1 Samuel23:7–29

Where the English smooths the original

• נִכַּ֨ר נִכַּ֨ר (nik·kar, Piel perfect of nâkar, H5234) — the lexicon gives “properly, to scrutinize,” and the Piel here does not mean “deliver” at all. Cambridge: “Lit. hath rejected him and delivered him.” K&D: “nâkar does not mean simply to look at, but also to find strange, and treat as strange, and then absolutely to reject.” Pulpit renders it “God hath ignored him,” hath treated him as a stranger. The BSB “has delivered him” supplies from context what the verb itself does not say.
• נִסְגַּ֣ר נִסְגַּ֣ר (nis·gar, Niphal of çâgar, H5462, “to shut up”) — “he has trapped himself” is a fair sense, but the form is a plain passive/reflexive: he has been shut in. It is the key root of the whole Keilah episode: the same çâgar returns in the Hiphil at vv. 11, 12 and 20 for the men who would “shut David up” into a hand. Saul reads a closed gate as a divine verdict.
• דְּלָתַ֥יִם דְּלָתַ֥יִם (də·lā·ṯa·yim, deleth, H1817) is a dual — “two doors,” a leaf-pair, not the plural “gates”; deleth is literally “something swinging.” With וּבְרִֽיחַ (bᵉrîyach, H1280, “a bolt,” singular) the Hebrew names the two swinging leaves and the one bar across them. The English pluralizes and loses the picture of a single bar Saul is counting on.
• אֱלֹהִים֙ אֱלֹהִים֙ (’ĕ·lō·hîm, H430) — Saul says Elohim. When David prays at v. 10 he says יְהוָה֙, the covenant name. Both are “God/LORD” in English; in Hebrew the hunter invokes the generic deity of his own certainty, the hunted invokes the covenant name and asks a question.

Where the English smooths the original

• וַיְשַׁמַּ֥ע וַיְשַׁמַּ֥ע (way·šam·ma‘, Piel of shâmaʻ, H8085, “to hear intelligently”) — “summoned” is idiomatic but flattens a causative: he made them hear. Gill: “Or ‘caused them to hear’ (m) summoned them by an herald… (m) ‘fecit audire’, Montanus, Piscator.” The same root shâmaʻ is what David's servant does before God at vv. 10 and 11 — one man makes a nation hear him; the other reports what he has heard.
• לָצ֥וּר לָצ֥וּר (lā·ṣūr, tsûwr, H6696, “to cramp, to besiege”) — a siege verb, deployed against one outlaw and six hundred men. The infinitive stacks with לָרֶ֣דֶת and לַמִּלְחָמָ֑ה: a national levy, a march, a siege train, all aimed at a son-in-law.
• לָרֶ֣דֶת לָרֶ֣דֶת (lā·re·ḏeṯ, yârad, H3381, “to descend”) — the vertical verb of the chapter. Saul goes down (here), David asks whether Saul will come down (v. 11), the Ziphites urge the king to come down (v. 20), and David goes down to the Rock (v. 25). English “to go” loses the topography that the Ziphites of Gibeah are trading on.

Where the English smooths the original

• מַחֲרִ֣ישׁ מַחֲרִ֣ישׁ (ma·ḥă·rîš, Hiphil participle of chârash, H2790, “to scratch, i.e. engrave”) — “was plotting” is right in sense but the image is metallurgical. Cambridge: “Lit. was forging. Omit ‘secretly.’” Pulpit: “There is no idea of secrecy in the Hebrew verb, which literally means ‘to work in metals,’ ‘to forge.’” K&D cites Proverbs 3:29 and 6:14 for the same idiom. Saul is at the anvil, hammering out a weapon.
• הָרָעָ֑ה הָרָעָ֑ה (hā·rā·‘āh, raʻ, H7451, with the article) — “the evil,” definite. Not evil in general but the evil, the known and specific thing. The English drops the article and with it the sense that David already knows the shape of what is being forged.
• הַגִּ֖ישָׁה הַגִּ֖ישָׁה (hag·gî·šāh, Hiphil imperative of nâgash, H5066, “to be or come near”) — “Bring” is thin for a causative of approach: cause the ephod to draw near. The verb belongs to the vocabulary of approaching God. Ellicott notes the pointed connection: David's earlier inquiries (vv. 2, 4) are simply “he enquired of the LORD,” whereas here the narrator has first placed Abiathar and the ephod at Keilah (v. 6) and then makes the request explicit.

Where the English smooths the original

• שָׁמֹ֤עַ שָׁמֹ֤עַ שָׁמַע֙ (šā·mō·a‘ šā·ma‘, infinitive absolute + perfect of shâmaʻ, H8085) — the Hebrew doubles the verb for certainty: hearing he has heard. BSB's “has heard” is correct English and loses the emphasis; Gill catches it — “had good information of it, on which he could depend.” The same doubling figure returns at v. 22 in Saul's mouth (cunning he is cunning).
• לְשַׁחֵ֥ת לְשַׁחֵ֥ת (lə·ša·ḥêṯ, Piel infinitive of shâchath, H7843, “to decay, to ruin”) — not merely “destroy” a population but bring the city itself to ruin. Gill: “to besiege it, and demolish it, if that was necessary, in order to take him.” After Nob, David has reason to think in exactly these terms.
• בַּעֲבוּרִֽי בַּעֲבוּרִֽי (ba·‘ă·ḇū·rî, ʻâbûwr, H5668, properly “crossed over, on account of”) — “on my account.” David's prayer names himself as the cause of the city's danger before he asks anything about his own safety. The English keeps the words but the placement in Hebrew (the last word of the sentence) gives it the weight of a confession.
• יְהוָה֙ יְהוָה֙ אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל (Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê yiś·rā·’êl, H3068 + H430 + H3478) — David addresses the covenant name joined to the national name. Saul at v. 7 said only Elohim. English renders both “God,” and the contrast between a king's assumption and a servant's address disappears.

Where the English smooths the original

• בַעֲלֵי֩ בַעֲלֵי֩ (ḇa·‘ă·lê, baʻal, H1167, “a master”) — “citizens” is too broad. Cambridge: “Lit. ‘the lords,’ or ‘masters,’ i.e. the governing body of citizens, as distinguished from the mass of inhabitants.” Gill agrees: “the lords and great men of the place, the governor of the city.” David is not asking whether a mob will turn; he is asking whether a council will vote.
• הֲיַסְגִּרֻ֣נִי הֲיַסְגִּרֻ֣נִי (hă·yas·gi·ru·nî, Hiphil imperfect of çâgar, H5462) — the identical root Saul used of David at v. 7. There David “was shut in”; here the men of Keilah would “shut him up” into a hand. “Surrender” is accurate as idiom and hides the verbal chain: a bolted gate, a betrayed man, and at v. 20 an offer to do the same, all built on çâgar.
• נָ֖א נָ֖א (nā, H4994) — the particle of entreaty, “I pray,” untranslatable and here rendered “please.” It sits between the two divine names and the imperative: the anointed king of Israel begs for a sentence.
• יֵרֵֽד׃ In Hebrew the answer יֵרֵֽד (yê·rêḏ, “He will come down”) stands at word 15, before the speech-formula וַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהוָ֖ה at 16-17. BSB reorders to English shape (“‘He will,’ said the LORD”). The Hebrew fronts the verdict and only then names who spoke it.

Where the English smooths the original

• הֲיַסְגִּ֜רוּ הֲיַסְגִּ֜רוּ … יַסְגִּֽירוּ (hă·yas·gi·rū … yas·gî·rū, H5462 twice) — question and answer use the identical Hiphil form. The Hebrew answer is a single bare verb, “They-will-shut-up,” with no object: God returns David's own word to him and supplies nothing more. BSB's “They will” is idiomatic English and cannot show that the reply is the echo of the question.
• וְאֶת־אֲנָשַׁ֖י וְאֶת־אֲנָשַׁ֖י (wə·’eṯ- ’ă·nā·šay, ʼĕnôwsh, H582) — “and my men.” The second asking adds what the first omitted. K&D notes the mechanism: only one question is answered at a time, so David had to ask again; but the repetition is not merely procedural — David widens the question from his own life to the six hundred who depend on him.
• בְּיַד־שָׁא֑וּל בְּיַד־שָׁא֑וּל — at v. 11 the phrase was “into his hand”; here David names Saul outright. The English keeps the names but the Hebrew progression from pronoun to name registers a question growing more exact as the answers come back affirmative.

Where the English smooths the original

• וַיִּֽתְהַלְּכ֖וּ וַיִּֽתְהַלְּכ֖וּ בַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר יִתְהַלָּ֑כוּ (way·yiṯ·hal·lə·ḵū ba·’ă·šer yiṯ·hal·lā·ḵū, Hitpael of hâlak, H1980, twice) — “moving from place to place” is an interpretation of a Hebrew tautology. K&D renders it exactly: “they wandered about where they wandered about.” Pulpit: “i.e. without any fixed plan, as chance or their necessities dictated.” Ellicott: “the armed camp of David was pitched without any fixed plan or aim.” The reflexive stem makes the aimlessness their own act.
• נִמְלַ֤ט נִמְלַ֤ט (nim·laṭ, Niphal of mâlaṭ, H4422) — the lexicon gives “properly, to be smooth, i.e. to escape.” The escape is a slipping. K&D will later derive the name Sela-hammahlekoth at v. 28 from a different root (châlaq, to be smooth) with the same idea; the two roots are not the same word, but the chapter twice reaches for smoothness to describe how this man gets away.
• וַיֶּחְדַּ֖ל וַיֶּחְדַּ֖ל (way·yeḥ·dal, châdal, H2308) — “he declined” is too dignified. The lexicon gives “properly, to be flabby,” hence to slacken, leave off. The great levy of v. 8 simply goes limp. Poole's comment cuts: Saul had gone out on the strength of what “he fondly persuaded himself.”
• אִ֗ישׁ אִ֗ישׁ (’îš, H376) stands singular after “about six hundred” — Hebrew idiom counts “six hundred man.” BSB supplies “strong.” Ellicott notes this is the only place in the narrative where the growth of the band is recorded; Poole and Gill both compute two hundred added since the four hundred of 22:2.

Where the English smooths the original

• וַיֵּ֨שֶׁב וַיֵּ֨שֶׁב (way·yê·šeḇ, yâshab, H3427) twice in one verse — “stayed.” The root is “properly, to sit down,” and it is the settled opposite of v. 13's wandering Hitpael. Twice within one sentence David sits; he will sit again at v. 18, v. 25 and v. 29. The English variation (“stayed… remained… lived”) hides a single repeated verb.
• נְתָנ֥וֹ וְלֹֽא־נְתָנ֥וֹ בְּיָדֽוֹ (wə·lō- nə·ṯā·nōw bə·yā·ḏōw, nâthan, H5414, “to give”) — the deliberate answer to v. 7. Benson sees it exactly: “to show the vanity of that ill-grounded confidence, the sacred writer makes use of the very same expression reversed.” Strictly the verbs differ — Saul said nâkar, the narrator says nâthan — but the phrase “into his hand” is verbatim the same, and the narrator is quoting Saul back at him.
• בַּמְּצָד֔וֹת בַּמְּצָד֔וֹת (bam·mə·ṣā·ḏō·wṯ, mᵉtsad, H4679) — “a fastness (as a covert of ambush).” Not built fortresses but natural refuges. Pulpit: “Natural fortresses in the woods and mountains are meant, and places difficult of access.” The man who would not stay behind gates and bars now lives in rock.
• כָּל־הַיָּמִ֔ים כָּל־הַיָּמִ֔ים (kāl- hay·yā·mîm, “all the days”) — BSB's “day after day” is vivid but narrower than the Hebrew. K&D: “‘All the days,’ i.e., as long as Saul lived.” Cambridge cautions the other way: “Continually: not that he literally spent all his time in the pursuit of David.” The phrase is summary, covering the rest of the reign.