2 samuel 15:7

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by robycop3, Mar 14, 2009.

  1. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    2 Samuel 15:7, KJV-And it came to pass after forty years, that Absalom said unto the king, I pray thee, let me go and pay my vow, which I have vowed unto the LORD, in Hebron.

    Most English versions read the same, "after 40 years". To WHAT does the 40 years refer? Absalom was dead by age 25, & David's entire reign was but 40 years.

    FOUR years seemsta fit the timeline better, since Absalom stayed with his gramdpa for 3 years & then began his scheme to make himself very popular. Could there be a slight goof in the Hebrew?

    YOUR thoughts, please?
     
  2. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,836
    Likes Received:
    115
    Here's what Clarke has to say in his commentary.


     
  3. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,659
    Likes Received:
    190
    2 Samuel has quite a few textual problems, especially with numbers.

    You just have to try to figure out what makes the most sense in the context of the passage.
     
  4. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Usually the textual problems (that is a good phrase) are because of the different counting methods and some variant issues between texts.

    The NET points out the issue with some reconcilation (they use the word 4 btw)

    tc The MT has here “forty,” but this is presumably a scribal error for “four.” The context will not tolerate a period of forty years prior to the rebellion of Absalom. The Lucianic Greek recension (τέσσαρα ἔτη, tessara ete), the Syriac Peshitta (’arba sanin), and Vulgate (post quattuor autem annos) in fact have the expected reading “four years.” Most English translations follow the versions in reading “four” here, although some (e.g. KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV), following the MT, read “forty.”
     
  5. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    Through it all, the STORYLINE remains clear, that Absalom hatched a plot to dethrone David & whack Solomon, God's choice to succeed him on the throne.
     
  6. jonathan.borland

    jonathan.borland
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    0
    So the question is, should our English Bibles put known textual errors into the text? Or is 40 what the author actually wrote and we just don't understand why? (I'm inclined to think "40" is an error, though.) I'm curious if anyone has defended the "40" reading. How reliable is the Masoretic Hebrew tradition of 1 Samuel? It seems to be less reliable than the Masoretic Hebrew tradition of 1-2 Chronicles when they differ. Why? What copying or editorial process led to this?
     
  7. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    0
    A long time ago I was a Coast Guard Radioman stationed in Detroit (yes they have CG there). We routinely edited messages coming in over the teletype from our various small units scattered around the lakes.

    One day a message came in about a "broken potable water line under the river". My buddy and me hadn't heard of a "potable water line" so we guessed it was "portable water line" and edited accordingly........Well, we were the donkeys that day.

    So, I would prefer the text be translated as it reads.


    A.F.
     
  8. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    I agree with A.F. (as I often do). But no common mainstream translation is completely diplomatic (strictly translating a single source text); not even the KJV. Therefore, all I expect from the translators is an indication that a change of source text has occurred (footnote or something). This is an admirable characteristic of the NET.
     
  9. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,975
    Likes Received:
    129
    Masoretic Text Only-ists?

    Rob
     
  10. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is probably an error in the text(s) underlying the OT of the KJVs. Lamsa's translation of the Peshitta has four years.

    I'm sure the Peshitta isn't perfect 100% of the time, but apparently this verse and the harmony in giving Ahaziah's age when he became king are more accurate than in the KJVs and many of the modern Bible translations.
     
  11. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could you let me know where you get " Absalom was dead by age 25" ?

    Mikets can be interpretted as " at the end of " 40 years.

    I am not sure it had started from Samuel's time.
     
  12. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,635
    Likes Received:
    45
    One chronologist takes the incredibly novel approach of reading the phrase together with the words that immediately precede it:

    ---Chronology of the Old Testament By Floyd Nolen Jones
     
  13. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still wait for the answer from Roby because I think he can be right with 25 years of age.

    But this issue can be very similar to Mark 2:26.

    Did Jesus make a mistake in acknowledging Abiathar instead of Ahimelek?

    It was not Abiathar when David entered the Temple ( 1 Sam 21:1-)
    But it was Ahimelek, his father.

    Was the Autograph wrong? Were the copies wrong? Was the text (TR) wrong? Was the translation wrong?

    In the same way, I think we can find the answer.

    In my survey, there are some variances in Elcah ( Let me go) among the manuscripts, but not in Arbaim ( 40).

    Then we must check carefully, Mikets. Mikets is not aharei definitely.
    In such case we should be based on the first meaning, though it can be " after". So, the nuance is very important in this case.
     

Share This Page

Loading...