Rereading 2 Samuel 8:18: “David’s Sons Were Priests”

Last week, in my post on “Jesus: A High Priest After the Order of Melchizedek,” I wrote that after David conquered Jerusalem and made the city the capital of his government, he “incorporated the original inhabitants of Jerusalem into the population of Israel and became their king.”

I also wrote that David became a priest of the people who lived in Jerusalem, “not because he was a Levite, but because he continued the tradition established by Melchizedek.” Then I concluded: “Melchizedek now becomes a type of the Davidic king. The descendants of David will be kings and they will be priests; this is clearly expressed in 2 Samuel 8:18: ‘and David’s sons were priests.’”

The statement in 2 Samuel 8:18 that “David’s sons were priests” is very controversial and even the translations disagree on how to translate the word kohanim (“priests”) in this section of the verse.

The following translations translate the word kohanim in 2 Samuel 8:18 as “priests”:

The Bible in Basic English (BBE), the English Standard Version (ESV), the New American Bible (NAB), the New English Translation (NET), the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB), the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), the Jewish Publication Society (TNK), the New English Bible (NEB), and the Today’s New International Version (TNIV).

Other translations are not willing to accept that David’s sons were priests. Instead, they reinterpret the word and say that David’s sons were his advisors. These are the ways the word kohanim is translated:

“Chief ministers”: the American Standard Version (ASV), the Jewish Publication Society (JPS), the New American Standard Bible (NASB), and the New King James Version (NKJV).

“Chief officials”: the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB).

“Chief rulers”: the King James Version (KJV), the Revised Webster Bible (RWB), and the Geneva Bible (GNV).

“Princes”: the Douay-Rheims Bible (DRB).

“Royal advisers”: the New International Version ( NIV).

“Priestly leaders”: the New Living Translation ( NLT).

“Princes of the court”: the Septuagint ( LXX).

In defense of the translations of kohanim as “chief rulers” or “royal advisors,” some commentators acknowledge that the word “kohen” means “priest,” but that in early Israel the word was also used to designate a royal minister or a person who advised the king.

Keil (p. 369), in order to justify translating the word kohanim as “confidants,” cites 1 Kings 4:5, where Zabud, Nathan’s son, is a kohen (“priest”) and “the king’s friend,” that is, the king’s confidential advisor..

Most of the translations that say that David’s sons were advisors base their translations on the interpretation offered by the Chronicler in 1 Chronicles 18:17 where David’s sons are called “the chief officials in the service of the king.” This description of the office occupied by David’s sons reflects the post-exilic perspective of the Chronicler, where only Levites could serve as priests. Thus, the designation of David’s sons as priests was unacceptable to the Chronicler.

Many English translations follow the Chronicler’s unwillingness to acknowledge that individuals who were not Levites could become priests. Since the Chronicler does not use the word “priests” but calls the sons of David “chief officials at the king’s side” (NIV), many English translations follow the reading of the Chronicler.

But, as P. Kyle McCarter, Jr. (p. 255) concluded:

“Almost all critics, therefore, have agreed that the readings of I Chron 18:17 and the versions in II Sam 8:18 are interpretive paraphrases of the reading of MT by scribes who considered it impossible that there should be non-Levitical priests.”

In conclusion, it is better to translate the word kohanim as “priests” rather than “royal advisors.” Since David performed some priestly functions in the Jerusalem cult, it is very possible that he delegated some of his priestly responsibilities to his sons.

References:

C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary of the Books of Samuel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950.

P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., II Samuel. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1984.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: David, Priests, Translations

“Our Mother who is in heaven”: Reflections on a New Translation of the Bible

The Adventist News Network has published an article in which they review a new translation of the Bible published recently in Germany. Below is an excerpt from the article:

Seventh-day Adventist theologians in Germany worry the latest Bible version released in their country sacrifices Scriptural accuracy on the altar of political correctness.

Reflecting five years of study and the input of nearly 50 individuals from diverse backgrounds, the new Bible version, worded to “do justice to women, Jews and marginalized groups” sold out as soon as it hit bookshelves in Germany, according to Ecumenical News International.

With its diluting of Old Testament violence and references to female disciples, apostles, and Pharisees--among other revisions--the version has inspired much hype, not to mention controversy.

“The intent of the new German translation...is to present the Bible in gerechter sprache, or 'just language,'” said Udo Worschech, a Seventh-day Adventist theologian at Friedensau Adventist University in Friedensau, Germany.

“[The translators] tried to be innovative and scientific,” said Siegfried Wittwer, a German Adventist pastor, “[adhering] to the Hebrew and Greek text, [but] using a modern, up-to-date language. They wanted to be gender-fair and avoid anti-Semitic expressions.”

Women are not only mentioned, but addressed personally. As one such example, Wittwer cites several Old and New Testament examples where the phrase "my daughter" replaces the traditional "my son," and where "mother" joins the typical mention of "father."

Additionally, Wittwer notes that when referring to God, the translation often employs the expression, "the Living, the Eternal, the Holy." Each of the attributes is gender-neutral in the German language and--accompanied by a feminine article--intends to temper a patriarchal notion of God, he explains. The familiar "Lord's Prayer" now begins, "Our mother who is in heaven," says Frank M. Hasel, dean of the Adventist-run Theological Seminary at Bogenhofen.

Despite the translations' attempt to heighten Scripture's relevancy, both Wittwer and Worschech remain skeptical of its credibility. Worschech even questions its title. "The German word gerecht is here imbued with the idea of "righteous[ness]. In the German language, this title itself is already misleading, since it recalls the idea of absoluteness and finality," he explains.

Holger Teubert, director and editor of Germany's Adventist Press Service, agrees. "The title of the new Bible version is provocative and polemical. My question is this: Is this Bible version the only translation in a fair language? Are all other translations [written] in an unfair language? The title condemns all other Bible translations."

Where the version claims absoluteness, its language is disturbingly wishy-washy, says Hasel. He cites its treatment of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, recorded in the book of Matthew. "We read that Jesus no longer speaks with his divine authority saying: 'but I say to you...' Instead, he says: 'I interpret this today to mean...' A definite statement is turned into an optional and provisionary suggestion," he explains.

To read the entire article, visit the Web page of the Adventist News Network by clicking here.

Many modern versions of the Bible make an attempt at being gender inclusive, but a translation that changes masculine words into feminine words in order to promote social equality cannot be considered a reliable translation.

Translators are human and for this reason, every translation falls short of perfection since, at times, translators may allow their views to influence the way a text is translated. To be reliable, a translation of the Bible must reflect integrity in representing the meaning and the intent of the original text.

Translating from one language into another is not easy. A good translator must be familiar not only with the intricacies of the language, but also with some aspects of the culture and traditions of the people who produced the text. Translators also must be familiar with their own language. This is necessary in order to convey the meaning of the original language into a form that can be easily understood by the people who will read the translation.

Translators must determine the meaning of the original text and then transmit that meaning in the language into which the text is being translated. Take for instance, the English expression “he gets my goat.” This expression simply means that one person makes another person angry or irritated. In the Spanish spoken in the United States, this expression has been translated “me pega el chivo.” No native Spanish speaking person will understand the meaning of this expression in their language because a person needs to know the context of the phrase in order to know the reason a person is getting a goat. In other words, a literal translation of the English expression makes no sense in Spanish.

Every translation is, to some extent, an interpretation. Translators must interpret the intent of the original author and be able to communicate what they understand the original author was saying. However, private interpretation and theological bias should be set aside for the sake of the integrity of the text.

When this new translation takes the prayer Jesus taught his disciples and translates it “Our Mother who is in heaven,” the translation becomes more than a mere distortion of the original text. This translation, if it could be called a translation, is an imposition of political correctness that reflects a theological agenda that has been imposed upon the text.

I believe that there is a place for gender inclusiveness in translating the Scriptures. However, gender inclusiveness has its limitation because when it is wrongly used, it completely distorts the true intent of the original writers.

If I lived in Germany, this would be one translation I would never use.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Translators, Translations, Bible