worse before the Lord.” The Hebraic nature of the Greek syntax used here suggests that the LXX translator was accurately rendering a Hebrew variant and not simply expanding the text on his own initiative. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 1:19) | 4 tn The verbs זָכַר (zakar) is often translated “remember.” It does not simply mean the ability to recall (as “forgetting” does not simply mean the inability to recall). It means the decision to recall or to bear in mind, here with regard to her previous request. The Hebrew verb is often used in the OT for considering the needs or desires of people with favor and kindness. |
| (0.17) | (1Sa 1:5) | 2 tn Heb “because Hannah he loved.” The Hebrew places the direct object, “Hannah,” first as a means of emphasis (topicalization). The emphasis on Hannah shows she was his favorite and may leave the audience wondering whether or how much he loves Peninnah. In turn this may typologically recall the ancestral story of Jacob loving Rachel more than Leah (Gen 29:30, 32), whom he was tricked into marrying. |
| (0.17) | (Rut 2:13) | 1 tn Heb “I am finding favor in your eyes.” In v. 10, where Ruth uses the perfect, she simply states the fact that Boaz is kind. Here the Hebrew text switches to the imperfect, thus emphasizing the ongoing attitude of kindness displayed by Boaz. Many English versions treat this as a request: KJV “Let me find favour in thy sight”; NAB “May I prove worthy of your kindness”; NIV “May I continue to find favor in your eyes.” |
| (0.17) | (Jdg 15:6) | 5 tn The Hebrew text expands the statement with the additional phrase “burned with fire.” The words “with fire” are redundant in English and have been omitted from the translation for stylistic reasons. Some textual witnesses read “burned…her father’s house,” perhaps under the influence of 14:15. On the other hand, the shorter text may have lost this phrase due to haplography. |
| (0.17) | (Jdg 10:16) | 3 tn Heb “And his spirit grew short [i.e., impatient] with the suffering of Israel.” The Hebrew noun נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) also appears as the subject of the verb קָצַר (qatsar) in Num 21:4 (the Israelites grow impatient wandering in the wilderness), Judg 16:16 (Samson grows impatient with Delilah’s constant nagging), and Zech 11:8 (Zechariah grows impatient with the three negligent “shepherds”). |
| (0.17) | (Jdg 9:26) | 1 sn The name Gaal derives from, or at least sounds like, a Hebrew verb meaning “to abhor, loathe.” His father’s name, Ebed, means “servant.” Perhaps then this could be translated, “loathsome one, son of a servant.” This individual’s very name (which may be the narrator’s nickname for him, not his actual name) seems to hint at his immoral character and lowly social status. |
| (0.17) | (Jdg 8:11) | 2 tc Heb “and attacked the army, while the army was secure.” The Hebrew term בֶטַח (vetakh, “secure”) may means the army was undefended (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 156), not suspecting an attack at that time and place. A few mss supported by the LXX read the participle form from the same root, בֹטֵחַ (voteakh) “trustingly,” the implication being that they were not attentive to defense. |
