¹ sn Summon…Nathan. Nathan must have left the room when Bathsheba reentered.

¹ tn Heb “look.” The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) here draws attention to Nathan’s arrival and invites the audience to view the scene through the eyes of the participants.

¹ tn Heb “the word of God was [i.e., came] to Nathan.”

² sn Summon Bathsheba. Bathsheba must have left the room when Nathan arrived (see 1:22).

³ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Nathan) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tc Many medieval mss read the singular here, “your faithful follower.” In this case the statement refers directly to Nathan’s oracle to David (see 2 Sam 7:17).

² tn Heb “a psalm by David, when Nathan the prophet came to him when he had gone to Bathsheba.”

¹ tn Heb “according to all these words and according to all this revelation, so Nathan said to David.”

¹ tn The parallel text of 2 Sam 23:36 has the variant “Igal son of Nathan from Zobah.”

¹ tn Heb “according to all these words and according to all this revelation, so Nathan said to David.”

¹ sn The use of Nathan here as the son of David is different than Matthew, where Solomon is named. Nathan was David’s third son. It is not entirely clear what causes the difference. Some argue Nathan stresses a prophetic connection, but it is not clear how (through confusion with the prophet Nathan?). Others note the absence of a reference to Jeconiah later, so that here there is a difference to show the canceling out of this line. The differences appear to mean that Matthew’s line is a “royal and physical” line, while Luke has a “royal and legal” line.

¹ sn By the time of Zechariah the line of descent from David had already been transferred from the Solomon branch to the Nathan branch (the clan of the family of Nathan). Nathan was a son of David (2 Sam 5:14) through whom Jesus eventually came (Luke 3:23-31). Matthew traces Jesus’ ancestry back through Solomon (Matt 1:6-16) but apparently this is to tie Joseph into the Davidic (and thus messianic) line. The “official” descent of Jesus may be viewed as passing through Solomon whereas the “physical” descent came through Nathan.

¹ tn In the Hebrew text the sentence is introduced by the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”), which here draws attention to Nathan’s concluding word of assurance and support. For this use of the word, see HALOT 252 s.v. הִנֵּה.

³ tn Heb “when you speak.” In this context the psalmist refers to God’s word of condemnation against his sin delivered through Nathan (cf. 2 Sam 12:7-12).

¹ tn Heb “and the events of David the king, the former and the latter, look they are written in the annals of Samuel the seer, and in the annals of Nathan the prophet, and in the annals of Gad the seer.”

¹ sn The Shimeites were Levites (Exod 6:16-17; Num 3:17-18) who presumably were prominent in the postexilic era. Just as David and Nathan represented the political leadership of the community, so Levi and Shimei represented the religious leadership. All will lament the piercing of the Messiah.

² tn Heb “who/which was in the […?].” The meaning of the Hebrew term פַּרְוָרִים (parvarim), translated here “courtyards,” is uncertain. The relative clause may indicate where the room was located or explain who Nathan Melech was, “the eunuch who was in the courtyards.” See M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 288-89, who translate “the officer of the precincts.”

⁵ sn Luke’s use of the term “house” probably alludes to the original promise made to David outlined in the Nathan oracle of 2 Sam 7:12-16, especially in light of earlier connections between Jesus and David made in Luke 1:32. Further, the mention of Bethlehem reminds one of the promise of Mic 5:2, namely, that a great king would emerge from Bethlehem to rule over God’s people.

¹ sn Psalm 51. The psalmist confesses his sinfulness to God and begs for forgiveness and a transformation of his inner character. According to the psalm superscription, David offered this prayer when Nathan confronted him with his sin following the king’s affair with Bathsheba (see 2 Sam 11-12). However, the final two verses of the psalm hardly fit this situation, for they assume the walls of Jerusalem have been destroyed and that the sacrificial system has been temporarily suspended. These verses are probably an addition to the psalm made during the period of exile following the fall of Jerusalem in 586 b.c. The exiles could relate to David’s experience, for they, like him, and had been forced to confront their sin. They appropriated David’s ancient prayer and applied it to their own circumstances.